|
This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication in San Antonio, Texas August 2005.
If you have questions about this paper, please contact the author
directly. If you have questions about the archives, email
rakyat [ at ] eparker.org. For an explanation of the subject line,
send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").
(Feb 2006)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
====================================================================
NEWS FRAMES AS META-NARRATIVES: THE CASE OF CNN AND AL JAZEERA'S
COVERAGE OF THE KIDNAPPINGS IN IRAQ
Aziz Douai
Doctoral Student
The College of Communications
115 Carnegie Building
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802
[log in to unmask]
814 777 3060
Draft of March 30, 2005
Paper submitted to the International Communication Division of the
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication for
review and presentation during AEJMC's 2005 conference.
NEWS FRAMES AS META-NARRATIVES: THE CASE OF CNN AND AL JAZEERA'S
COVERAGE OF THE KIDNAPPINGS IN IRAQ
ABSTRACT
This paper identifies the dominant news frames ("meta-narrative"
frames) in both al Jazeera's and CNN's coverage of the kidnappings of
Americans and other foreigners in Iraq. I argue that news frames
generated in the coverage of international conflict incidents form a
"meta-narrative" frame that comments on the frame itself and the
nature of the conflict. It concludes that meta-narrative frames in
the global media's coverage of international conflict still remain local.
Paper submitted to the International Communication Division of the
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication for
review and presentation during AEJMC's 2005 conference.
NEWS FRAMES AS META-NARRATIVES: THE CASE OF CNN AND AL JAZEERA'S
COVERAGE OF THE KIDNAPPINGS IN IRAQ
Terrorism has been a highly charged and contested label in
international communication research, cross border communications,
and international media coverage in general (P. Norris, M. Kern, and
M. Just, 2003). Many researchers get engulfed in this definitional
debate, inevitably incurring simultaneous praise and condemnation,
leading some to conclude that probably "terrorism is in the eye of
the beholder" (Norris, Kern & Just, 2003, p.6). For the purposes of
this study, and to steer clear of these contentions, I have adopted
an encompassing, tolerant definition of terrorism as "the systematic
use of coercive intimidation against civilians for political goals"
(p.6). As Norris, Kern & Just persuasively argue, the forgoing
definition encompasses conceptual and practical considerations of
techniques and tactics, targets and victims, and goals and objectives
of terrorism. Hereafter, I will use the word "terrorism" in
compliance with these definitional considerations, and the term
"terrorist" to refer to an individual who employs terrorist methods
viz. systematic and coercive intimidation.
The contentious nature of terrorism as a contested concept has
inflicted the mass media's framing of terrorist incidents. In a post
9/11 world, we can cautiously assume consensual, overarching news
frames in American news media's coverage of (international/Islamic
extremist/al Qaeda) terrorist acts, as in the instances of the Bali
bombing in Indonesia, the bombings in Casablanca, and, more
importantly, the frequent kidnappings, abductions, and beheadings of
foreigners in Iraq at least as a realization of the media's agenda
setting function and its tendency to build consensus (e.g. McCombs,
1997). The emergence of al Jazeera as an alternative and powerful
news media outlet in the Middle East has disrupted, I argue in this
paper, the dominant narratives and consensual frames of the American
news media (as shown in CNN's coverage). Indeed, the news frames
predominating in al Jazeera's coverage of the kidnappings,
abductions, and beheadings of foreigners in Iraq could have found
their echoes in American media's coverage in light of the increasing
professionalism and credibility of al Jazeera that have compelled CNN
and other networks to broadcast footage still bearing al Jazeera's
logo on their screens (Jasperson and El Kikhia, 2003). Yet, as this
paper will argue, those echoes never materialize since each network
remains entrenched in its own overarching frame (what I prefer to
term a "meta-narrative" frame).
Building on the rich body of framing research and the news
media's coverage of "two sided" conflicts and issues, this paper
seeks to "identify" and "pin down" the dominant news
frames ("meta-narrative" frames) in both al Jazeera's and CNN's
coverage of the kidnappings, abductions, and beheadings of Americans
and other foreigners in Iraq. I will argue that news frames generated
in the coverage of international or cross-border and conflict
incidents form a "meta-narrative" frame that comments on the news
frame itself as well as the nature of the "conflict." Thinking of
news frames as "meta-narrative" frames in an international coverage
context will help inform the analysis of pertinent events or
situation and how it was defined. The kidnappings, abductions, and
beheadings of Americans and other foreigners in Iraq, despite being
tragic and horrific incidents, remain very conducive to illuminating
these intricate issues. Their relevance to these media outlets in
terms of "physical proximity," the "local angle," let alone the
gripping human interest story side will always influence the coverage
and the ensuing constructed frames (e.g. Todd Schaefer,
2003). Political and international relations' implications should
not be absent from our considerations. Finally, the concept of news
frames as meta-narratives brings to the fore a need for comprehending
the role of the media in the coverage of two-sided (international)
conflicts, and essentially how global media will always remain local
through their less than primary "actor" status.
DEFINING NEWS FRAMES AS META-NARRATIVES
Verbal conceptualizations of "news frames" have stemmed from
its literal connotations of the term. While a "frame" always conjures
up images of "pictures" and "buildings," as a verb, "to frame"
remains frequently interchangeable with verbs like "construct",
"formulate", and "arrange" (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2004). The house
or picture metaphor of news frames is central to the concept, viewing
frames as journalistic windows or lenses that provide a "snapshot" or
a "strip" of reality (Reese et al, 2001).
Theoretical conceptualizations of news frames have similar
conceptualization. Hertog and McLeod (2001) broadly define frames as
"cultural structures with central ideas and more peripheral
concepts." News frames are manifestations of the metaphors, ideology
and narratives dominant in the broader culture. Under this cultural
perspective, news frames are stable, symbolic and powerful (Pan and
Kosicki, 1993). Goffman (1974) broadly define frames as "schemata of
interpretation." News frames are viewed as translators or
interpreters of meaning and organizers of the social world. They
provide an interpretive package of information. The psychological
bent appears to permeate this conceptualization. Entman (1993) refers
to framing as a process of selecting some specified "aspects of
reality and mak[ing] them more salient in a communicating text." News
frames, then, might define, diagnose, and evaluate a problem within a
given context. A synthetic definition of a news frame emerges from
Tankard et al (1991) influential study. A news frame is
A central organizing idea for news content that supplies a context
and suggests what the issue is through the use of selection,
emphasis, exclusion, and elaboration (p. 336).
It can be detected that Tankard and his collaborators attempt to
synthesize the diverse conceptualizations of news frames.
Operationally, definitions of news frames have spanned the spectrum
of and crisscrossed the former theoretical definitions. The cultural
approach operationally defined news frames as a basic concept of
"conflict" couched in a "master narrative" (Hertog & McLeod, 2001).
In news frames, the "actors," i.e. the sources, "will structure the
discussion." The master narratives (derived from culture at large)
will organize divergent ideas (Hertog & McLeod, 2001). News frames
have also been operationalized as an overarching frame interpreted
through a "Media Package" or paragraph (Gamson and Modigliani,
1989). Consisting of key words used in media coverage, material from
pamphlets and direct quotes from knowledgeable sources, about nuclear
power, Gamson & Modigliani (1989) construct paragraphs framing
nuclear power as "progress," "public accountability" or "energy
dependence," to measure the frames used in the news media. The
concept of news frames has also been operationalized as the
amalgamation of salient aspects in a news story rather than a
dominant theme. Ashley and Olson (1998) categorized the
aspects/attributes used to describe the woman movement as a focus on
feminists' appearance, and a rare mention of the movement's goals.
Some researchers used content analysis to identify the range of words
making these aspects salient in a news story. Tankard et al (1991)
operationalized the concept of a new frame as the sum total of "focal
points of news presentations" detected through what they term
"framing mechanisms" (pp.335).
Implicit in the former definitions is the view that news
frames are the product of journalists' framing decisions. The
underlying belief behind all definitions of news framing is the
principle of organizing news in a particular form to induce certain
interpretations. The cultural perspective calls the central idea "a
master narrative." Organization of information revolves around a
dominant theme/ narrative to the exclusion, or diminutive
presentation, of others. A dominant news frame usually coexists with
other secondary frames. Definitions of news frames share an emphasis
on the idea of exclusion and selection of specific attributes of the
issue (Tankard et al., 1991). While agreement on attributes as being
essential to news frames exists, a divergence in these definitions'
focus on the process of framing versus the content of framing is
quite apparent. It is the recommendation of this literature review
that news frames should be viewed as encompassing both process (of
selection, exclusion and inclusion) and content (meaning and
interpretation). In consequence, a study of news frames would benefit
from a marriage of both a qualitative and a quantitative assessment
of the frames present in the news. Methodologically, the present
paper welcomes both approaches but for purposes of this study, it
will limit its scope to a qualitative assessment of news frames.
A comprehensive definition is put forth to reconcile these
tensions and overlaps that have plagued studies of framing. It is
posited here that framing refers to the process of organization,
selection, and making salient specific news attributes (Tankard et
al, 1991; Entman, 1993; Gamson & Modigliani, 1989). Organization of
news attributes includes quotes from the protagonists, officials,
activists, politicians and representatives (of the victims). It is
the opinion of this author that if qualitatively assessed, news
frames remain essentially as embedded news stories with a
meta-narrative of their own. The meta-narrative usually seeks to
identify the protagonists (their identity and name(s), for example),
their purposes (goals, demands, responses…), culminating in
establishing, or reiterating a broader context. The other implication
of the "meta-narrative" perspective is that news frames tell stories
and narratives about the frames themselves, how they got constructed,
and to what end. What I have termed news framing
as "meta-narratives" finds its inspiration in Entman's (2004) model
of the media's framing of US foreign policy questions that rely on
elucidating an "event" and an "actor" (via a focus on problem,
evaluation/cause, and remedy).
In conclusion, this literature review and explication of news
frames has argued that the disparate views and definitions of news
frames can be distilled into an encompassing definition that stresses
context, selection and exclusion of information. As such, attention
is equally shared between the content (meaning) and the process
(construction) of these frames. Assessment of these frames is
admittedly problematic (Tankard et al., 1991), but for purposes of
exploration and subsequently enriching any methodological analysis of
these news frames, a qualitative assessment is perhaps mandatory.
Further, when it comes to international news coverage of contentious
events and issues like terrorism news frames are best thought of in
terms of "meta-narrative" frames highlighting the workings both the
workings and construction of these meta-narrative frames.
Meta-narrative frames are constructed through the parameters of
naming or labeling, identity and purpose (demands, response…)
probably constituting what Tankard et al (1991) term "focal points of
news presentations."
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
This paper examines a contentious event (kidnapping of foreigners in
Iraq) with foreign policy implications and seeks to illuminate the
meta-narrative frames enveloping its coverage in CNN and al
Jazeera. The research project is interested in answering two main
research questions:
1) What "meta-narrative" (news) frames does CNN and al Jazeera's
coverage of kidnapping incidents in Iraq generate? The paper will
identify the "meta-narrative" frames focusing on issues of naming,
identity and demands of the perpetrators or the official responses to
those demands.
2) How can thinking of news frames as "meta-narratives" inform the
study of international media's coverage (of two-sided conflicts)? The
paper will discuss the implications of "meta-narrative" frames
existing in the coverage of the two media outlets on "global" media,
and how issues of proximity and local angle will trump and drive the
framing of contentious issues.
TEXTUAL ASSESSMENT OF NEWS FRAMES IN CNN AND AL JAZEERA'S COVERAGE OF
KIDNAPPING INCIDENTS IN IRAQ
The study used Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe to retrieve CNN
transcripts, using keywords: hostages, kidnappings and Iraq during
2004. The search yielded 25 news stories, of which I have chosen to
shed extra focus on a gruesome incident that ended in the killing of
an American hostage (Mr. Nick Berg). That horrible incident gained
wide media coverage, and ushered in the era of taped (and broadcast)
killing of American and other foreign hostages in Iraq. I therefore
further limited the search to the period following that incident,
that is, CNN transcripts between April and September of 2004. The
period consciously avoided merging media coverage during the US
presidential campaign and elections to eliminate highly partisan
-dominated reporting. To compare CNN to al Jazeera, this study uses
al Jazeera's coverage of the incidents in the network's English
Website as the main data source for al Jazeera's news frames. A
preliminary comparison of the English and Arabic version of the
websites leaves scarce doubt that the English language Website
remains faithful to the editorial policies of the network. The
Website's search engine, as well as a careful attention to the links
of related stories, permitted the retrieval of most, if not all, the
articles (30 articles) covering the issue of the foreign hostages in
Iraq, during the same period (April and September 2004).
A qualitative assessment of the data has led to the
identification of a dominant and overarching news frame (what I have
previously termed a "meta-narrative" frame) in CNN's coverage that is
in diametric opposition to the "meta-narrative" frame permeating al
Jazeera's coverage of the kidnapping crises in Iraq. CNN National
Edition's coverage pressed forth a news frame of terrorism and the
"war on terror," as an organizing coverage tool, while al Jazeera's
coverage presented the incidents within "the Iraqi insurgency and
resistance frame." The exploratory analysis and identification of
these news/meta-narrative frames assumes that framing techniques,
rhetorically and structurally, are enriched when combined with a
meaning/textual analysis. The assessment therefore concludes that the
"meta-narrative" frames in CNN and al Jazeera are identifiable
through an examination of the "labels" used to refer to the
perpetrators (terrorist or otherwise), their identities (Iraqi or
foreign), their demands or the response to those demands and the
preceding acts of terror.
The Iraqi Insurgency and Resistance Frame in al Jazeera:
Unlike CNN's coverage of the kidnapping (and/or eventual
beheading) incidents in Iraq, al Jazeera.net never refers to the
perpetrators as "terrorists." Instead, they are frequently referred
to with a diversified descriptive lexicon. Utilizing terminology such
as "captors," a "masked man" in the video, "Iraqi group," "armed
Iraqis" and sometimes as "Iraqi resistance." More often than not, the
"captors'" alleged group name is used, and confusing, previously
unknown names have cropped up in the coverage: "Ansar al-Din,"
"Jamaat al-Tawhid and Jihad," (The Group of One God and Jihad) or
"Saraya al-Mujahidiin" (The Mujahedeen Brigades). 1 It appears very
practical to put all of these "captors" in one basket that is the
"the Iraqi Resistance" thereby creating a superficial homogeneity,
and a probable unity of purpose among factions that never dreamt of
being unified. The term "terrorist" is not a mot de choix, and in the
few instances of its use, it is stressed as a quote from
American/allied officials in Iraq or in the US, as in this instance:
"We should not give in to these despicable threats from terrorists,"
said Koizumi.2
The poignant issue of labeling the perpetrators of those acts
of "terror" goes in tandem with another delicate site of tension,
which is the identity of these people. If the victims' identities are
clearly apparent, the perpetrators' identities are hidden, inherently
illusive, literally and figuratively masked and hooded to terrorize
and sow confusion. While CNN, as will be explained, frequently
points out the non-Iraqi identity of the terrorists3, mostly through
their affiliation with trans-national terrorists of al Qaeda, al
Jazeera.net never questions their Iraqi identities.4 The coverage of
al Jazeera indefatigably grounds the kidnapping crises in the Iraqi
context of war, occupation, retaliation, and fighting the Americans.
Almost universally, the adjective "Iraqi" qualifies the perpetrators,
as in these instances: "Iraqi captors release foreign drivers,"
"Iraqi group claims Kurds' beheading," and "Armed Iraqis hold
foreigners hostage."5 In essence, both emphasizing the Iraqi identity
and endowing the perpetrators with "actual" names reminds the
audience that this is a "real" war with victims and perpetrators, not
even remotely resembling other fights with broader international
terrorist groups. Being Iraqis, the perpetrators potentially glean
legitimacy in al Jazeera's coverage (and potentially with the
network's primary audiences) and broadcast their grievances and
complaints against the US intervention in their country.
Al Jazeera's expansive broadcasting of the demands of the
"captors'" and "armed Iraqis" serve to further accomplish, reinforce,
establish and reiterate the frame of the "Iraqi resistance" or
"national insurgency." Quoted at length, these demands range from
justifying the brutalization and beheading of the hostages as a
retaliation and revenge against the scandalous acts of Abu Ghraib.
For instance, in one of those demands al Jazeera reports: "his
captors threatening to kill him unless the US released all Iraqis in
"occupation jails." 6 Actually, the first immensely publicized
incident of kidnapping and beheading took place while the US Congress
was examining the Abu Ghraib photos. In their words, beheading the
hostages represented a "revenge for the abuse of Iraqis by US
troops," and redemption of the "dignity of Muslim men and women"
through blood.7 Often times, the demands are for a complete
withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq, so far met only by the
government of the Philippines, to save the hostages' lives.8 In
conclusion, the meta-narrative frame of resistance has been
constructed throughout al Jazeera's coverage in the form of a
meaningful message: Iraqi groups, like : "Ansar al-Din," are
combating American occupation in Iraq and kidnapping Americans and
foreigners is probably a tactic of war distinct from terrorism.
International Terrorism or "War on Terror" News Frame:
From the onset, CNN-American Edition's coverage of the
foreigners' kidnapping, hostage and beheading incidents in Iraq names
the perpetrators as "terrorists." In describing the grisly video of
the execution of an American hostage, a CNN journalist explains that
"One of five hooded terrorists reads a statement" before executing
their victim,9 while al Jazeera's journalists used the less charged,
morally "neutral" and descriptive term of "man" when referring to the
same individuals. The terrorists are also equated with notions and
labels of barbarism and savagery in interchangeably using terms like
"barbarians," highlighting the "difference between us and them." The
show's guests and officials' statements boost this impression, and
Sen. McCain's interjection sums this whole issue on the show: "It's
terrible, it's tragic. It also shows the stark difference between
America and these barbarians."10 In other stories, very infrequently,
if ever, do references to terrorists as "captors" or "insurgents"
occur. Unlike al Jazeera's coverage, the names of the terrorist
groups rarely seep into or inform the coverage of these kidnappings
and gruesome executions. Achieved is a unity of purpose in the
universal use of terminology that blends the journalists, the guests,
the "experts" and the US officials' references to the perpetrators,
the "terrorists," into one overarching news frame and meta-narrative: terror.
US officials' comments on CNN, and other press releases, have
situated the kidnapping and killing of American hostages in Iraq
within the broader context and narrative of America's "War on
Terror." For such a purpose, the perpetrators are almost universally
described as terrorist groups, part and parcel of international
terrorist networks, or more specifically al Qaeda's affiliates. CNN's
coverage of these incidents makes prominent these broad terrorist
links, culminating in its emphasis that one of the executions was
carried out by al Zarqawi, a Jordanian born terrorist.11 CNN's
framing of the kidnappings and killing of American hostages in Iraq
from the perspective of "the War on Terror" does put aside the
debates and slippages enveloping the specific context of the war
against Iraq, realities of occupation, and minimize the Iraqi
identity of the insurgency.12 In quotes from CIA to a guest who
authored Inside al Qaeda, CNN wanted to determine whether the voice
on a tape showing the execution of an American is that of al Zarqawi.
But the guest brushes off those attempts in his claim "Whether it is
Zarqawi's voice or not, what really matters is that the tape says
that, the tape refers to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. And we know that Abu
Musab al-Zarqawi is a man who is capable of doing this kind of
operation. He's in the same league as that of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed
{a terrorist accused of masterminding the 9/11 attacks}. And we know
that in the past, the Arab Mujahedeen have conducted this type of
beheading."13 The war on terror framing is further achieved by
mentioning and linking it to America's most wanted enemy Osama Bin
Laden.14
The dominant news frame in al Jazeera's coverage of the issue,
the Iraqi resistance and insurgency meta-narrative frame, gained
prominence through an extensive illumination of the demands of the
kidnappers and perpetrators. In CNN, the initial broadcasts of the
videos do some justice to those demands as well. For instance, in the
same coverage of the beheading of an American subject concomitant
with the Abu Ghraib prison scandal mentioned earlier, CNN host
reports that the killers in the video claim they murdered their
American hostage "to redeem the dignity of Muslim men and women in
Abu Ghraib" and after attempting "to exchange their prisoner for some
in Abu Ghraib."15 However, what ultimately gains prominence in CNN is
the official response to that "terror" through frequent repetition of
press releases and quoting the administration. Overall, it is safe
to assume that on CNN American Edition, those demands were less
prominent and less frequently mentioned. The frame of terrorism and
the "war on terror" grid probably does not tolerate any elements of
demands under the official rubric of "no negotiation with the
terrorists" (Entman, 2004). In promoting the "war on terror" frame,
what got the limelight was the official response to that terrorist
act, summed up in a viewer's email: "terror must be stopped."16 A
former general, acting as a CNN military expert, was more pugilistic
as he opined that the American people want to "take off their gloves"
to stop the murderous terrorists, and that the US military should
"resume combat."17 These responses merge with both the official and
popular responses to the arch terrorist act on American soil in 2001,
a subtle transition from a brutal Iraqi insurgency to the "war on
terror" frame. Within this meta-narrative frame, there is no
justification whatsoever for this terrorist's unwholesome act, and
the American government's will stay the course and complete the
"mission" and "task" of ridding the world of terrorists.18
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
To recap, the "Iraqi resistance and insurgency frame" emerges
as the prevalent, overarching, main news frame in al Jazeera's
coverage of the hostages and/or their subsequent beheading in Iraq.
The news frame, I have attempted to argue, is achieved with a naming
strategy, abstaining from describing the perpetrators as
"terrorists," and instead opting for terms like "armed Iraqis." The
news frame also rejects the international terrorism frame through its
emphasis on the Iraqi identity of the perpetrators, situating the
incidents in the context of US occupation, conflict and
resistance. Other frames might co-exist with this main frame, but
they never achieve prominence, neither through space allocation or
frequency (in the case of the website). The Coalition Provisional
Authority in Iraq and other American officials are quoted fairly
well, but they never achieve "resonance" (see M. M. Miller & B. P.
Reichert, 2001, on frame resonance). The gripping tales of the
victims' families are also present as a "human interest frame," which
in this instance serves to bolster the overarching and meta-narrative
frame of Iraqi resistance and insurgency. The apogee and reach of
the meta-narrative frame are achieved by highlighting the
perpetrators' demands. Finally, the combined effect of naming and
labeling the perpetrators, as "resistance," insurgents and "armed
Iraqis" is to "de-terrorize" these "captors," highlight their demands
and ground the meta-narrative frame in the Iraqi context. Eventually,
the Iraqi resistance meta-narrative frame sweeps aside the potential
links to other "terrorist" networks and clearly rejects other counter frames.
While framing the kidnapping of American hostages in Iraq as
an act of terror, part of the broader "war on terror" frame, remains
the single most important and dominant news frame in CNN's coverage,
other minor news frames do co-exist albeit with less resonance and
stridence. In each incident, counter frames might emerge as the
context allows, as in the case of the murder of one US hostage whose
family shifted the blame to the US government, creating a check on
the official narrative and halting CNN's and probably other mass
media outlets' coverage from adopting the "war on terror"
frame. Family's outrage at the US government is reported, posing a
counter frame, opposing the official framing of the killing of their
son in Iraq (CNN AMERICAN MORNING May 14 2004). The "war on terror"
frame, according to this analysis provides a linear story, rather
than the protracted, potentially unpopular and hazardous, conflict
frame of the Iraqi insurgency and resistance to the US occupation.
Despite the inherently open-ended drift of the "war on terror" frame,
at this particular instance it provides CNN's coverage with closure
similar to traditional, regularly adopted news frames. CNN's news
framing of the kidnapping and killing of Americans in Iraq as a "war
on terror" act simulates a self-sufficient meaningful phrase: A
terrorist (Zarqawi) murders Americans and he will be eliminated with
swift and ruthless force.
The analysis of CNN's and al Jazeera's news coverage of the
kidnapping and violent incidents in Iraq in terms of meta-narrative
frames has the advantage of organizing seemingly unrelated events in
broad, macrocosmic outline. The "meta-narrative frame" definition and
approach used here might potentially appear reductive, but it still
retains the power of a frame as "definitions of a situation" built
through organization, selection, exclusion of information (Goffman,
1974, pp.10-11). What is innovative about this term is the notion and
perception that meta-narrative frames have an intrinsic potential to
transcend the micro-frames (those of lesser dominance in the news
coverage) as well as provide comments on the framing choices and
interpretations within the coverage of contentious issues, especially
in the realm of international crises and foreign policy news. The
analysis of news frames in this paper cannot claim to have
exhaustively described and analyzed such broad dimensions. In
essence, the paper has been concerned with mere exploration, and
intellectual exercising, of this window of opportunity in frame
analysis. The meta-narrative frames identified in the coverage of the
kidnapping and killing (of foreigners and Americans in particular)
carried out in Iraq, either as the "war on terror" meta-frame (CNN's
coverage) or as the "Iraqi resistance/insurgency" meta-frame (al
Jazeera's coverage), have both defined the "situation" (and probably
organized the experiences of viewer-ship about the incidents).
Further, meta-narrative frames provide a grounded definition
of the situation in narrative terms, naming of the
culprits/protagonists/antagonists, insisting on foregrounding their
identity (or lack of it), and problematizing the demands/responses
enveloping the act(ion). In the case at hand, it is useful to note
how related coverage of hostages and kidnappings in the American
media has amalgamated these strategies by subsuming all such "evil"
in one perpetrator or terrorist, namely Zarqawi (the Jordanian-born
terrorist). As an unnamed official source described how opportune is
the Zarqawi myth as a foe, "making him out as the linchpin of just
about every attack in Iraq…We needed a villain, someone identifiable
for the public to latch on to, and we got one" (Washington Post,
October 5, 2004). The quote thus highlights the working and
establishing of a meta-narrative frame that coincides with the
administration's own framing of the kidnappings in Iraq as mere
episodes of the broader "war on terrorism." As a meta-narrative
frame, the "war on terror" illuminates how powerfully insidiously
official frames seep into American media's coverage. The question
remains as to both how and why do these meta-narrative frames stop
short of dominating or superseding each other (transference) in our
closely networked global media?
The semblance of an answer lies probably in classical issues
of proximity and the local vantage point or angle. Proximity and
local vantage potentially challenge the facile transference of frames
in global television news as the divergence and clearly oppositional
stances of al Jazeera and CNN news frames became more apparent.
Conventionally, globalization and monopolization trends suggest that
a few and concentrated television news agencies should have the
capacity to transmit news frames, more especially through their
supply (chain) of international news footage to various news networks
and broadcasters (e.g. Chomsky and Herman, 1988; Paterson, 2001). In
this case, however, al Jazeera's own news gathering operations, the
fact that its journalists were roaming the Iraqi terrain prior to the
recent prohibition (enacted by Iraq's provisional government in
2004), the geographic and cultural proximity could all be elements
that contributed to the rise of this distinct news frame (meta-frame,
actually). Al Jazeera's news frame might as well have constituted a
challenge to the meta-frame in CNN's coverage of the kidnapping
incidents in Iraq. Such a conclusion reiterates the ascendancy of al
Jazeera as a household brand name in the coverage of international
events with its own distinct voice largely absent from the coverage
of, say, the earlier Gulf War in 1991 (Jasperson and El Kikhia, 2004).
Al Jazeera's ascendancy and capacity to come out as an
international media player followed its groundbreaking coverage of
the war in Afghanistan and its exclusive reach to Taliban and Al
Qaeda leaders there. Some studies have hastily ventured to conclude
that the international renown, legitimacy and ascendancy could imbue
American media's coverage and reportage of events in the Middle East
with some semblance of impartiality and balance (e.g. Jasperson & El
Kikhia, 2004). In light of the present analysis, succumbing to that
streak of optimism could appear rather precipitous and less solid
(however desirable it might be). When it comes to issues of national
security, American media's first instinct, I might unsurprisingly
claim, is to "rally around the flag," a more pronounced effect after
the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and support the
president/administration frames (e.g. Hetherington and Nelson, 2003).
In sum, there is no tangible and moderating impact of al Jazeera's
coverage and framing of the kidnapping incidents exerted on CNN's own
framing choices. The chasm is probably still there, highlighting both
standards of news reporting, context issues and the politico-cultural
linkages of journalists in each network.
NOTES
1. Al Jazeera.net- May 12, 2004; al Jazeera.net on September 20, 2004
2. The quote was cited in the context of Japan's official response to
the Japanese hostages in Iraq. Al Jazeera.net; April 9, 2004, 14:34 GMT.
3. The terrorist label might not need any illustration, but one
instance could be CNN AMERICAN MORNING, May 14 2004.
4. Those claims are repeatedly highlighted in CNN LOU DOBBS TONIGHT,
May 13, 2004.
5. Al Jazeera.net: August 7, 2004, 1:53 GMT
6. Al Jazeera.net July 4, 2004, 6:31 GMT
7. Al Jazeera.net: May 12, 2004; April 16, 2004, 6:20 GMT; April 14,
2004, 15:49 GMT
8. The hostage was released after the Filipino government began
pulling its troops out of Iraq, an outcome highlighted in al
Jazeera.net, July 22, 2004, 10:32 GMT
9. CNN AMERICAN MORNING, May 12, 2004. Also, in LIVE FROM... May 11, 2004.
10. CNN AMERICAN MORNING, May 12, 2004
11. CNN LOU DOBBS TONIGHT, May 13, 2004
12. Prior to the coverage of the killing of Mr. Nick Berg, the
media's focus was on the scandal of Abu Ghraib, the photos seen by
the Congress, and the Democratic Party's criticism of the
administration's Iraq policies. CNN LARRY KING LIVE; May 14, 2004
13. CNN AMERICAN MORNING, May 14, 2004.
14. CNN LARRY KING LIVE, May 14, 2004 Friday
15. CNN LIVE FROM… May 11, 2004
16. CNN AMERICAN MORNING, May 12, 2004
17. CNN AMERICAN MORNING, May 12, 2004.
18. President Bush is quoted on CNN Live From…. May 12, 2004.
REFERENCES
Ashley, L. and Olson, B. (1998). Constructing reality: Print media's
framing of the
women's movement, 1966–1986. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 1998
Chomsky, N. and Herman, Edward S. (1988). Manufacturing consent: the political
economy of the mass media. New York: Pantheon Books
Encyclopedia Britannica Online (2004). Retrieved October 13, 2004,
from Encyclopedia
Britannica Online.
Entman, Robert (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm.
Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.
Entman, Robert (2004). Projections of power: framing news, public
opinion, and U.S.
foreign policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gamson, W. & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public
opinion on nuclear
power: A constructionist approach, American Journal of
Sociology, 95, 1-37.
Goffman, Erving (1974). Frame analysis: an essay on the organization
of experience.
New York: Harper & Row.
Hertog, James K and McLeod Douglas M. (2001). A multiperspectival approach to
framing analysis: A field guide. In S.D. Reese, et al. (eds.).
Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of
the social world (pp.139-161). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hetherington, Marc J. and Nelson. Michael (2003). Anatomy of a Rally
Effect: George
W. Bush and the War on Terrorism. Political Science and
Politics, 36:37-42
Jasperson, Amy E. and El Kikhia, Mansour O. (2003). CNN and al Jazeera's media
coverage of America's war in Afghanistan. In Norris, Kern & Just
(eds.), Framing Terrorism: the news media, the government, and the
public. New York: Routledge.
McCombs M. (1997). Building Consensus: The News Media's Agenda-Setting Roles.
Political Communication, 14 (4), 433-443.
McCombs, M. & Ghanem, S. I. (2001). The convergence of agenda setting
and framing.
In S.D. Reese, et al. (eds.). Framing public life: Perspectives on
media and our understanding of the social world (pp.67-81).
Miller, M. M. & Andsager, J. L. (1997). Media framing of hate speech:
From campus to
the public sphere. Newspaper Research Journal, 18 (3-4), 2-15.
Miller, M. M. & Reichert, B. P. (2001). The spiral of opportunity and
frame resonance:
Mapping the issue cycle in news and public discourse. In Reese, et
al. (eds.). Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our
understanding of the social world (pp.107-135).
Norris, P., Kern, M. and Just, M. eds. (2003). Framing Terrorism: The
news media, the
government, and the public. New York: Routledge.
Pan, Z. & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news
discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55-75.
Paterson, Chris A. (2001). The Transference of Frames in Global
Television. In Reese,
et al. (eds.). Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our
understanding of the social world (pp.337-353).
Schaefer, Todd M. (2003). Framing the US embassy bombings and
September 11 attacks
in African and US newspapers. In Norris, P., Kern, M. and Just, M.
eds., Framing Terrorism: The news media, the government, and the
public (p.p.93-112).
Tankard, J., Hendrickson, L., Silberman, J., Bliss, K., & Ghanem, S.
(1991). Media
frames: Approaches to conceptualization and measurement. Paper
presented to AEJMC, Boston.
Washington Post, October 5, 2004. Electronic retrieval, March 9 2005:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8244-2004Oct5.html
|
