Search

Media and terrorism has been an area of research which has attracted researchers' interests in looking at the strategic dimensions of framing. Researchers look at how different communities, in conflict situations such as terrorist attacks, dispute meaning and interpretation of similar events. Entman's (2003 and 2004) cascading activation model is an interesting tool to look at results of this sort of framing contests. However, the variable "cultural resonance" suggested by this model is only able to explain after the whole process of communication. This paper combines both Entman's model with dramatism theory. The principle of drama by which a scenario has to be consistently built provides tools to assess the inner capacity of a frame to cascade through. This paper analyzes four speeches and their press coverage in conflict situations: reaction from the Government and the opposition to ETA terrorist band in Spain. For the analysis of the speeches Burkean concepts of the Pentad and ritual of purification (as well as their corresponding evaluative concepts) are applied to assess the quality of motivations of both communicators. For the press coverage, Entman's cascading activation model is applied. Empirical analysis shows a "two sided context" with two very different interpretations of the situation associate to a highly fragmented capacity for cultural resonance: assessments of the communicator motivations are made differently by two "communities" (parties and newspapers) who are strongly disputing meaning. Combination of framing theory and dramatism theory enriches the strategic dimension of framing analysis. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Government communication strategies vary in the way they involve people needs and demands in public policies-decision making. Kriesi's model for analysis (2004) differentiates between top-down strategies, media strategies, and bottom-up strategies. Aiming at assessing how the public sphere is implicated in public policy, this author thinks that conditions regarding events, actor constellations, and speaker attributes are connected with each strategy. Audience democracy appears to be a complex set of interrelations. The basic assumption of his model is that even when studies focus on countries that share similar cultural, economic, and politico-institutional characteristics, and even when the same issues are selected, a great variation in the range of actors and their respective strategies in trying to shape public opinion will be found. This paper analyses the evolution of government communication in Spain in the transition to democracy. Using in depth interviews with all Governments Spokespeople in Spain from 1986 until 2006, it assess different strategies employed. For the analysis of models Denton and Woodward's typology (1998) is applied: the 'press agent' model, the 'events coordinator' model, and the 'strategic planner' one. For the operational analysis, three-tier communications operation suggested by Kumar (Kumar, 2003: 377) are looked at: the strategy level (units -and their resources— that compose the organizational structure), the operational level (how strategies are carried out) and the implementation level (how message is translated into words and pictures). Ultimately, the question of the aim of government communication and its implications for social impact is addressed testing the assumption that the difference between the "better mutual understanding" aim and the "simply disseminating favourable information" aim is that while the first demands strategy, the second, for being uni-linear information, does not. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the findings of a study comparing the use of frames in television news in three West European countries, Italy, Spain, and Germany. Following the definition given by Entman (1993), this study applied a modified classification of frames according to the dimensions cooperation/agreement vs. conflict/disagreement. The agreement/disagreement dimension is used if the frame refers to the position of the journalist, while the cooperation/conflict dimension is applied for coding the events being reported. It was hypothesized that the uses of frames varies among different journalistic cultures (in this case, the Mediterranean or Polarized Pluralist Model vs. the North European or Democratic Corporatist Model). In fact, this study found differences that can be interpreted along the lines of the factors that characterize the two journalistic cultures, particularly the relationship between journalists and politicians. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]