<%BANNER%>

Framing analysis of the New York Times and Le Monde following the attacks of September 11

University of Florida Institutional Repository

PAGE 1

FRAMING ANALYSIS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES AND LE MONDE FOLLOWING THE ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11 By ALLISON IRENE AIKEN A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN MASS COMMUNICATIONS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2003

PAGE 2

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to first and foremost thank my committee chair, Dr. Kurt Kent, for his continued support of this thesis the past two years. I would also like to thank Dr. Leonard Tipton and Dr. Ido Oren for their support. I would additionally like to thank Dr. Julie Dodd for her continued support over the past two years on this research and my general well being. ii

PAGE 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..................................................................................................II LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................VI ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................VII CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 What Is the Role of the Press?......................................................................................1 The Decline of International News in the American Press...........................................5 American and French Press..........................................................................................8 Definitions....................................................................................................................9 Justification for Study.................................................................................................10 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE.....................................................................................12 Framing.......................................................................................................................12 The Elite Press............................................................................................................18 Description of Newspapers Used for this Study.........................................................20 Le Monde.............................................................................................................20 The New York Times............................................................................................22 Summary.....................................................................................................................24 Hypotheses..................................................................................................................24 3 METHOD...................................................................................................................28 Content Analysis.........................................................................................................28 Quantitative Content Analysis....................................................................................30 Qualitative Content Analysis......................................................................................30 Study Materials...........................................................................................................31 Variables.....................................................................................................................33 iii

PAGE 4

Frames.................................................................................................................33 Sources................................................................................................................37 Analysis......................................................................................................................39 Reliability...................................................................................................................40 Validity.......................................................................................................................41 4 FINDINGS..................................................................................................................43 Brief Overview...........................................................................................................43 Results of Application of Method...............................................................................45 Nature of Sample........................................................................................................47 Reliability Analysis....................................................................................................47 Descriptive Analysis and Hypotheses Results............................................................48 5 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................51 Results of Application of Method...............................................................................51 Descriptive Analysis Discussion................................................................................53 Post-hoc analysis........................................................................................................56 Summary of Hypotheses.............................................................................................60 6 CONCLUSION...........................................................................................................64 Summary.....................................................................................................................64 Conclusions.................................................................................................................67 Limitations..................................................................................................................69 Future Research..........................................................................................................71 Implications................................................................................................................73 APPENDIX A CODING PROTOCOL...............................................................................................74 I. Project Description...........................................................................................74 II. Sample............................................................................................................75 III. Length to be coded........................................................................................75 IV. Coding Log....................................................................................................75 V. Filling in the coding sheets.............................................................................76 iv

PAGE 5

B DATA.........................................................................................................................81 LIST OF REFERENCES...................................................................................................90 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.............................................................................................93 v

PAGE 6

LIST OF TABLES Table page Table 3.1 Variable definitions............................................................................................34 Table 4.1 Number of articles each day..............................................................................44 Table 4.2 Frame usage.......................................................................................................44 Table 4.3 Source eliteness..................................................................................................45 Table 4.4 Source in relation to event.................................................................................45 Table B.1 The New York Times........................................................................................81 Table B.2 Le Monde..........................................................................................................85 vi

PAGE 7

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of Arts in Mass Communication FRAMING ANALYSIS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES AND LE MONDE FOLLOWING THE ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11 By Allison Irene Aiken May 2003 Chair: Kurt Kent Major Department: Journalism and Communications The terrorist attacks of September 11 shocked the entire world. The media frenzy that ensued was unlike anything ever witnessed. The present study looks at the first ten days after the attacks to discover, using framing theory, reporting differences between the United States and France. Using The New York Times and Le Monde, the present study content analyzed a ten-day period of articles about the attacks. Five media frames defined in previous research were employed as a means of categorization for the articles. In addition to analyzing the frames used in each article, the present study also analyzed the type of source and the eliteness of the source used in each article. There was a significant difference in the way the two newspapers used the five media frames and elite sources. Le Monde used the economic consequences frame more significantly than The New York Times did, and The New York Times used the humanvii

PAGE 8

interest frame and conflict frame significantly more than Le Monde used them. Le Monde also used elite sources significantly more than The New York Times used them. Additional analysis was done looking at the data in two time periods different from the period under investigation. The data were looked at for the first two days under investigation (September 12-13) and for the eight-day period following the immediacy of the attacks (September 14-21). The two-day analysis showed no significant differences in the newspapers use of frames or sources. The eight-day analysis showed stronger differences in usage of frames and sources than the analysis of the whole ten-day period showed. viii

PAGE 9

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The tragic events of September 11 not only shocked Americans, they shocked the entire world as well. Media all over the world were suddenly faced with a huge story that needed daily coverage. The media were faced with the daunting task of quickly providing audiences with what they wanted and needed to know. As Navasky (2002) put it in the foreword to Journalism after September 11, [it] would be a mistake to minimize the difficulties the media faced covering the uniquely traumatic and unprecedented events of September 11 and their aftermath (xiii). He also adds that it would be a mistake not to recognize the achievements of The New York Times and others that came out of this crisis mode. The pressure on the media came not only because these were traumatic and unprecedented events, but also because they were where hundreds of thousands of people would be getting their information of what was going on in the world and right around them. As Navasky (2002) put it, its based largely on journalism that we make up our national mind (p. xiii). And with that being said, the pressure was on for the press to get out there and tell the world what to think about (Cohen, 1963, p. 13) this international event. What Is the Role of the Press? In this study, the researcher looked at frames used in The New York Times and Le Monde in news articles about the attacks of September 11, 2001. The study also observed the types of sources the newspapers used when reporting on the event. These 1

PAGE 10

2 items were observed for a ten-day period after the event occurred. They were observed mainly to see if the newspapers remained true to their traditional roles in society during a time of international crisis. Studies have been done in the past that have become the basis for communication research showing a definite role of the press in society. But, what has been the role of The New York Times and Le Monde in the United States and France respectively? As Chomsky (1989) argues in Necessary Illusions, a problem prevalent in democracies since the beginning of democracy persists: Decision making power over central areas of life resides in private hands, with large-scale effects throughout the social order (p. vii). He continues by arguing that in advanced democratic industrial societies, this problem is often approached by depriving democratic political structures of substantive content, while still technically leaving them intact. Chomsky believes institutions like the media, which channel thought and attitudes within acceptable bounds, take on a large part of this task. So, would The New York Times and Le Monde do this in their reporting of the September 11 attacks? Would they deprive their audiences of the content they wanted, or would they break from Chomskys mold? It is difficult to come by just one single answer to this question mainly because of the differences between the press in these two countries. The United States had been experiencing a serious cutback in international news coverage. Cunningham (2001) reports that U.S. newspaper space devoted to international news had dropped from 10 percent in 1971 to a mere 6 percent in 1995. This being said, American newspapers were now going to have to devote more space to international news than they had in the previous three decades. Since non-American media systems had not been cutting back

PAGE 11

3 their international coverage as the American systems had, the non-American systems could have more page space and air time devoted to pieces about the effects of the attacks felt in other countries than their own if they wanted to. Their space and time could be devoted to emotional/analytical concepts, while the American media was going to have to devote more time and space to the traditional who, what, when, and where. In fact, foreign news sources that were available in America, such as the BBC, experienced increased audiences. Those seeking to escape what James (2001) called tunnel vision turned ever more to sources like BBC World News and ITN World News for Public Television (The New York Times, 11/9/01). In a November 2001 poll by Gallup Europe, 62.9 percent of the French surveyed used their own national press to keep informed about the events going on in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the United States and the impact they were having on the rest of the world. Only 15.9 percent of those surveyed by the same poll in France were using the press of other countries. However, 21.4 percent of Germans surveyed were reading the press of other countries for the same information. The French seemed to be relying on their own national press to bring them the information they wanted to know. The French press, perhaps, had a different role to play than that of the press of other European countries. Le Monde was on the scene in Washington and New York as soon as the attacks happened. They were on hand and able to report to their readers about the events and aftermath just as The New York Times reporters were. Both papers were there to answer questions being raised in the minds of their readers. Thirty percent of French surveyed by Gallup Europe in November 2001 were fearful of imminent terrorist acts, more than in any other EU country, while 39 percent of Americans polled by CBS and The New York

PAGE 12

4 Times said they were very concerned about an attack where they live (retrieved on April 22, 2002 from http://www.americans-world.org/digest/global_issues/terrorism_emoResp.cfm). It seemed both papers had an important job in front of them to fulfill the needs of their audiences, who were fearful of more attacks. A 1992 Chang and Lee study found that only when there was a perceived impact on American security and national interest was an international news story selected for U.S. daily newspapers. If it takes a threat to national security for the American press to print international news, then the attacks of September 11 were exactly the type of threat that was going to demand newspapers print international news. Even though this was an international event, the American people were going to be demanding information because it happened on American soil and directly threatened American national security in a very prominent way. The New York Times would have to send out reporters immediately to cover the ensuing events since they knew what their audience wanted to know. But what would Le Monde do? Because of the attacks, they would also have to send out more reporters to different countries to cover the crisis. Sending out many reporters to so many different locations across the globe would cost time and money for these two newspapers. Time and money would have to come from newsholes and budgets that the media in America had been cutting back. Parks (2002) argues that most U.S. newspapers would have to commit more space to international news and hire editors knowledgeable about the world to pull together packages from wires; TV station would have to give up that crime story in the evening news to make room for a longer foreign story; and networks would have to commit

PAGE 13

5 correspondents, producers, crews, and time on their main news programs to keep up with what the American audiences want to read and hear about. Perhaps, now more than a year after the attacks, it is time to think about what lesson all this has taught the American media system. In a cjr [formerly known as the Columbia Journalism Review] article, Andrew Kohut (2002) argues that the attacks and the ensuing responsibility placed on the media have re-emphasized the importance of the public to the media. He says it shows that the publics need to know trumps everything else (pg. 54). The Decline of International News in the American Press This unexpected and huge demand for information posed a large challenge for newspapers, especially in America, because over time the amount of international news in American newspapers had begun to decline. Newspaper studies showed that international news coverage had dropped significantly in the past two decades (Cunningham, 2001). Parks (2002) discusses a 2001 Newspaper Advertising Bureau study that showed coverage of international news in newspapers in America before September 11 was only at 2 percent, which was down from 10 percent in 1971. With the closing of international bureaus, the newsholes in newspapers and magazines began simply to be filled with more domestic and entertainment news. Therefore, the American people were beginning to know less about international events and developments than they had in previous years. Cunningham refers to Nina Burleigh, a former war correspondent for Time, commenting that the foreign news blackout means that the rest of the world knows far more about America than we know about ourselves (p. 110). Some argue that this decline in international news had created a new isolationism within the United States. Parks (2002) report that Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster,

PAGE 14

6 told a 1997 conference on the issue that the media only cover instability abroad and have made international involvement look very undesirable (p. 56). Parks also report on a Gallup poll that found those who described themselves as hardly interested in international affairs went from 3 percent to 22 percent between the 1990 and 1998 studies by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations. It seems that after the Cold War ended, the United States felt safe within its borders. However, after the attacks, for papers to simply report on the what was not enough for the public to truly understand what was happening, nor was it what the public seemed to be saying it wanted. In a September 27-28, 2001, Newsweek poll, 15 percent of those surveyed felt like their life would never return to normal (retrieved on January 3, 2003 from http://people-press.org/reports/print.php3?PageID=22). The public needed and wanted to know more about the why. Reporters and editors were faced with the daunting challenge of filling in these gaps for their readers in a very quick manner. Papers had to get reporters to the scenes of the events quickly and keep up with the up-to-the-minute changes the U.S. government was making. As Zeiler and Allan (2002) put it in the introduction to Journalism after September 11, [t]hrough it all, they scrambled to provide breaking information, offset panic, and make sense of events that had devastated most existing interpretive schema (p. 3). This coverage was not going to be any ordinary international news coverage for the press. It would entail more than simply going to the White House for daily briefings from the press secretary. It would entail hard news gathered from primary sources in a very timely manner because audiences were looking for reasons and explanations to

PAGE 15

7 questions that they had never had before. Parks (2002) argues that many American news organizations began to play catch-up (p. 52). But why was the American press playing catch-up? Parks (2002) suggests the threat of an Islamic fundamentalist attack had been clear for years with the World Trade Center attacks in 1993, Air Force housing in Saudi Arabia attacks in 1996, 1998 U.S. embassy attacks in Kenya and Tanzania, and U.S.S. Cole attack in 2000. Shouldnt the American people already have known about the who of these attacks? Parks suggests the answer is not really because the previous attacks were only covered episodically and had little investigative and followup reporting. Since there was little and mostly thin reporting on the previous terrorist attacks, the who of the September 11 attacks was quite unknown to an American audience. Had the American media been failing their audience? Parks (2002) reports that Bill Wheatley, vice president of NBC News, was self-critical about the situation. We all have done a good job since September 11, Wheatley says, but I and a lot of others wish we had done more to help the public understand the intensity of feelings, the anger, among the radical Islamic fundamentalists (p. 53). Parks also reports that Edward Seton, former president of the American Society of Newspaper Editors, said there is no question that they failed their readers. Parks (2002) argues that the media failed their audiences by not acknowledging that, even before the attacks, the American people saw the threat of global terrorism as the countrys greatest concern. Parks (2002) mentions polls that reported in the late 1990s that American people thought the 21 st century would be even bloodier than the 20 th and that protecting the United States from foreign terrorist attacks should be a top priority.

PAGE 16

8 Simply put, most news organizations failed to cover what a substantial number of their readers and viewers believed was vitally important the danger posed to the United States by global terrorism (p. 53). American and French Press If the American media had been failing the public in covering international news for at least a decade, how different would the American newspaper coverage of the attacks be from the French newspaper coverage? Would they not report on the same exact issues since this was actually an attack on the West? How would these two seemingly different countries portray, or frame, the same event to their newspaper readers? It is without question that each world power has at least one elite newspaper that stands out from the rest. According to Pool (1970), these newspapers are usually semiofficial, always intimate with the government read by public officials, journalists, scholars, and business leaders (p. 62). Pool categorizes Le Monde as semiofficial. He acknowledges that The New York Times often doesnt follow the line of the government, yet says it still retains some of the characteristics of semiofficial newspapers. Concerning Le Monde, Salinger (1982) notes that [t]he role of General de Gaulle in the founding of the newspaper has not been without effect over the years in the treatment of the news (pp. 82-83). The differences between The New York Times and Le Monde may not be blatantly obvious, but Salinger makes the point: For an American reader, Le Monde (and for that matter the rest of the French press) differs from what one is accustomed to reading in the written media in the United States. American newspapers make an effort, mostly successful, to separate opinion and information. Opinion is labeled as such, often confined to special pages of the newspaper. The rest of the newspaper is devoted to information. American newspapers stress pure information. (p. 83)

PAGE 17

9 The French press is more interested in analyzing the news, while the American press is more interested in objectively presenting the news. But articles on the attacks were not the typical news story for either press system, so would the attacks produce typical analytical pieces from the French and typical objective news from the Americans? While the French press has been noted for being a government feeler or an unofficial expression of policy (Pool 1970, pp. 65-66), would the attacks create a similar air in the American press system? This study attempts to discern the differences in the use of frames in The New York Times and Le Monde in the reporting after the attacks of September 11. Definitions The following terms are used within the present study. The explanations that follow come from a variety of sources. Bureau A news office away from the main newsroom of a newspaper or wire service (Harrigan, p. 407). Newshole Space left for news and editorial matter after ads have been placed on pages (Baskette et al., p. 435). Frame The parameters within which an author sets or frames a story. For the purposes of the present study, there are five main frames that newspaper reporters use when writing stories: conflict, attribution of responsibility, morality, economic consequences, and human interest (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000). Elite newspaper A newspaper aimed at a specific elite audience, which usually is better educated and has a greater interest in public affairs than the readers of the popular press (Merrill, 1968).

PAGE 18

10 News story An article that is about a recent event that has been designated as news by the editorial staff. Usually, a news story contains mostly objective facts and figures. Editorial [T]he unsigned, staff-written statement that runs on the editorial page, stating the newspapers official position on issues (Harrigan, 1993, p. 411). Column A piece of writing that strongly shows the writers opinion or personal style (Harrigan, 1997, p. 408). Broadsheet Term used to describe a full-sized newspaper page as opposed to a tabloid (Burkette et al (Eds.), 1997, p. 427). Source A person or document that provides information for a story (Harrigan, 1993 p. 422). Justification for Study This study will look at the differences between the elite press of the United States and of France with respect to their traditional roles in society. More specifically, the study will investigate the difference between two elite newspapers in regards to the use of media frames used when reporting soon after the attacks of September 11. The study will look at the elite press of these two countries to content analyze the press coverage of the September 11 attacks on the United States. The results of the study will add to the general body of knowledge about the press system within the two countries. The comparisons and contrasts made will help researchers understand the press systems and how they operate in crisis situations. The coverage of the attacks has been used for the study to help put the comparisons and contrasts on the same level, and the event was chosen because it was an event that had international effects; therefore international newspapers would cover it. Using the same event to do the research also helps to keep the results balanced.

PAGE 19

11 The study remains balanced in the sense that the event being reported on was a global event having global consequences. Even though the attacks were only in one country, the entire globe was affected economically, politically, emotionally, religiously, and in countless other ways. The events continue to have a global impact even today, one and a half years later. In France, a new Muslim Council has been formed in hopes of creating better relations between the countrys five million Muslims and the French government. In the United States, a new Department of Homeland Security has been formed. These are just two examples of ways each country in the study continues to be affected by the attacks.

PAGE 20

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Newspaper analysis is nothing new to the field of social science. Social scientists have come up with varying ways of doing this analysis. In the 1950s, Erving Goffman elaborated the concept of framing as a way to study interactions. Since then, framing has been used in a number of studies on newspapers, and more generally media, coverage of events in the news. This particular study deals with news articles on the terrorist attacks of September 11. This study does not include analysis of any photos, or illustrations regarding the event. These types of information were not analyzed because the purpose of the present study was to analyze only text printed on the attacks. Framing How a reporter approaches an event and puts it into words has become commonly referred to as how the reporter has framed the story. Framing has become increasingly important in mass communication research. Goffman (1974) defines framing as a way of organization that will govern (social) events, and it has often been linked together with agendasetting in the theoretical world of communication studies. Tuchman (1978) suggests that mass media actively set the frames of reference that readers or viewers use to interpret and discuss public events (p. xi). In other words, instead of telling readers what to think about as agenda setting does, frames go a step further and tell readers how, or in what terms, to think about the issue. A frame gives a reader a specific way in which to look at a reality taken from many different ways in which to look at that same reality. 12

PAGE 21

13 Over the years of research, two concepts of framing can be identified: media frames and individual frames. Kinder and Sanders (1990) suggest that media frames are rooted in political discourse and individual frames are structures made within the mind. Gamson and Modigliani (1987) define a media frame as a central organizing idea or story line that provides meaning to an unfolding strip of events the essence of the issue (p. 143). Entman (1993) says frames essentially involve selection and salience. In other words: [T]o frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described. (p. 52) He adds that frames diagnose, evaluate, and prescribe an idea or concept. With respect to these functions, Entman (1993) says frames define problems by deciding who is doing what with what causes, usually measured in terms of cultural norms. They also diagnose the cause of these defined problems, make moral judgments about the causal agents of these problems, and suggest remedies to these problems. Frames can be presented in a single sentence or throughout an entire text, and they may not include all of the aforementioned functions. Frames also have at least four locations in the communication process, according to Entman (1993). The communicators make framing judgments, whether conscious or unconscious, when deciding what to say. The text has frames that are emphasized or de-emphasized by the presence or absence of certain words, phrases, images, and sources. The receivers thinking and/or conclusions may or may not reflect the frames in the text and the communicators intention. Additionally, culture is the stock of commonly used

PAGE 22

14 frames. Framing in all four locations includes similar functions: selection and highlighting, and use of the highlighted elements to construct an argument about problems and their causation, evaluation, and/or solution (p. 53). But the question remains: How do frames work? Entman (1993) argues they elevate some bit of informations salience. He defines salience as making a piece of information more noticeable, meaningful, or memorable to audiences (p. 53). Therefore, when the salience of an issue is increased in a certain manner, it increases the probability that the audience will remember the issue in that certain way. Entman argues that even a small appearance of a frame can be important if it works with the receivers pre-existing belief systems. Even the choice of words is important when relating to frames. Kahneman and Tversky (1984) experimented with word usage in a survey and found that frames determine whether most people notice and how they understand and remember a problem, as well as how they evaluate and choose to act in regards to that problem. They also found that the exclusion of other ideas or frames was just as significant as inclusion of ideas or frames. The frame used gives meaning to the event or issue being reported on. Its the giving of meaning to the event that has been turned into the five major media frames looked at in research: conflict, human interest, economic consequences, morality, responsibility. Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) suggest a reliable set of content analytic indicators is necessary for studying developments in the news over time and similarities and differences in the ways in which politics and other topics of national and international importance are framed in the news in different countries (p. 94). In other words, these five categories are important because they help researchers study communication processes over time in a comparable fashion.

PAGE 23

15 Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) also mention that other research and literature dealing with content analysis of the nature of the news in the United States and Europe has confirmed that the conflict and attribution of responsibility frames were most commonly used, which also adds to the ability to compare communication across national boundaries. The ability to compare across national boundaries also permits the present study to use this deductive approach of coding articles into one particular frame category using the five aforementioned frames. A brief explanation of them follows. The conflict frame emphasizes conflict between individuals, groups, or institutions as a means of capturing audience interest (p. 95). The human-interest frame emphasizes the human side of a story in an effort to personalize the newsin order to retain audience interest (p. 96). The economic consequences frame puts the issue in terms of the future economic consequences the event will have on groups and/or individuals. The morality frame puts the event in the context of religious tenets or moral prescriptions (p. 96). Finally, the attribution of responsibility frame tells the story in terms of who or what was responsible for the issue. This division into five categories of frames has helped communication researchers do testable and re-testable research. Since the Shoemaker and Reese (1996) statement that news is a socially created product, not a reflection of an objective reality (p. 21), we have agreed that there is some subjectivity in the news. Norris (1995) argues that journalists often work within news frames to simplify, prioritize, and structure the flow of their stories. Entman (1991) argues that these routines journalist go through when producing their product create the frames from which the public draws its opinion on social or political movements of the day; hence, the power of the news frame. Entman

PAGE 24

16 even goes as far as saying that news organizations shape their reports to get positive reactions from their publics, and these anticipated reactions affect political elites, who are the main sponsors of the news frames. The only difference comes when the news event is something breaking and new. Then, the journalists frame the issues on their own. When something is breaking and new, journalists also use their elite sources to make frame-confirming data more salient in the news text and to de-emphasize contradictory data (Entman 1991, p. 8). Its because these frames appear to be natural that they are often difficult to detect. Entman (1991) goes on to say that frames reside in the specific properties of the news narrative that encourage those perceiving and thinking about events to develop particular understandings of them (p. 7). The understanding that the public has of these frames is implemented in their minds through the continued use of the frame. Entman argues that through the repeating and reinforcing of words that are in reference to some ideas and not others, frames work to make some ideas more salient in the text, others less so and others entirely invisible (p. 7). This reinforcement of the frame makes the idea easily identified, understood, and remembered in the minds of the public. But, its not important that everyone identify, understand, or remember the story in the same way, its only important that a significant majority do so, according to Entman. And media professionals can enlarge a frame so much that it penetrates the consciousness of the mass public, or they can shrink the frame so that the public is only minimally aware of the issue or event. News frames are embodied in key words, metaphors, concepts, symbols, and visual images emphasized in a news narrative; (p. 7) therefore, its

PAGE 25

17 important to note that the news media can play a powerful role in determining the success of failure of certain social and political movements, such as the War on Terrorism. However, as Entman (1993) states, whatever the specific use, the concept of framing consistently offers a way to describe the power of a communicating text (p. 51). This power is important to remember when researching political subject matter, such as the War on Terrorism. Entman says this power of the text is important because frames call attention to certain aspects of reality and also obscure certain aspects of reality. Therefore, he argues, political elites fight over the use of certain frames with each other and with journalists. In other words, the frame in a news text reflects the power that dominated the fight. In the same vein, Gameson (1992) argues that a frame can have social power when used with a widely accepted term, so that to not use that term is to risk losing target audiences. For example, the American press has picked up on the term War on Terrorism. If journalists stopped using that term to describe activities of American troops in Afghanistan, they might lose some readers because those readers are only interested in wars and/or terrorism or because some readers might consider the use of another term as being anti-American. The five frames defined by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) can be loosely related to the idea of news values, which are taught to students of journalism. According to Mencher (2000), at least three-fourths of all news stories fall into one of the following categories of news values: conflict; timeliness; impact, consequences, importance; proximity to readers; the unusual nature of the event; and currency or the sudden interest people have in an ongoing situation (p. 68). When reporters choose a subject for an article, they usually are concerned with whether the topic has one of these values. The

PAGE 26

18 five frames defined by Semetko and Valkenburg can help reporters to decide on a way in which to present their chosen topic that will appeal to their readers. For example, if a reporter decides the news event has the news value of impact (news value), then they may decide to frame their article in terms of the economic consequences (frame) of the news event. Additionally, if the reporter decides the news value of the event is the conflict it is causing (news value), the reporter may decide to frame the article in terms of the conflict going on (frame). Similarly, if the reporter determines that the news event has the news value of being unusual in nature, then the reporter may decide to frame the article in terms of human interest (frame). There is no real match for the news values of timeliness, proximity, and currency. And there is no real match for the frames of attribution of responsibility or morality. The present study will look to find which of the five frames are used most often. The Elite Press All around the world, in every country, some aspect of the press has emerged into what is now called the elite press, newspapers read by the elites of their countries and by the elites of other countries as well. Merrill (1968) suggests that these elite newspapers express a significant segment of international elite opinion (p. 11). This elite press is aimed at a specific elite audience, which usually is better educated and has a greater interest in public affairs than do the readers of the popular press. Through the elite press is disseminated either the thoughtful, pluralistic, and sophisticated dialogue of a free society, or the necessary social and political guidance of the closed society (p. 11). Therefore, Merrill (1968) puts the world elite press into two main categories: the free press of an open society, and the restricted or managed press of a closed society. This study deals only with the former.

PAGE 27

19 The elite press is referred to by different names in different parts of the world, but researchers often use the elite press, by whatever name, for the purpose of media study. Merrill (1968) says these papers open minds and stimulate discussion and intelligent reflection (p. 16). Perhaps it is for this reason, and that these elite newspapers impact government policy or are a reflection of that policy, that these newspapers are used often in studies. Merrill also makes the distinction between a quality newspaper and a prestige newspaper. The difference lies in the prestige papers being what Merrill calls kept organs of the state, while a quality paper is a courageous, news-views-oriented journal, published in an open society (p. 15). The present study concerns two quality papers, The New York Times of the United States and Le Monde of France. Schramm (1959) differentiates between these two elite papers, calling Le Monde an analytical newspaper and The New York Times a news-oriented newspaper (p. 5). Merrill (1968) suggests taking these differences into consideration when comparing or studying the two, but he also adds, regardless of the differences among the elite newspapers, they are all serious, concerned, intelligent, and articulate (p. 13). In context with the present study, its important to note one way that Merrill (1968) describes the elite, quality press: These are the papers whether they be dailies or weeklies, specialized or general, large or small that offer hope to the world. They are the reasonable journals, freely and courageously speaking out calmly above the din of party politics and nationalistic drum-beating. They are urging peoples to work together for the good of all, to consider all sides of complex issues, to refrain from emotional decisions, to cherish that which has proved good and discard that which has been detrimental, to consider seriously the basic issues and problems that confront mankind. (p. 16)

PAGE 28

20 Description of Newspapers Used for this Study In studies of the media of countries, researchers often use the same media from study to study. In studies of U.S. broadcast media, the three major broadcasters are almost always used (CBS, NBC, ABC). The same is true of studies of the print media, with The New York Times being used often. The present study is no exception. The researcher has chosen for study one elite newspaper from the United States and one from France The New York Times and Le Monde. Le Monde The newspaper began in 1944 after the Nazi occupation of Paris ended. The government under Charles de Gaulle called for a newspaper that would be respected at home and abroad. It was built on the back of the prewar newspaper Le Temps, which was considered one of Europes best newspapers before World War II. It only took about a year, according to Merrill (1968), for Le Monde to gain an international reputation and circulation for an intelligent, well-educated, and liberal audience (p. 191). There had been criticism about the loss of culture in France. The debate, as discussed in Silvermans (1999) Facing Postmodernity, peaked just after World War II. This debate revolved around: the decline of a notion of culture founded on the intellect, solitary reflection, meaning and a concept of lesprit and [on the other hand] the emergence of an anti-intellectualist version of culture founded on an easy hedonism and instant gratification of the senses; the elevation of mass and popular culture forms (television, rock music, fashion, and so on) to the same status as classical culture; the connivance of education in this debasement, or dumbing down, of culture so that the pedagogic, social and national function of the school is jettisoned in favour of an approach which simply indulges the individualistic whims and desires of young people (pp. 98-99)

PAGE 29

21 It is in response to this debate that Le Monde began and continues to operate. The paper was founded on the ideas of intellectualism, and it continues to operate on the basis of analysis and objectivity in the sense of basing stories on empirical evidence. The analysis is what sets Le Monde apart from many other Western elite newspapers. Merrill (1968) mentions that while the straight news reports may be short, the background and interpretation wander through columns and columns of small type (p. 188). Merrill goes on to add, Le Monde has an uncanny ability to foresee developments, to predict, and to offer reasons, often days or weeks before headlines burst out with news stories (p. 188). However, similar to what has happened to the media in the United States, Silverman (1999) argues, the media and state of France have given up on trying to mold French citizens according to a national ideal of homogeneity and high culture. Instead, he writes, they are both pushed on by demand and consumer satisfaction. To steer clear of being pushed in the direction bending to the demands of consumer satisfaction, Le Monde has never affixed itself to one particular party or another. As Merrill (1968) states, giving a political label to Le Monde is made more difficult by the great diversity of opinions and tendencies of the papers collaborators or contributors (p. 192). In general, though, Le Monde is considered liberal, left-of-center, and internationalist, often being recognized for its coverage and background reporting of international issues. It is also a pacifist paper, calling for rational discussion and arbitration. Le Monde keeps this non-label label by using a mix of news and editorial-style writing in the newspaper. According to Salinger (1982), Journalists (in France) are

PAGE 30

22 encouraged to mix information and opinion, and those who do not have a point of view are considered dull or unreadable (p. 84). It is without a doubt that Le Monde is valuable to the world. Perhaps it is best stated as Merrill (1968) says one French newsweekly put it, Le Monde represent[s] today one of the last lighthouses that light for France the road of intellectual courage, sternness of spirit and of political morality (p. 195). In October 2001, Le Monde voted to go public, according to the economic newspaper The Daily Deal. The initial public offering of 20 to 25 percent of the company was planned to aid editor-director Jean-Marie Colombani with his plans to enlarge the main paper and create stakes in provincial papers. Colombani is credited with bringing the paper back to life after its decline in the early 1990s. He helped restore circulation to more than 500,000, and he helped Le Monde turn a profit for the first time in four years. The papers physical size is somewhat similar to that of a tabloid. It is 13 by 20 inches in size, and the front pages have few pictures larger than 2.5 inches in width. The inside is mostly text, with sparse graphics and photos. Often, the main image on the front page is an editorial cartoon printed in full color. The New York Times Started in September 1851, the New York Daily Times was published for a city of half a million. It was a broadsheet four-page newspaper and sold for one cent a copy. Henry Raymond was the editor, and he was determined to make the paper appeal to the highly intelligent, who might be reading Horace Greeleys Tribune. But the paper added something more than just a moral, conservative side to stories; the paper was more of a news-paper, presenting the reader a well-balanced and heavy diet of news especially foreign news (Merrill 1968, p. 270).

PAGE 31

23 In the late 1800s, the paper was falling into decline. It wasnt until Adolph Ochs came from the Tennessee hills, bringing with him intuitive business sense, faith, and imagination, (Merrill 1968, p. 270) that the paper began to rebound. Ochs coined and put on the front page the famous slogan, All the News Thats Fit to Print. In 1898, he cut the price of the paper back to one cent from the three cents it had been. Within three years, the paper was back and had a circulation of 102,000. Now, with a circulation of more than 1 million, according to the U.S. newspaper trade journal Editor & Publisher, The New York Times is the United States third highest circulation paper in the country. According to the Web site http://www.infoplease.com, the Times is also the worlds 42 nd highest circulation newspaper. Merrill (1968) claims that one can always expect to find a copy of the Times in leading libraries and governmental offices throughout the world (p. 263). He continues by stating that the newspaper is more than a national paper; it has become an international one. When comparing the Times to other elite world papers, Merrill (1968) argues, it is not as careful in typography as dailies such as Pravda not as tediously thorough in certain stories or as well-documented as Le Monde but it goes further in combining the worthy characteristics of all these great papers than any other single daily in the world (p. 264). In addition, the Times international reporting has been considered one of its strongest areas. In the 1920s, Ochs determined to make the Times foreign coverage the best in the world, and his many successors have carried this dream with them. As with Le Monde, many find it hard to categorize the Times. Merrill (1968) says it actually defies classification. It is a kind of composite of all newspapers, aiming to some degree at all audiences, except, perhaps, those seeking the lurid and sensational

PAGE 32

24 journalism sought by readers of such papers as New Yorks Daily News (p. 266). One thing that can be said for sure, according to Merrill (1968), is that the paper is thorough, and this characteristic warrants the label The Paper of Record that it is so often given. Summary Using the concept of framing, this study will attempt to decipher what, if any, differences separate the elite press of the United States and France. The study will look specifically at frames used and sources used. Results are expected to show a variety of differences and similarities that should further the understanding of the press systems of the United States and France. Hypotheses This study will look at the frames used to present the news of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon. The study will also look at the use of sources in articles. The first variable will be frames. Comparing the use of frames between the two papers will allow for study of the differences between the two papers and show reflections of national culture portrayed within the newspapers. The second variable will be source. Comparing sources between the two papers will allow for further examination into the differences between these papers, perhaps related to the newspapers relationship with and to the national government. Sources will be looked at in terms of whether or not they are elite or non-elite and what their relationship is in relation to the event.

PAGE 33

25 The following hypotheses will be tested based on the literature review: H1) The attribution of responsibility frame will be used more in The New York Times. As the September 11 attacks happened in the United States, and more specifically in New York, the Times will be more likely to report on who or what was responsible for the attacks. The readers of Le Monde will not feel the need to constantly be reminded who or what was responsible. H2) The human-interest frame will also be used more frequently in The New York Times. Because so many of the victims of the attacks were from New York, the human-interest frame will be more prevalent in the Times. The readers of The New York Times will want to be able to put actual names and faces with the victims, whereas the French readers will not be as concerned with names and faces. H3) The morality frame will be used more often in Le Monde. Because the French media typically seems less concerned with the traditional American who, what, when, where, and why, the French press will have more leeway with analyzing the morality of the case. In addition to this, the Times will not have had time to analyze a moral aspect of the attacks in the time frame being studied. They would have to wait until all the who, what, when, where, and why questions had been answered for their audience before they could move on to analyzing, and 10 days is just not enough time for those questions to be completely answered. Additionally, according to Salinger (1982), reporters for Le Monde have a tendency to moralize (p. 84). H4) The economic consequences frame will also be used more often in Le Monde.

PAGE 34

26 Similarly to H4, the French press will have been able to devote more time to thinking about and analyzing the economic consequences of the attacks because they did not have to spend as much time on the human-interest side. H5) The New York Times will have more articles devoted to the conflict frame. Because American newspapers were being forced to spend a great deal of time and space on getting their readers up to date on who and what was involved in the attacks, they would have to entice their readers in to the huge number of articles printed by using the conflict frame. The newspapers will continue with the conflict frame to keep their readers attention. The Times was inundated with articles on the event, so to keep readers attention, the newspaper will use conflict as a point of entry into each article for the readers. H6 a ) Le Monde will have a higher number of articles sourced by governmental officials, whether French, American, or international officials. H6 b ) Le Monde will have a higher number or articles sourced by elites than The New York Times. Herman and Chomskys (1998) third filter argues that the media rely on government experts. Their third filter also argues that since the media claim to be objective, they need material that can be made to seem accurate. Yet, Herman and Chomsky argue that another reason for governmental sources being used so often is because they keep costs down since little investigating needs to be done. Gans (1979) adds that news sources often represent the hierarchy of society, and as Le Monde is more clearly for the elite of France than the Times is for the elite of the United States, it will have more elite sources in its articles.

PAGE 35

27 Merrill (1968) calls Le Monde the most unremorselessly intellectual of the worlds elite newspapers (p. 187). He adds, Le Monde likes to keep its pages, headlines, and type small and its ideas large (p. 187). Concentrating on world news and commentary, Le Monde supplements the basic details of their stories with weighty political and economical analysis (p. 187). To hold that weight, this political and economic analysis needs to be sourced by governmental source.

PAGE 36

CHAPTER 3 METHOD This study used content analysis as a means of data collection. Content analysis is a research method that uses a set of procedures to make valid inferences from text (Weber 1985, p. 9). These inferences are about the message itself, the sender of the message, or the audience of the message. The present study compares the sender of the messages, newspapers, and the messages they sent. As Budd et al (1967) suggest, communicators respond and handle their messages about news events in different ways. Some may handle the reporting of a news event by reporting on it daily on the front page of the newspaper. Others may only report on the news event once and place the article on page three. Some may present the news on the event with color photographs or graphics, while others may not. Some produce long messages, some short messages, and some dont produce at all. There is a growing need to analyze these messages and to examine the factors in the environment in which these messages were created, and content analysis has become an effective research tool for doing so. Content Analysis There are many purposes for content analysis research. Pool et al (1970) argue content analysis provides society with a mirror to itself and a way of observing the external environment in which it lives (p. xi). Weber (1985) notes reasons for using content analysis, including disclosing international differences in communication content, identifying the intentions and other characteristics of the communicator, detecting the 28

PAGE 37

29 existence of propaganda, and describing trends in communication content. The present study is concerned with the first use listed. Weber (1985) also notes that an important use of content analysis is the generation of cultural indicators that point to the state of beliefs, values, ideologies, or other culture systems (p. 10). Additionally, the present research probes how the concerns of one society differ from those of another. Weber (1985) also lists several advantages to content analysis. Some are relevant to the present study: Communication is the central form of social interaction, and content analysis works directly with the transcripts of human communications; the best content analysis studies use both quantitative and qualitative measures; therefore, content analysis can use what is usually thought of as antithetical modes of analysis; compared with other forms of research, content analysis usually yields unobtrusive measures that neither the sender of the message nor the receiver of the message know are being measured, therefore leaving little room for obtrusiveness in the measurements. Additionally, Kerlinger (1964) calls content analysis a method of observation [that] takes the communications that people have produced and asks questions of the communications (p. 544). This format usually allows the researcher to work without fear that the attention will bias the communicator. A central purpose of content analysis is the classifying of many words into smaller groups or categories. That is what the present study set out to do. Weber (1985) contends that for the investigator to make valid inferences from the text, it is important for the classification procedure used to be reliable in terms of being consistent, but there is no one right way to do content analysis.

PAGE 38

30 The complicated part to content analysis, according to Weber (1985), comes after the job is done. The finished product raises many questions often found in other forms of research: What do the results mean? Are there competing interpretations? How do we decide whether the interpretation is in some sense correct? Unfortunately, there are no authoritative answers to these questions. Quantitative Content Analysis The main objective of the present study was to use quantitative data gained from a content analysis of two newspapers to discover if stereotypical national press patterns remain true in the reporting of the attacks of September 11. Using statistical analysis, quantitative analysis allows researchers to reduce huge amounts of data into a comprehensible form and make inferences from the data. Quantitative content analysis is defined by Babbie (2001) as a numerical representation and manipulation of observations for the purpose of describing and explaining the phenomena that those observations reflect (p. G8). The present study coded articles in a ten-day time frame from The New York Times and Le Monde according to certain variables. Those variables were frames, source in relation to event, and use of elite or non-elite sources. This study took these coded observations and manipulated them so as to be able to explain certain characteristics of what was reported in the two newspapers during the ten-day period. Qualitative Content Analysis The present study attempted qualitative research on the same topic. Using the basic coding results taken from this study, the researcher created qualitative measurements to use in further research. Based on the five frames discussed below, the researcher attempted to create new frames for use when coding articles reporting on an

PAGE 39

31 international crisis such as the attacks of September 11. These new frames could be termed crisis frames. Qualitative research, according to Babbie (2001), involve[s] a continuing interplay between data collection and theory (p. 359). Qualitative research helps confirm relationships among concepts. For example, in the present study, qualitative research could confirm, perhaps, that the French press is more opinionated than the American press. While the number of opinion pieces can be measured with quantitative analysis, subtleties of the type or strength of the opinions cant be measured as readily with quantitative analysis. The coding of new frames, arising from qualitative research, would help uncover opinions that appear repeatedly within the present study. According to Babbie, the aim of data analysis is the discovery of patterns among the data (p. 365), and the present study will attempt to discover new patterns. Study Materials The New York Times and Le Monde were chosen for study because they represent the most prestigious newspapers in the United States and France. The articles selected for analysis begin the day after the attacks and end ten days afterward, when President Bush declared in his address to a joint meeting of Congress on September 21, every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime (The New York Times, 9/21/01). The study looked at a census of articles printed in Le Monde that dealt directly with the attacks, but it looked only at a sample of all articles from The New York Times about the attacks during this time frame because of the sheer amount published in the Times regarding the attacks. As Weber (1985) suggests, sampling is used for the sake of

PAGE 40

32 economy. Only articles directly relating to the attacks were analyzed, and only text material were analyzed. No photographs, editorial cartoons, drawings, or graphs were used. Both papers have online databases available through Lexis/Nexis. After an initial search in both papers, a secondary search was done to narrow down the articles for study. The initial search terms used were attaque and septembre for Le Monde and attack and terror* for The New York Times. The with terror was used in hopes of finding all derivatives of the word, i.e. terrorism, terrorist, etc. These terms produced 68 and 242 articles respectively. After a thorough scanning, or reading of the headlines, of those initial articles retrieved, a second search was done using attentat (bomb attack) and septembre for Le Monde and attack and terrorism for The New York Times. The secondary search produced 242 and 939 articles respectively, a much more thorough census of articles printed regarding the attacks. For Le Monde, all but two articles that were retrieved in the initial search were in the secondary search, and all but six of The New York Times articles that were retrieved in the initial search were in the secondary search. After a thorough scanning of those secondary articles retrieved and a deleting of articles not directly related to the attacks, photos, and other non-related material, the total number of articles was 176 for Le Monde and 846 for The New York Times. Each article was regarded as the unit of analysis with the variables in each unit being the newspaper, how each newspaper framed the events (conflict, attribution of responsibility, morality, human interest, or economic consequences) and the types of sources that were used.

PAGE 41

33 While they did contain text, the photo stories, maps, graphs, editorial cartoons, and charts that may have appeared were not coded because the text was only reporting on the photos, maps, graphs, cartoons, or charts, and they were not whole articles. The present study only deals with text articles that were found on the database. Variables Four main variables were coded in this study: newspaper, frames, source eliteness, and source in relation to the event. Frames As established by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000), a set of five news frames was used for analysis in this study. (See Table 3.1.) The first five paragraphs of each article were read to determine which frame was used in the article. Just the beginnings of stories were read because research has shown that a high percentage of readers quit reading after the first five paragraphs (Bush, 1966). The frames looked for were: conflict, human interest, economic, morality, and attribution of responsibility. As stated in chapter two, the following is a brief description of each frame:

PAGE 42

34 Table 3.1 Variable Definitions Variable Value Nominal definition Operational definition Newspaper 1) The New York Times 2) Le Monde 1) A daily newspaper based out of New York City, NY, USA 2) A daily newspaper based out of Paris, France Articles derived from the databases of Lexis/Nexis for the time period 9/12/01 to 9/21/01 specifying 1)The New York Times using the search terms terrorism and attacks. 2) Le Monde using the search terms attentat and attaque. Frame used 1) Conflict 2) Attribution of Responsibility 3) Economic Consequences 4) Morality 5) Human Interest Frames that emphasize: 1) conflict between groups to grab readers attention. 2) who or what is responsible for the news event. 3) the economic consequences of the news event. 4) a moral aspect of the news event. 5) a personal angle of the news event. Frames that emphasized* see coding manual, Appendix A.: 1) conflict between groups involved in events related to the attacks. 2) who or what was responsible for the attacks. 3) the economic after effects of the attacks. 4) a moral aspect of the attacks and attackers. 5) a personal story related to the attacks. Source eliteness 1) Elite 2) Non-elite 1) An person or document providing information for a story who is well-known and respected in society as an expert in some area by readers. 2) A person or document providing information for a story that may not be well-known by readers. 1) Sources such as rulers of countries, presidents of companies, those considered experts in a given field. 2) Sources that are considered common such as people standing around on a street after an event has taken place.

PAGE 43

35 Table 3.1 Continued: Variable Value Nominal definition Operational definition Source in relation to event 1) Domestic Government 2) Foreign Government 3) NGO 4) Law Enforcement 5) Expert 6) Business Owner 7) Witness 8) Victim 9) Victims relative 10) Non-expert Person or document: 1) Of the national government in the papers home country. 2) Of the national government from a country other than that of the papers. 3) From a nongovernmental organization 4) From the police or fire department. 5) From a person considered by the newspapers readers to be an expert in the topic that they are being quoted about. 6) Who owns a business. 7) Who witnessed the event. 8) Who was a victim of the event. 9) Who is related to one of the victims of the event. 10) Typical man on the street. 1) Someone such as the president of the country. 2) Same as #1 except from another countrys government. 3) Someone from a group such as the PLO. 4) Someone from a law enforcement agency. 5) Someone such as an architectural engineer. 6) Someone such as the owner of a restaurant. 7) Someone who was an eye-witness to one of the attacks. 8) Someone who was victimized in some way from the attacks. 9) A relative of someone who was victimized by the attacks. 10) An ordinary person who had no real involvement with the attacks in any way, shape, or form.

PAGE 44

36 The conflict frame emphasizes conflict between individuals, groups, or institutions as a means of capturing audience interest (p. 95). An example of the conflict frame used in an article would be a story about how Muslim-Americans were targets of prejudice in New York City after the attacks. The human-interest frame emphasizes the human side of a story in an effort to personalize the news in order to retain audience interest (p. 96). A personal story of one particular familys ways of coping with a family members death in the attacks would be an example of a human interest-framed article. The economic consequences frame puts the issue in terms of the future economic consequences the event will have on groups and/or individuals. An example of an economic consequence-framed article would be an article about how the attacks were going to affect the stock market when it re-opened. The morality frame puts the event in the context of religious tenets or moral prescriptions (p. 96). An article about the tension between the Muslim faith and American society would be an example of a morality-framed article. Finally, the attribution of responsibility tells the story in terms of who or what was responsible for the issue. An article about figuring out who or what was responsible for the attacks would be coded into the attribution of responsibility category. Each article was placed in one and only one of these five frames in the coding process. In the event that more than one frame was used in the article, the first frame used was the one coded. As noted earlier, since newspaper readership research indicates that

PAGE 45

37 only a small percent of audiences read past the first five paragraphs (Bush, 1966), coding the first frame used by the article author is an appropriate course to take. These five categories have aided media researchers in the process of test and re-test research. Replication studies allow the results of one study to be retested by another researcher. This repetition helps bolster the validity and reliability of each study. The presence of similar previous research can aid each researcher in his or her own personal research area. Since media professionals and researchers alike have agreed that there is no objective reality (Shoemaker and Reese 1996), the acknowledgement of these five frames has been able to further media research. In other words, since these five frames have been used in previous research, the present study has a good foundation on which to build. The framing data were used to test hypotheses one through five. Each of the frames works differently in the two newspapers because of cultural differences between the countries. For example, the American press attempts to be objective in reporting news, so the morality frame is harder to get into a news story in the United States. The French press often discusses subjective topics; therefore, a morality frame should appear quite often within the pages of a French newspaper. Sources The next variable to be analyzed in the study was sources. Journalists use sources to gather facts. Herman and Chomsky (1998) argue that there is a symbiotic relationship between the media and powerful sources of information. They write that government and corporate sources are used because theyre recognizable, and therefore credible, since theyre of high status and prestige.

PAGE 46

38 In this study, both human and organizational sources were coded, quoted or paraphrased. And both opinion and factual pieces of information given by sources were considered. According to Herman and Chomskys (1988) third filter, all government officials and business people are considered elite sources. The elite sources considered in this study were: government officials international and national; international organization officials; other elite newspapers; presidents of companies; engineers; authors and/or people considered experts in certain areas of study; and police. These groups or individuals were considered elite in the present study because they were either directly involved in the aftermath of the attacks, or they are perceived by the public as extremely knowledgeable on the topic for which they are used as a source. For example, the police were directly involved in the clean-up of the attacks, and engineers are considered extremely knowledgeable on the topic of building construction by the public. Those considered not elite were sources considered to be the typical man on the street sources. Examples would be people who witnessed the attacks from the streets of New York, employees of institutions housed inside the World Trade Center who may have lost their job as a result, or attendees at a memorial service. After the initial elite versus non-elite coding was done for the newspapers, another round of coding was done with more specific types of sources in order to get more detailed results. The values being looked for were called sources in relation to event. The ten different categories were: sources from domestic government officials, foreign government officials, NGOs, witnesses, victims, victims relatives, law enforcement, experts, non-experts, and business owners. It was only after the initial

PAGE 47

39 coding of sources that these ten groups were noticed as those being used as sources throughout the coverage in The New York Times and Le Monde. Gans (1979) defines sources as the people reporters obtain news from by interview or observation. Gans argues that while sources theoretically come from all walks of life, they are often the elite and powerful who shape society, and their recruitment and their access to journalists reflect the hierarchies of nation and society (119). Sources were coded to test hypotheses six. Only the first source quoted or paraphrased was coded for the purposes of this study. Research has shown that readers only read the first five paragraphs of most articles; therefore, the coding of additional sources in each story was foregone. Analysis The statistics of data analysis were used to ensure that the results presented could be trusted and used in further research. After the coding was finished, z-scores were run on the data to find out the difference of proportions between newspapers from frames used and sources in relation to event. The z-scores indicated whether or not the sample results may be generalized to the whole population of articles, or whether any differences may be attributed to random chance. A Mann-Whitney U test was run on the five frames and source in relation to event to test for significance in their use in the two newspapers. This test was run to show whether the two newspapers used frames in a significantly different way overall. After it had been established that the newspapers did or did not differ in the use of frames overall and source in relation to event overall, the z-scores for the individual frames used and individual source in relation to event used were calculated

PAGE 48

40 to show the significance of the differences between the two newspapers. A .05 level of significance will be used for statistical tests. Reliability For content analysis studies to be considered reliable, there are many things that have to happen. Its important to make sure the statistics presented are both reliable and valid. Babbie (2001) states that reliable statistics will show that the researchers technique, applied repeatedly, yields the same results each time (p. 140). The data obtained must be consistent from one coder to the next. Each coder must code the text in the same way. Weber (1985) suggests three types of reliability that are pertinent to content analysis: stability, reproducibility, and accuracy. Stability refers to the extent to which the results of content classification are invariant over time (p. 17). Stability can be assessed by having the same coder code the same content more than once. But stability is the weakest form of reliability because only one person is coding. Reproducibility, often called intercoder reliability, refers to the extent to which the same text, coded by different coders, produces the same results. High intercoder reliability is a minimum standard for content analysis (as opposed to stability) because it measures the consistency of shared understandings or meanings. Accuracy is the strongest form of reliability and refers to the extent to which the classification of text corresponds to a standard. However, researchers seldom use accuracy as a measure of reliability because standard codings are rarely established for texts. For the purposes of this study, high intercoder reliability was strived for. It was achieved by having another graduate student at the University of Florida code all the articles along with the researcher. In order to procure accurate results in this process, the

PAGE 49

41 second coder for Le Monde (after the researcher) was bilingual in French and English, and the second coder for The New York Times was a graduate student in the College of Journalism and Communications. As Riffe (1998) puts it in discussing reproducibility, Reliability in content analysis is defined as agreement among coders about categorizing content (p. 104). Therefore, the results of the different coders were checked for agreement. Riffe suggested that a random sample of the population of coding logs be tested for the level of agreement between the two coders. However, for the present study, a thorough analysis of each article coded was done to assess the level of reliability in the study. A minimum level of agreement of 80 percent was set for reliability. Since the use of these five frames in content analysis is relatively new, this relatively low value was established. Validity As Budd et al (1967) suggests, there isnt much literature on validity in content analysis. Riffe (1998) writes that the social science notion of validity relates more rigorously to procedures for obtaining information so that appropriate inferences and interpretations may be made (p. 135). Riffe believes that content analysis has the potential to have very high external validity. Problems with internal validity lie in the fact that content analysis can only show patterns. Content analysis cannot find the cause of these patterns, per se. Weber (1985) adds that the procedure used must generate a variable that is valid to the extent that it measures or represents what the investigator intends to measure (p. 12). Since scientific validation of research is necessary before that research can have any broader meaning or importance (Riffe 1998, p. 145), the present study seeks to have validity. In the present study, the research of Semetko and Valkenburg

PAGE 50

42 (2000) has set a valid precedent for the use of variables measured. This previous research enhances the measurement of validity of the present study. Riffe also says that the external validity of research can be increased if the content being studied is important. The present study explores content that is believed to be highly important, and the results will help future researchers and the newspaper industry in making news judgments in the future.

PAGE 51

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS The present study looked at the differences in reporting of the attacks of September 11 in the newspapers The New York Times and Le Monde, employing framing theory. Content analysis was done to compare differences in sources used and frames used in these newspapers articles on the attacks. Brief Overview After all the coding of articles was complete, the data were entered into an SPSS computer program file. From there, difference of proportions tests were run on the data. Each hypothesis was tested and conclusions were made regarding the content of both newspapers. Overall data were gathered from the coding sheets. The data were put into three different spreadsheets: one for The New York Times, one for Le Monde, and one for the two newspapers combined. More articles were printed on September 13 in Le Monde than any other day in the ten-day period of observation. (See Table 4.1.) The sample from The New York Times drew twenty articles from September 13 and 16 more than any of the other eight days in the period. Therefore September 13 had the most articles overall in the present study than any other day in the ten-day period under observation. There were no articles coded for Le Monde on September 12. While two articles did appear on the search of Lexis/Nexis, those two articles were not about the attacks. A hard copy of the newspaper was used to double check that no articles were printed on September 12. 43

PAGE 52

44 Table 4.1 Number of articles each day Date The New York Times Percent Le Monde Percent 12 14 8.1 0 0 13 20 11.6 30 17.1 14 19 11.0 26 14.9 15 14 8.1 15 8.6 16 20 11.6 0 0 17 16 9.3 28 16.0 18 19 11.0 16 9.1 19 16 9.3 19 10.9 20 16 9.3 17 9.7 21 18 10.5 24 13.7 Total 172 99.8* 175 100.0 *percent differs from 100 due to rounding The frame used most often overall was the conflict frame. (See Table 4.2.) Of the 347 articles coded, 109 of them were framed in terms of conflict; 49 of those came from Le Monde and 60 came from The New York Times. The frame used least often overall was the attribution of responsibility frame. Only 34 of the 347 articles used this frame. Table 4.2 Frame usage Frame The New York Times Percent Le Monde Percent 1 Attribution of Responsibility 11 6.4 23 13.1 2 Economic Consequences 30 17.4 42 24.0 3 Morality 19 11.0 29 16.6 4 Conflict 60 34.9 49 28.0 5 Human Interest 52 30.2 32 18.0 Total 172 99.0* 175 99.7* *percent differs from 100 due to rounding Both newspaper used elite sources the majority of the time. (See Table 4.3) Both newspapers also had articles with no sources at all. Le Monde had 85.1 percent of the articles with elite sources, while The New York Times had 68.8 percent of theirs.

PAGE 53

45 Table 4.3 Source Eliteness Source The New York Times Percent Le Monde Percent Elite 118 68.6 149 85.1 Non-elite 40 23.3 16 9.1 none 14 8.1 10 5.7 Total 172 100.0 175 99.9* *percent differs from 100 due to rounding The plurality of the sources in both newspapers were from governmental sources, whether domestic or foreign. (See Table 4.4.) Most of The New York Times government sources were domestic, while most of Le Mondes were foreign. Le Monde only had one article sourced by a victim or a victims relative. Table 4.4 Source in relation to event Source The New York Times Percent Le Monde Percent 1 Domestic government 43 25.0 10 5.7 2 Foreign Government 10 5.8 52 29.7 3 NGO 18 10.5 33 18.9 4 Witness 5 2.9 2 1.1 5 Victim 8 4.7 1 0.6 6 Victims relative 6 3.5 1 0.6 7 Law Enforcement 5 2.9 1 0.6 8 Expert 30 17.4 46 26.3 9 Non-expert 19 11.0 13 7.4 10 Business Owner 14 8.1 6 3.4 None 14 8.1 10 5.7 Total 172 99.9* 175 100.0 *percent differs from 100 due to rounding Results of Application of Method The method chosen for the present study was content analysis. The content analysis was done on a sample of newspaper articles from The New York Times and a census of articles from Le Monde for the 10-day time period of September 12 through September 21 that related directly to the attacks of September 11, 2001.

PAGE 54

46 The initial search for articles in both newspapers, while successful in some regards, led the researcher to refine the search methods. This refinement of search terms on the Lexis/Nexis database resulted in a wider scope of articles from both newspapers from which to code. There were a few unusual circumstances run into even after the refinement of search terms was done. The New York Times sample set included 18 sports articles. They were used in the present study because the research design included all articles that directly related to the attacks and their effects. These sports articles topics ranged from how the athletes were dealing with the attacks to funds being spent to increase security at ballparks. This is noteworthy because Le Monde does not have a sports section in the paper; therefore, there were no comparable stories coded in Le Monde. A similar dilemma encountered was that Le Monde does not have editorials written by the editors of the paper, as is found in U.S. newspapers. The journalists of the newspaper offer opinions and editorial comments throughout what The New York Times would categorize as hard news stories. This didnt pose too much of a true dilemma, though, because the present study did include editorials from The New York Times in the articles coded. The only resulting problem was that some of the articles in Le Monde did not have any sources. However, this was somewhat counterbalanced by editorials from The New York Times with no sources being included. Another result of the use of the 10-day period was that there were no articles for Le Monde on September 16. The newspaper does not print on Sundays; therefore, there were no articles in the Lexis/Nexis database for that day.

PAGE 55

47 Nature of Sample The articles coded for Le Monde came from a search on Lexis/Nexis using the search terms attentat and septembre. From that list, articles were discarded that did not directly relate to the attacks of September 11; that left 176 articles from the initial 242 found. For The New York Times, systematic random sampling was done to get a sample of 176 articles. The researcher flipped a coin to decide which article from the Lexis/Nexis search of The New York Times that fell within the first skip interval would be the first article to be coded. The second item from the list was selected. Of the 176 Le Monde articles initially chosen to be coded, one had to be discarded for not directly relating to the research study. It was about the Israel/Palestinian conflict and not the attacks in New York or Washington. Four New York Times articles had to be discarded as well, resulting in a total of 175 Le Monde articles and 172 The New York Times articles being coded. These four discarded articles were tables of contents lists for the days edition of the newspaper. All articles were then printed out in their entirety from the Lexis/Nexis database in order to be coded. Of the 172 The New York Times articles coded, fourteen had no sources. Nine of those 14 were editorials. Sports articles accounted for four of the fourteen, and one was what the Times called a Notebook, consisting of first-hand reports from its reporters. All but one of the ten Le Monde articles with no sources were essays written by Le Monde reporters. The one that was not, was a simple description of the sequence of events that took place during the attacks. Reliability Analysis Two second coders were used to test the reliability of the coding for the two newspapers. Once the researcher coded all the articles for both newspapers, a second

PAGE 56

48 coder was chosen to code the same set of articles. Two different people were chosen because the amount of articles needing to be coded was large and one set of articles was written in French, so finding a person who was able to read and understand French was difficult to come by. Both second coders were graduate students at the University of Florida. The second coder for Le Monde was a native French speaker who was a graduate student in Anthropology, while the second coder for The New York Times was a graduate student in Journalism. The results of analysis of the second coders coding logs showed a 82 percent agreement of frames used between coders for The New York Times and an 83 percent agreement of frames used between coders for Le Monde. The reliability level was considered satisfactory. There was 87 percent agreement for eliteness of source and source used in relation to event between coders for The New York Times, and 98 percent agreement for eliteness of source between coders for Le Monde. The second coder for Le Monde did not code for source in relation to event as that variable was added after the fact. Descriptive Analysis and Hypotheses Results After all the data were entered into SPSS, a Mann-Whitney U test was run to see if there was any statistical significance in the overall use of frames and source in relation to event by each newspaper. The test for frame used resulted in a significance of .000. The test for source in relation to even resulted in a significance of .822. And the test for eliteness of source resulted in a significance of .015. After these tests of significance were run, tests of the individual variables were done to see if there was significance there. Z-scores were used to test the significance of difference for each variable.

PAGE 57

49 The z-scores for frame used were computed in order to test the hypotheses stated in Chapter 2. The z-score for the attribution of responsibility frame was .68. The negative result means that H1 was not supported. There were, contrary to the hypothesis, more articles in Le Monde framed by using attribution of responsibility than there were in The New York Times. To be more precise, there were 23 articles (13.1 percent) framed using attribution of responsibility in Le Monde and only 11 (6.4) in The New York Times. The difference in the use of the human-interest frame resulted in a z-score of 3.33. The probability of this difference occurring because of chance is .00; therefore H2 was supported by the data; The New York Times did use the human-interest frame significantly more than Le Monde used it. There were 52 (30.2 percent) articles in The New York Times using the human-interest frame and only 31 (17.7 percent) in Le Monde. The test of difference for H3 ended up with a z-score of 1.33. Hypothesis three stated Le Monde would use the morality frame significantly more than The New York Times would use it. With a z-score of 1.33, the probability of H3 being true based merely on chance is .09, which is larger than .05; therefore, H3 was not be supported by this data. Although there were only nineteen morality-framed articles in The New York Times and 29 in Le Monde, the probability of this difference occurring by chance is high enough to be unable to conclude the results werent due to random chance. The z-score for frame two, economic consequences, was 2.33. H4 stated that Le Monde would use the economic consequences frame significantly more than The New York Times would use it. The probability of H4 being true based only on chance is .01. Using .05 as the cutoff point for significance, H4 was supported by the data. There were

PAGE 58

50 41 (23.4 percent) articles framed in terms of economic consequences of the attacks in Le Monde, and there were 30 (17.4 percent) articles in The New York Times. Finally, the use of the conflict frame in the two newspapers resulted in a z-score of 1.89. H5 stated that The New York Times would use the conflict frame more than Le Monde. The probability of this occurring only by chance is .03, which is smaller than .05; therefore, H5 was supported by the data. There were 49 (28 percent) conflict-framed articles in Le Monde and 60 (34.9 percent) in The New York Times. The difference in use of governmental officials by the two newspapers resulted in a z-score of 3.17. The probability of this difference occurring merely due to chance is .00; therefore H6 a was supported. Le Monde had 95 articles, 54.3 percent, sourced by governmental sources, and the Times had 71 articles, 41.3 percent, sourced by governmental sources. The difference in use of elite and non-elite sources by the two newspapers resulted in a z-score of 4.29, which meant the probability of this difference being due solely to chance was .00, or very unlikely. Therefore, H6 b was supported by the data. Le Monde had 149 articles sourced by elite sources (85.1 percent), and The New York Times had 118 articles sourced by elite sources (68.6 percent).

PAGE 59

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION After all the data were gathered and analyzed, they supported some, but not all, of the hypotheses. More research needs to be done in a more detailed study to truly understand the implications of the data results. Results of Application of Method The method of content analysis was a successful method to use for this study. Analyzing the content of Le Monde and The New York Times using framing as the basis of study worked well in the present study. In the present study an even more specific theory of framing was used than the traditional theory that the media frame issues in the news. The research of Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) was the basis for using the five frame categories employed in the coding of articles. These five categories worked fairly well in terms of categorizing the American newspaper articles, but they were difficult to apply in some of the French articles because some of the French articles often included more than one of the five frames or used a frame not within the scope of the five given to choose from. For example, an article on the French governments launching of a security plan was coded into the conflict frame, but it could have also been thought of as being framed in terms of economic consequences of the launching of the new plan. Although all the coders were instructed to code the first frame used within the article, sometimes it was obvious that more than one frame was going to be used within the article; therefore, it was difficult to decide which one to enter on the coding sheet. 51

PAGE 60

52 Additionally, some of The New York Times articles could have been coded into more than one of the five frames given to choose from. For example, an article on the baseball players not playing for a week was coded as being framed in terms of morality, but the article also discussed aspects of the economic consequences this week off was having on the baseball industry. It was obvious from the beginning that the article was going to discuss both aspects, but morality was chosen as the frame used because that was the aspect taken on first in the article. The Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) research was used in an attempt to make the coding of the articles more valid, consistent, and reliable. The pre-existing frames of Semetko and Valkenburg were extremely useful for this research. The Lexis/Nexis computer database was also extremely useful. The program is accessible and free to use for students at the University of Florida; therefore, it was also a very cost-effective method of actual data gathering. Since the whole of the articles was available online for free, the researcher did not have to pay for copies of each article from microfiche. The ability to narrow down searches on a day-by-day basis in the program was also very helpful. This narrow searching ability saved a great deal of time. The decision to only code the beginning of each article was helpful in terms of consumption of time. If the coders had been required to read each article the whole way through, the actual coding of 347 articles would have been extremely time consuming. Additionally, having two different second coders for the each newspaper saved time and money. Had one person been chosen to second code both newspapers, the cost and time element would have been much higher since one person would have had to code 374 articles as opposed to just 172 or 175. The second coder for The New York Times coded

PAGE 61

53 the articles for free, and to have one person code 347 articles would have taken more time. Using a ten-day period of study was a successful way to do content analysis in terms of use of frames. Having a set time period based on actual events being studied was both helpful in terms of making a decision on when to stop looking for articles relating to the event and in terms of time consumption. If the time period had been much longer, there would have been many more articles to code, and those additional articles may have produced different results because they were published after President Bush made his speech about being either with the United States or against the United States. However, there really ended up being only eight days used in the analysis of Le Monde for two reasons. No articles from September 12 garnered hits that were used with the search terms used in Lexis/Nexis. Two articles from the 12th did appear in the results of the search, but they did not relate to the attacks of September 11 in the United States. One was about a trial of nationalists in France, and the other was about the attack on the Taliban opposition leader Ahmed Shah Massoud. The second reason only eight days worth of articles was used in the coding of Le Monde is that the newspaper does not publish on Sundays. Therefore, there were no Le Monde articles coded for September 16. Descriptive Analysis Discussion The Mann-Whitney U test run on the use of frames in each newspaper resulted in a finding of .000. Therefore, it can be stated that each newspaper used frames significantly differently in the time period under investigation. Since the papers did, in fact, use the frames differently, the validity of the research is supported. From this finding, the validity of the researcher testing the difference in use of each frame on a frame-by-frame basis was established. In other words, the hypotheses suggestions of

PAGE 62

54 differences between the two newspapers are warranted and should be tested. The Mann-Whitney U test run on eliteness of sources resulted in a finding of .015, while the test on source used in relation to event garnered a result of .822. Therefore, it can be said that the two newspapers did use elite sources significantly differently, but they did not use source in relation to event differently. Hypothesis one, which stated there would be more articles framed using attribution of responsibility in The New York Times, was not supported by the data. A possible reason for Le Monde having more articles framed through attribution of responsibility could be because the reporters at Le Monde thought they knew who was responsible because they are experts in international subjects. Since many of Le Mondes reporters have doctorates in given subjects, they often report on a topic using themselves as authority figures on the topic. This could have been the case in this instance. Perhaps many reporters at Le Monde felt they knew who was responsible, while reporters at The New York Times felt they couldnt place any attribution of responsibility on any one person or group until later in the investigations into the attacks. A day-by-day analysis of the use of the attribution of responsibility frame shows that The New York Times only used that frame five times in the first five days of reporting, while Le Monde used that frame 10 times in the same amount of time. Finding more articles framed by human interest in The New York Times than Le Monde (H2) was no surprise. Because the attacks took place in the same city of the newspapers publication, the newspapers reporters had easy access to people directly affected by the attacks in some manner. It was much harder for Le Monde to get reporter access to victims or first-hand witnesses of the attacks simply because there were fewer Le Monde reporters in the whole of the United States.

PAGE 63

55 Similarly, it was no surprise that there were more morality-framed articles in Le Monde (H3). The newspaper is known for its opinion-laded pieces. Journalists in France are often taught to include issues of morality in their articles as a way to keep the culture of France vigorous, not trampled upon by other cultures. In contrast to that, American journalists are taught to be objective, not including their own opinions or issues of morality in their articles. However, the significance of the difference in the amount of morality-framed articles between the two newspapers was not enough to support the hypothesis. The difference in number could be due to The New York Times reporters feeling somewhat more emotionally attached to their articles on the attacks since the attacks happened in New York. Perhaps there were more morality-framed articles in The New York Times than there would have normally been if the attacks had happened in another city. There is no real way of knowing the answer to this speculation, though. The reason for there being more articles framed in terms of the economic consequences in Le Monde than in The New York Times (H4) was a simple one of time. Both newspapers would be expected to have articles framed in these terms, but because other stories were more pressing, The New York Times simply had to hold off on some of those articles until later after the attacks. Therefore, the articles would not be in the 10-day time period used in the present study. Had the study included a larger time frame for the analysis, the amount of articles framed in terms of economic consequences may have been more equally matched between the two newspapers. The game of catch up being played by The New York Times seems to be one explanation for why they had more articles framed by conflict than in Le Monde (H5). Because their readers did not know as much as Le Mondes readers about those responsible for the attacks, the Times had to spend more time describing the actual

PAGE 64

56 conflict between the United States and the followers of Ossama bin Laden. Therefore, it was only natural that there be more articles in The New York Times framed in these terms than in Le Monde. That Le Monde had more articles sourced by elites than The New York Times did is not a surprise either (H6 a ). The elite nature of Le Monde could be an explanation for this finding. It is to be expected that such an elite newspaper would use a higher percentage of elite sources than most newspapers around the world. They have to use these elite sources to keep up their elite nature. Additionally, The New York Times had more articles that didnt necessarily call for elite sourcing. For example, The New York Times had more human interest-framed articles than Le Monde, and those type of articles do not need to be sourced by engineers or presidents of companies. Finally, the fact that Le Monde used more elite and more governmental sources than The New York Times was expected as well (H6 b ). The elite nature of Le Monde could well be one explanation for this finding. As stated in Chapter Two, Le Monde prides itself on being a paper of analyzation by elite writers. Additionally, the nature of the actual articles in Le Monde called for more elite sources than those in The New York Times. For example, Le Monde had more articles framed in terms of the economic consequences of the attacks. Those types of articles called for sourcing from people such as financial experts and governmental sources such as officials of the Federal Reserve. Post-hoc analysis In the post-test analysis of frames used in Le Monde and The New York Times, some qualitative items were examined. Throughout the coding process, both coders for each newspaper took notes about what they were finding. After the coding was complete, a thorough scanning of those notes revealed some consistent items worth discussion.

PAGE 65

57 It seemed Le Monde printed many articles framed in way that could have been called security and many with frames that could have been called cultural analysis. For example, on September 13 an article was printed discussing the tightened airport and national security in several different countries. This article didnt really fit in to any of the five frames given to choose from. It was put in the economic consequences frame, but it really didnt seem to be written with economics as the main topic for discussion. It was framed more in terms of making sure the readers knew that the airports in Europe were safe. Similarly, The New York Times had articles that were simply descriptions of the attacks. They were just minute-by-minute descriptions of what happened on September 11. There was no discussion of who was involved or why what was happening happened. That article was coded into the conflict frame, but it really needed to be coded as description since there was really no framing going on at all in any of the senses for which categories were available. Additional analysis also was done on the results that did not relate directly to the hypotheses. Analysis was done for each frame used in each newspaper after the immediacy of the attacks was over. In other words, which newspapers used each frame more during the eight-day period of September 14 through September 21? Would the results of the hypotheses testing be the same for the data after September 13? There were among the articles originally analyzed, 145 articles printed in Le Monde during this time frame and 138 in The New York Times. Using the same hypotheses as those for the ten-day period as a whole, z-scores were calculated for each frame used in the eight-day period after September 13.

PAGE 66

58 The difference in use of the attribution of responsibility frame (H1) garnered a negative z-score as it did in the testing of original hypotheses. Therefore, it seems as though The New York Times did not use the attribution of responsibility frame significantly more than Le Monde after the immediacy of the attacks was over. The economic consequences frame had a z-score of 2.35, which was similar to the z-score for the 10-day period. Hence, it can be said that Le Monde used the economic consequences frame more than The New York Times did even after the immediacy of the attacks was over. The z-score for the use of the morality frame after September 13 was 2.59. Therefore, the probability of this occurring not due to random chance is .00, or less than 5 percent. This was not the case for the whole 10-day period. In the data for the ten-day period, the z-score for the use of morality frame was not large enough to be able to say the results were due to anything other than pure chance. However, after September 13, the use of the morality frame by Le Monde was significantly different from the use of it by The New York Times, so the hypothesis would have been supported after the 13th. This finding could be so because perhaps Le Monde did not feel comfortable reporting on the attacks in morality terms until after more information was discovered concerning who was responsible for them. The conflict frames use in the two newspapers resulted in a z-score of 2.05. This means that the probability of the differences being more than a matter of chance is at .02, which is less than 5 percent. The New York Times used the conflict frame significantly more than Le Monde used it. The difference in use of the human-interest frame between the two newspapers after September 13 resulted in a z-score of 3.25, which means the probability of this

PAGE 67

59 difference being due to chance is .00, or very unlikely. The New York Times used the human-interest frame significantly more than Le Monde did during this eight-day period. This result was similar to that of the whole ten-day period of observation. The same tests were run for the data found during only the first two days of the study (September 12-13) to see how the hypotheses held up during the days immediately following the attacks. There were 34 articles printed in The New York Times during this two-day period and 30 printed in Le Monde. The difference in use of the attribution of responsibility frame (H1) garnered a negative z-score, which meant that H1 was also not supported during these first two days of reporting on the event. The z-score for the difference in use of the human interest frame (H2) between the two newspapers during this two-day period was .24, which meant the probability of this occurring from pure chance was .40. Therefore, H2 was not supported for the days immediately following the attacks, although it was supported during the whole ten-day period and during the eight days after the immediacy of the attacks was over. The difference in use of the morality frame in the two newspapers garnered a z-score of .30. This meant the chances of this difference being because of anything other than chance was .38; therefore, H3 was not supported during the first two days after the attacks. A negative z-score resulted from the use of the economic consequences and conflict frames in the two newspapers; therefore, H4 and H5 were not supported. When the hypotheses were tested for the two days immediately following the attacks (September 12-13), none of them were supported. The difference in usage of all five frames was not statistically different between the two newspapers. This sheds light

PAGE 68

60 on the idea that perhaps when a major international crisis occurs, the major media around the world turn to a universal form of reporting. The difference in use of governmental sources in the two newspapers garnered a z-score of .32, which meant the probability of this being due to anything other than chance was .37. Therefore H6 a was not supported by the data gathered immediately following the attacks. The z-score for the difference in use of elite versus non-elite sources in the two newspapers was 1.14; therefore, the probability of the difference being due to anything but chance was only .08, and H6 b was not supported for the two-day period immediately following the attacks. In the end, only H1 and H3 were not supported by the data for the entire ten-day period. These two hypotheses dealt with the use of the attribution of responsibility frame and morality frame respectively. H1 stated that The New York Times would have more articles framed in terms of attribution of responsibility, and H3 stated that Le Monde would have more articles framed in morality terms than the Times. When the data were examined for the eight-day period following the immediacy of the attacks, however, H3 was supported. Both hypotheses dealing with the use of sources in each newspaper for the entire period of study were supported. Le Monde used both more elite sources and more governmental sources. Summary of Hypotheses Number of Cases NYT LM After first search 242 939 After discarding 175 172 Eight-day study 138 145

PAGE 69

61 Two-day study 34 30 Mann-Whitney U test probabilities Frame used: .000 Source in relation to event: .822 Eliteness of source: .015 The hypotheses are summarized below. H1) The attribution of responsibility frame will be used more in The New York Times. 10-day : z = -3.68; X not supported 8-day : z = -; X not supported 2-day : z = -: X not supported H2) The human-interest frame will also be used more frequently in The New York Times. 10-day : z = 3.33; probability = .00; supported 8-day: z = 3.25; probability = .00; supported 2-day : z = .24; probability = .40; X not supported H3) The morality frame will be used more often in Le Monde. 10-day : z = 1.33; probability = .09; X not supported

PAGE 70

62 8-day : z = 2.59: probability = .00; Supported 2-day : z = .3: probability .38: X not supported H4) The economic consequences frame will also be used more often in Le Monde. 10-day : z = 2.33 : probability = .01: Supported 8-day : z = 2.35 : probability = .00 : Supported 2-day : z = : X not supported H5) The New York Times will have more articles devoted to the conflict frame. 10-day : z = 1.89 : probability = .03: Supported 8-day : z = 2.05 : probability = .02: Supported 2-day : z = : X not supported H6 a ) Le Monde will have a higher number of articles sourced by governmental officials, whether French, American, or international officials. 10-day : z = 3.17 : probability = .00 : Supported 8-day = z = 2.15 : probability = .01: Supported 2-day : z = .32: probability = .37: X not supported

PAGE 71

63 H6 b ) Le Monde will have a higher number or articles sourced by elites than The New York Times. 10-day: z = 4.29: probability = .00 : Supported 8-day : z = 4.37 : probability = .00 : Supported 2-day : z = 1.14 : probability = .08 : not supported

PAGE 72

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION The content analysis of framing used in The New York Times and Le Monde garnered results expected and results not expected. Overall, the hypotheses generated from the literature were supported. The study was successful in that it lends itself to much future research and can help the newspaper industry to see how they have reacted to crisis situations in the past in order to figure out how to react in the future. By looking at the present study, the newspaper industry can see what happened after September 11, and the industry can decide whether it would like to do the same thing again or try something new. Summary The present study was a content analysis of The New York Times and Le Monde for the ten-day period of September 12 through September 21, 2001. The analysis used framing theory as the basis of study. More specifically, the study looked at the five media frames defined by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) in the articles in the ten-day period. The topic of the attacks of September 11 was chosen because it was a recent event that garnered massive media attention. It was obvious that there was going to be a large number of newspaper articles to analyze on the topic. Additionally, previous research on framing has been done using one topic to analyze in different newspapers as a means of comparison (e.g., Entman, and Semetko and Valkenburg). This previous research helped create the foundations of the present study and also helped make the results more 64

PAGE 73

65 generalizable in that there could be more of an objective comparison between the two newspapers than if the researcher had come up with frame categories by herself. The articles used for coding in the present study were found using the computer database of Lexis/Nexis. The search terms attack and terrorism were used when searching in The New York Times and attaque and septembre for Le Monde. The time frame of September 12 to September 21 was used when running the search, and the search resulted in 938 hits in The New York Times and 242 hits for Le Monde. Although the articles coded from Le Monde were a census of articles found on the Lexis/Nexis database, there is no way of really knowing if the set was a true and accurate census of all articles printed in the newspaper on the attacks during that time period. After reading the headlines found in the search of both newspapers, 846 The New York Times articles remained, and 176 Le Monde articles remained. Examples of items discarded from the initial articles found in the search included things such as photo essays in The New York Times and articles in Le Monde discussing movies having the word attaque in the title. During the coding process, one article was discarded from the Le Monde set of articles. While the article did mention the attacks of September 11, it was not about the attacks directly. It was an article about the Israel/Palestine conflict going on in Israel. Four articles had to be discarded from the set of articles being coded for The New York Times. The four articles were excluded because they were not actually articles; they were lists of headlines that were played on the front page of the Times as a way of letting readers know what was inside.

PAGE 74

66 When the researcher finished the first set of coding, the articles were given over to second coders, who were both graduate students at the University of Florida. Once the second coders completed their coding, reliability was found to be more than 80 percent between second coders and the researcher. After entering the data from the coding sheets into the computer program SPSS, difference of proportions tests were done on the variables of frame used, eliteness of sources, and source used in relation to event. Six hypotheses were tested. The hypothesis stating that The New York Times would have more articles framed in terms of attribution of responsibility (H1) and the hypothesis stating Le Monde would have more articles framed in terms of morality (H3) were not supported by the data. There are several possible explanations as to why the H1 was not supported; perhaps the most poignant of all is that this was an extreme crisis situation. Perhaps under normal reporting conditions, the first hypothesis would have been supported. However, H3 was supported when the data were looked at after September 13. A possible reason why H3 was not supported in the ten-day period could be that since the attacks did occur in New York, perhaps the reporters and editors felt more comfortable framing their articles in terms of morality issues than they would under normal circumstances. In the analysis done for the first two days of reporting, the tests of significance of differences resulted in different scores from that of the whole ten and eight-day periods of analysis. The first hypothesis was not supported in any of the three sets of time. However, H2, which stated that The New York Times would have more articles using the human-interest frame, was not supported by the data from the first two days of analysis. This was contrary to the other two sets of time analyzed. It can be speculated this is because during

PAGE 75

67 those first two days, The New York Times did not want to frame articles in terms of human interest because it was too busy reporting on the who, what, when, where, and why of what had happened. Its also interesting to note that the use of the morality frame was not significantly different between the two newspapers during the first two days of analysis or the whole ten-day period of study, yet it was significant for the eight days after the immediacy of the attacks was over. Perhaps the first two days after the attacks was too soon for Le Monde to include frames of morality in the reporting. The differences between the two newspapers use of the economic consequences and conflict frames were not significant during the two-day time period either. Perhaps these two days resulted in similar uses of these frames because the event was so huge and indeed a crisis situation, therefore, both newspapers were more concerned with reporting than with how they were reporting. Conclusions The study is of importance for two main reasons. First, it adds to the body of knowledge in journalism research regarding framing. The results and conclusions drawn from the present study can help future framing researchers do better research. While the theory of framing has been studied for decades, the amount of literature on media framing across national borders is limited. Furthermore, the amount of literature on media framing across national borders during an international crisis situation is even more limited. Therefore, the topic of the present study warrants further investigation. Because most of the hypotheses were supported, it can be broadly stated that previous analyses of French and American newspaper reporting styles are an accurate representation of the reality in these countries. The literature was supported in the present

PAGE 76

68 study since each hypothesis was based on at least one aspect of the literature. The results of the present study help to support the suggestion that the literature used should and could be used again by future researchers. The literature on the two newspapers was somewhat limited, however. There was little printed material comparing the two newspapers directly after the 1970s, it seemed. But, the literature that was found seemed to give an accurate picture of what the two newspapers are still like today. The five media frames used to analyze the articles in the present study were useful in most respects; however, they were also limiting in other respects. They were limiting because there were sometimes articles that did not fit into any of the five categories from which to choose. This result leads the researcher to suggest ideas for future research on the subject. The second reason the present research is of importance is because it can help communication researchers in their future analysis of the coverage and framing used in crisis reporting. The attacks of September 11 created an international crisis in terms of national security. The reporting that resulted needs to be analyzed. As Chomsky (1998) argues, the media in democracies are highly important in terms of shaping what the country as a whole thinks and thinks about. The present study had found that these two elite newspapers seem to have reported similarly in the two days immediately following the attacks, but they drifted back toward their traditional roles of news informer for the Times and analyzer for Le Monde. It seems the newspapers did not follow Chomskys traditional mold in those first two days, but they did, perhaps, go back to channeling the thoughts and attitudes of their readers.

PAGE 77

69 After this crisis, it is important to look at what the elite press was saying and, more importantly, how they were framing what they were saying. If researchers continue to study this subject, then future media professionals will know what has already been done if such a crisis should ever arise again. Then, they can make a decision as to whether or not to do the same thing that was done the previous times around. The present study found that the two newspapers seemed to remain true to the cultures of their countrymen. The New York Times frames articles in terms of human interest and conflict more than Le Monde does, but Le Monde frames its articles in terms of economic consequences and uses significantly more elite sources than The New York Times does. Editors at these two newspapers can now look at these results and decide whether they want to continue this pattern of reporting. Additionally, the results of the present study can be looked at with regard to what the U.S. government was actually doing as a means of comparison between what the media was reporting about the attacks and how the government was responding to the attacks. For example, The New York Times seemingly made it clear that the United States did not know for sure who was responsible for the attacks, yet the federal government continued to discuss the response as if it were black and white issue. Limitations While the present study was overall successful, several limitations were encountered along that way. The first limitation came from the computer database. There is no way, short of conducting a separate census of the paper copies of the newspapers, that the researcher could be positive that the search terms entered would result in a true census of articles printed on the topic of the attacks of September 11. The researcher could only use the best search terms available when searching for the articles to be coded.

PAGE 78

70 Had time and money not been an issue, the research could have literally looked at every days physical edition of The New York Times and Le Monde printed in the 10-day time period to ensure a more accurate selection of articles to be coded. However, time and money were limitations in the present study, so the computer database was used. Another limitation of the present study was language. While the researcher is conversational in the French language, she is not totally bilingual. This was a limitation because there could have been words used that were inferred to mean one thing by the researcher, when in fact, they were intended by the author to mean something else. The use of a bilingual second coder helped to double check the researchers initial coding and showed that the researcher had been successful. Since the reliability results were similar for both newspapers, it can be inferred that the researchers readings of the Le Monde articles were fairly true to the actual meanings of the articles. Time was the final limitation of the study. If there had been more time, the researcher would have liked to use the data gathered in this round of coding to do a new set of content analyses on the same articles but not using the five media frames. The researcher would have picked new frames of her own choosing to use in the coding that were based on this initial research. Additionally, if there had been more time, the researcher would have liked to have done better scanning of the headlines in order to prevent articles being included in the set to be coded that did not belong there. This would have prevented the one Le Monde article and four The New York Times articles from having to be discarded after the fact.

PAGE 79

71 Future Research While the categorization of media frames into five distinct frames was very useful in the present study, after the coding was complete, qualitative analysis implies some new frames that could be used in future research. Future research could be done using a selection of media frames to do coding analysis, but researchers could use different frames than the present study used. The results from the present study suggest that reporting of a crisis situation includes additional media frames to the five defined by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000). For example, many articles were framed in terms of safety or security issues to readers. This would be a good frame category to include in future research. Both newspapers had articles framed in ways that would make the readers feel secure in their respective countries. There were articles about heightened security measures at airports, ballparks, public parks, and other places where large numbers of people pass through each day. It seemed like the idea of making readers feel safe was an important one to both newspapers. Additionally, a number of articles were simply descriptions of the events that happened, especially in the immediate days following the attacks. It seems that the newspapers wanted to offer their readers a simply play-by-play of what had happened. Since both newspapers printed this type of article, perhaps a new frame called descriptive could be added to future research. Perhaps the concept of framing is too much of an American concept, and that could be why the five frames used in the present study werent perfect matches for all the articles. Since the analysis was being done on articles written about an international event, the frame definitions were a bit limited. However, the Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) research was done on media in the

PAGE 80

72 Netherlands, so the five frames defined by Semetko and Valkenburg do have some basis for use with Western media systems. Similarly, future research could be done on the same topic without using pre-assigned frames. The researcher could come up with definitions of the types of frames used in each article after reading a number of articles and coming up with broad general frame categories used. Future research could also replicate the present study as a way to refine the research. In other words, this same study could be done but done a little differently. For example, the present study included sports articles found in The New York Times even though there are no sports articles in Le Monde. Another researcher could do the same analysis, but they could simply code sports articles for separate analysis in their study. Another type of refined replication of this study could be done by comparing the articles found on the Lexis/Nexis database with a careful study of the actual printed copies of the two newspapers. Additionally, the researcher could go back and compare the results of the first frame used (as was the purpose of the present study) to the second frame used in articles where there was more than one frame used. Similarly, the researcher could compare the frames usage found in the present study to the use of frames in the headlines of the articles analyzed since readers often only look at headlines when reading a newspaper. Finally, a similar study could be done by using several non-American second coders. These second coders could code the newspapers from their home countries and then also code newspapers from a different country. The discussions that could come

PAGE 81

73 from this could help the research decide whether or not the frame definitions were too Americanized. Implications The newspaper industries in both the United States and France can use the present study to make decisions about their routines. The New York Times and Le Monde can now see a generalized view of how it reported on the attacks of September 11. Both newspapers can now make better decisions as to whether they want to frame articles on international crisis situations the same way they did during this time period. Additionally, society can look at this study to see how the two newspapers reported the events. By looking at the data in the study, members of both societies can see how the two newspapers differed in the reporting of the event, and individuals can make a more informed decision as to from which newspaper they would like to get their news. Overall, the present study is useful to both the newspaper industry and society as a whole because it gives both groups an objective, general picture of how the events of September 11 were reported. This result is important because, as has been previously stated, the media had a great deal of power in shaping public opinion. The more the public knows about how the media have been working, perhaps the more informed decisions they can make.

PAGE 82

APPENDIX A CODING PROTOCOL I. Project Description The attacks of September 11, 2001 were unprecedented and created great challenges for the press around the world. The press systems in countries all across the globe were facing a challenge they had never faced before. The attacks came at a time of relative peace for the United States. The media of the country had been scaling back coverage of international news for the past two decades. As a result, the press in the United States had to play catch up for audiences. There were huge amounts of space devoted to coverage of the attacks in almost every paper in the country. They were used to deal with everything from background information on the attackers to the day-to-day information on the victims. The role the news media play in todays society is of great importance. The way the press portray events has a large impact on the way society thinks about that event. Traditional communications researchers have used the term agenda setting to describe this phenomenon. This agenda-setting research has lead into the concept of framing. While the two ideas are similar, framing looks more specifically at how the media is reporting the news. The way different newspapers framed the attacks of September 11 demands research since the way society views the event and ensuing events related to the attacks can impact societys view on things such as an impending war. 74

PAGE 83

75 II. Sample The articles to be coded will be chosen differently for The New York Times and Le Monde. All the articles coded will come from the issues published during the period of September 12 to September 21. This time frame was chosen because it includes the immediate response of the two papers and follows through until President Bushs speech stating that the world was either with us or against us. A census of the articles appearing in Le Monde will be coded. The census equaled 176 articles. Subsequently, systematic sampling of the census of articles found (equaling 850) will be used to code 176 articles from The New York Times. The articles for both newspapers were obtained using the databases of Lexis/Nexis. The search terms used were similar but not identical because of obvious inconsistent language translation between English and French. All stories will be analyzed with the exception of letters to the editor, photo essays, graphics, and simple lists of victims. These types of stories will be excluded because they do not lie in within the structure of traditional frame analysis. III. Length to be coded Examine only the beginning of the article. The amount to be read will vary from article to article. Simply read until you have enough information to code for all the variables. Typically, the information being coded for will be within the first five paragraphs. It may take longer for some articles, though. IV. Coding Log Keep notes on the coding sheets of items that you feel may be of interest to the researcher. This will help others understand how and why you are making the coding decisions you are making. Each entry should include the date, newspaper name, headline

PAGE 84

76 (with English translation), number of words, frame used, and type of source used. Jot down any themes you see appearing. Also, jot down on the coding sheet any problems or confusion you had in any of the coding. For example, if you think one article could be coded in to two different frames, pick one frame and make note of the second frame you think should also be considered. This will help the researcher flush out problems. Type up a detailed list of notes and overall description in an organized manner as well so the researcher will have a better idea at the ideas you may have had while coding. V. Filling in the coding sheets Fill out one sheet per article. Analyze all of the stories given to you. 1. Article Number: For each coding sheet, a sequential integer should be entered in the blank to the right of the page. Start with the number for the first article coded, continue with , and so forth. 2. Newspaper: Write the appropriate number of the newspaper being coded on the line at the right of the page. Write for The New York Times and for Le Monde. 3. Date: Enter the date of the article being coded on the line to the right of the page in a month/day format. 4. Number of words: Enter the number of words in the article given by Lexis/Nexis on the line at the right of the page. 5. Coder: Enter the appropriate number for who you are. Enter for Allison Aiken and for the second coder.

PAGE 85

77 6. Frame used: Enter the appropriate number on the line at the right for the type of frame used in the article. The frames are: 1) Attribution of Responsibility: If the article is framed with reference to who or what was responsible for the attacks of September 11, enter a on the line at the right. 2) Economic Consequences: If the article is concerned with the economic consequences of the attacks of September 11, enter a on the line at the right. 3) Morality: If the article is put in terms of religious tenets or moral ideals, enter a on the line at the right. 4) Conflict: If the article is written in terms of conflict between individuals or groups to get the readers attention, enter a on the line at the right. 5) Human Interest: If the article focuses on some personal aspect of the attacks, enter a on the line at the right. 7. Sources: The source is the document or person providing information for the article. Articles often have more than one source. You will just be coding the first source you come to. You will be coding for two different categories of sources: the sources eliteness and the type of source in relation to the event. Elite sources are those well-known and well-respected documents or people used in articles. Examples would be Colin Powell, police officers working on the scene of the attacks, foreign leaders, other well-respected news agencies (ie, The Associated Press), or leaders of international organizations such as Koffi Anan. Non-elite sources are those often termed man on the street. Examples of non-elite sources would be people

PAGE 86

78 attending a candlelight vigil for the victims, people who were walking on the street when the attacks happened, individuals who have lost their jobs as a result of the attacks, or individuals who have opinions on the attacks but are not well-known to society at large. Enter a for all elite sources found and a for those non-elite sources found. 8. There 10 types of sources in relation to the event. They are: domestic government, foreign government, NGOs, witness to the attacks, victims of the attacks, victims relative, law enforcement, expert, non-expert or man on the street, and business owners. Enter the corresponding number on the line to the right of source on the coding sheet: 1) Domestic government refers to sourcing by any member of any government agency, including mayors, aides, and other governmental type institution. 2) Foreign government refers to the same, only coming from any non-U.S. government source. 3) NGOs will include any organized group not a part of the federal government. For example, charities or church organizations would be categorized in this group. 4) Witness, 5) victim, and 6) victim relative refer to witness of, victims of, and relatives of victims of the attacks. 7) Law enforcement includes both fire and police forces. 8) Experts are those people whose profession it is to know an extensive amount about some topic. Examples of experts might be terrorism or financial experts interviewed for their opinion after the attacks. 9) The non-expert would be just any everyday person interviewed for their thoughts or opinions on the topic.

PAGE 87

79 10) Business owners are those sources whom own businesses and have been interviewed for their thoughts and opinions on the attacks regarding their business. 9. Headline: Write the headline on the lines provided. Write as much of the headline as is needed in order to get a good idea of what the article is about. For Le Monde headlines, write a rough English translation below the French version.

PAGE 88

80 Coverage of the September 11 attacks in The New York Times and Le Monde v1. Article Number v2. Newspaper 1) The New York Times 2) Le Monde v3. Date v4. Number of Words v5. Coder 1) Allison Aiken 2) #2 v6. Frame used 1) Attribution of Responsibility 2) Economic Consequences 3) Morality 4) Conflict 5) Human Interest v7. Sources 1) Elite 2) Non-elite v8. Source in relation to event 1) Domestic Government 2) Foreign Government 3) NGO 4) Witness 5) Victim 6) Victim reality 7) Law Enforcement 8) Expert 9) Non-expert 10) Business Owner v9. Headline __________________________________________________ _____ ID _____ NP _____ DATE _____ WORDS _____ CODER _____ FRAME _____ SOURCE _____EVTSOU

PAGE 89

APPENDIX B DATA Table B.1 The New York Times Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 1 12 3 2 9 2 12 5 2 5 3 12 4 1 1 4 12 3 2 9 5 12 4 1 1 6 12 4 1 8 7 12 4 1 1 8 12 4 1 1 9 12 1 1 1 10 12 1 1 2 11 12 5 1 3 12 12 4 1 2 13 12 2 1 8 14 12 2 1 8 15 13 5 1 4 16 13 5 2 10 17 13 5 2 4 18 13 3 2 5 19 13 1 1 8 20 13 4 1 1 21 13 4 1 1 22 13 4 1 1 23 13 2 1 10 24 13 5 2 6 25 13 2 1 1 26 13 5 1 7 27 13 5 2 3 28 13 4 0 0 29 13 3 1 3 30 13 5 2 6 31 13 5 1 3 32 13 2 1 8 33 13 3 2 9 34 13 4 1 2 35 14 2 1 3 81

PAGE 90

82 Table B.1 Continued: Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 36 14 4 1 7 38 14 2 1 3 39 14 4 1 1 40 14 3 1 3 41 14 3 2 9 42 14 4 1 7 43 14 3 2 6 44 14 4 1 4 45 14 4 1 1 46 14 2 1 1 47 14 3 1 5 48 14 5 1 1 49 14 3 1 10 50 14 4 1 1 51 14 4 0 0 52 14 4 1 10 53 14 2 1 8 54 14 2 2 8 55 15 2 1 8 56 15 4 1 10 57 15 4 1 1 58 15 5 2 1 59 15 4 1 1 60 15 5 2 1 61 15 3 0 0 62 15 1 1 2 63 15 2 1 2 64 15 5 1 8 65 15 4 2 5 66 15 4 1 8 67 15 2 1 8 68 15 5 1 10 69 16 5 1 8 70 16 5 2 6 71 16 5 2 6 73 16 1 1 1 74 16 5 1 1 75 16 4 1 1 76 16 4 1 1 77 16 4 1 2 78 16 4 2 9 79 16 4 1 8

PAGE 91

83 Table B.1 Continued: Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 80 16 5 0 0 81 16 4 0 0 82 16 2 1 8 83 16 5 1 8 84 16 4 1 8 85 16 2 1 8 86 16 5 1 1 87 16 3 1 1 88 16 4 1 3 89 16 2 1 8 90 17 1 1 8 91 17 1 2 9 92 17 4 1 10 93 17 4 1 1 94 17 5 2 5 95 17 5 2 4 96 17 2 1 5 97 17 1 1 2 98 17 5 2 6 99 17 3 2 3 100 17 4 1 2 101 17 2 1 8 102 17 4 1 1 103 17 5 1 8 104 17 5 1 10 105 17 4 0 0 106 18 4 0 0 107 18 4 1 1 108 18 4 1 8 109 18 2 2 5 110 18 2 2 8 111 18 2 2 5 112 18 5 1 1 113 18 4 1 1 114 18 5 2 9 115 18 4 0 0 116 18 4 1 1 117 18 5 0 0 118 18 5 2 9 119 18 2 1 10 120 18 1 2 9 121 18 5 0 0

PAGE 92

84 Table B.1 Continued: Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 122 18 2 1 10 123 18 1 1 8 124 18 5 1 8 125 19 2 1 10 126 19 4 1 1 127 19 2 1 3 128 19 4 1 2 129 19 2 1 1 130 19 5 2 9 131 19 4 1 1 132 19 5 2 9 133 19 5 2 9 134 19 5 1 8 135 19 5 2 9 136 19 4 0 0 137 19 4 1 3 138 19 5 0 0 139 19 2 1 10 140 19 5 1 3 141 20 4 1 1 142 20 3 1 10 143 20 5 2 9 144 20 5 1 3 145 20 5 1 7 146 20 3 1 3 147 20 3 1 2 148 20 5 1 10 149 20 5 1 8 150 20 4 1 1 151 20 4 1 1 152 20 3 1 3 154 20 5 1 9 155 20 4 1 1 156 20 5 2 9 157 20 5 2 4 158 21 4 1 1 159 21 2 1 1 160 21 4 2 9 161 21 4 1 7 163 21 1 1 1 164 21 4 1 1 165 21 5 2 9

PAGE 93

85 Table B.1 Continued: Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 166 21 5 0 0 167 21 4 2 9 168 21 5 1 1 169 21 4 1 1 170 21 2 1 8 171 21 4 1 3 172 21 3 1 3 173 21 4 1 8 174 21 3 0 0 175 21 5 1 8 176 21 2 1 3 Table B.2 Le Monde Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 1 13 4 1 2 2 13 4 1 2 3 13 4 1 2 4 13 1 1 7 5 13 4 1 1 6 13 4 1 8 7 13 3 2 9 8 13 3 1 2 9 13 3 1 1 10 13 3 1 3 11 13 5 2 9 12 13 5 1 10 13 13 5 1 8 14 13 5 2 5 15 13 1 1 2 16 13 1 1 8 17 13 5 1 2 18 13 2 1 2 19 13 4 1 2 20 13 4 1 2 21 13 4 2 6 22 13 4 0 0 23 13 5 1 8 24 13 5 1 8 25 13 5 1 8 26 13 2 1 10 27 13 2 1 2 28 13 2 1 2

PAGE 94

86 Table B.2 Continued: Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 29 13 4 1 2 30 13 3 0 0 31 14 4 1 8 32 14 1 1 8 33 14 1 1 2 34 14 5 1 8 35 14 2 1 8 36 14 2 1 8 37 14 2 1 8 38 14 2 1 3 39 14 2 1 2 40 14 3 2 9 41 14 4 1 2 42 14 3 1 3 43 14 5 1 8 44 14 2 1 8 45 14 4 1 10 46 14 4 1 8 47 14 1 1 8 48 14 5 1 8 49 14 5 1 8 50 14 1 1 2 51 14 4 1 1 52 14 3 0 0 53 14 4 1 3 54 14 3 0 0 55 14 4 1 2 56 14 1 1 3 57 15 1 1 2 58 15 3 2 9 59 15 5 1 3 60 15 2 2 9 61 15 4 1 3 62 15 1 1 2 63 15 4 1 2 64 15 3 1 1 65 15 3 1 8 66 15 3 2 9 67 15 4 1 8 68 15 2 1 9 69 15 2 1 8 70 15 3 1 10

PAGE 95

87 Table B.2 Continued: Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 71 15 2 1 1 72 17 5 1 8 73 17 2 1 8 74 17 5 1 3 75 17 2 0 0 76 17 2 1 8 77 17 2 1 3 78 17 2 1 8 79 17 2 1 3 80 17 3 1 2 81 17 3 0 0 82 17 3 1 8 83 17 4 1 8 84 17 1 1 2 85 17 1 1 3 86 17 4 1 2 87 17 4 1 2 88 17 4 1 2 89 17 4 1 3 90 17 5 2 4 91 17 4 1 2 92 17 5 1 3 93 17 4 1 3 94 17 4 0 0 95 17 4 1 8 96 17 4 1 8 97 17 5 1 3 98 17 1 0 0 99 17 2 1 3 100 18 2 1 3 101 18 3 1 8 102 18 4 1 2 103 18 1 1 2 104 18 1 1 8 105 18 4 1 2 106 18 3 1 2 107 18 4 1 8 108 18 3 1 8 109 18 4 1 8 110 18 4 1 3 111 18 2 1 8 112 18 2 1 3

PAGE 96

88 Table B.2 Continued: Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 113 18 3 1 8 114 18 5 0 0 115 18 5 1 2 116 19 2 2 9 117 19 2 1 3 118 19 3 1 3 119 19 5 2 4 120 19 3 1 3 121 19 4 1 2 122 19 5 2 9 123 19 1 1 2 124 19 2 1 2 125 19 2 1 1 126 19 3 1 3 127 19 2 1 3 128 19 2 1 10 129 19 2 1 8 130 19 4 1 8 131 19 3 1 8 132 19 4 1 3 133 19 1 1 2 134 19 1 1 3 135 20 2 1 2 136 20 1 1 8 137 20 5 2 9 138 20 2 1 1 139 20 4 1 2 140 20 1 1 8 141 20 5 2 9 142 20 2 1 8 143 20 2 1 2 144 20 4 1 2 145 20 4 1 1 146 20 4 1 2 147 20 4 1 2 148 20 4 1 2 149 20 2 1 10 150 20 5 2 9 151 20 5 0 0 152 21 5 1 3 153 21 1 1 3 154 21 3 1 2

PAGE 97

89 Table B.2 Continued: Item Date Frame Eliteness Source 155 21 4 1 3 156 21 4 1 2 157 21 1 2 9 158 21 1 1 2 159 21 2 1 2 160 21 2 1 2 161 21 2 1 8 162 21 4 1 1 163 21 5 1 1 164 21 4 1 2 165 21 3 1 2 166 21 5 1 3 167 21 5 1 8 168 21 2 1 2 169 21 4 1 2 170 21 3 1 8 171 21 5 1 2 172 21 2 1 8 173 21 3 1 3 174 21 2 1 3 175 21 5 1 3

PAGE 98

LIST OF REFERENCES Akhavan-Majid, R. and J. Ramaprasad. (2000). Framing Beijing: Dominant Ideological Influences on the American Press Coverage of the Fourth UN Conference on Women and the NGO Forum. Gazette, 1, 45-59. Americans Open to Dissenting Views on the War on Terrorism (2001, October 14). Retrieved August 28, 2002 from http://people-press.org/reports/print.php3?PageID=22. Babbie, E. (2001). The Practice of Social Research. 9th Ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. Baskette, F., J. Sissors, and B. Brooks. (Eds). (1997). The Art of Editing. 6th Ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Budd, R., R. Thorp, and L. Donohew. (1967). Content Analysis of Communications. New York: The Macmillan Company. Bush, C. (Ed.). (1966). When and Why Does the Reader Stop Reading? pp. 76-78 of News Research for Better Newspapers. Vol. 1. New York, NY: American Newspaper Publishers Association Foundation. Chang, T. and J. Lee. (1992). Factors Affecting Gatekeepers' Selection of Foreign News: A National Survey of Newspaper Editors. Journalism Quarterly, 3, 554-561. Chomsky, N. (1989). Necessary Illusions. South End Press: Boston. Cohen, B. (1963). The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Cunningham, B. (2001, November/December). Global Blinders. Columbia Journalism Review. 4, 110-111. Entman, R. (1991). Framing U.S. Coverage of International News: Contrasts in Narratives of the KAL and Iran Air Incidents. Journal of Communication, 4 p. 6-27. Entman, R. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, 4, 51-58. Flash Eurobarometer 114: Crise Internationale. Released by EOS Gallup December 2001. Gamson, W. (1992). Talking Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press. 90

PAGE 99

91 Gamson, W. and A. Modigliani. (1987). The Changing Culture of Affirmative Action. In R.G. Braungart and M.M. Braungart (Eds), Research in Political Sociology. 33, 137-177. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Gans, H. (1979). Deciding Whats News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, and Time. New York: Pantheon Books. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row. Harrigan, J. (1993). The Editorial Eye. New York: St. Martins Press. Herman, E. and Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York; Pantheon Books. James, C. (2001, November 9). British Take Blunter Approach to Reporting War. New York Times. Retrieved on January 3, 2003, from http://www.nytimes.com. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1984). Choice, Values, and Frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350. Kerlinger, F. (1964). Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Kohut, A. (2002, January/February). A Worried Public Tunes In: The Press Shines in a Dark Moment. cjr, 5, 54-55. Kinder,D. and L.M. Sanders. (1990). Mimicking Political Debate With Survey Questions: The Case of White Opinion on Affirmative Action for Blacks. Social Cognition, 8, 73-103. Mencher, M. (2000). News Reporting and Writing. 8th Ed. Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill. Merrill, J. (1968). The Elite Press: Great Newspapers of the World. New York: Pitman Pub. Corp. Navasky, V. (2002). Foreword in Journalism After September 11. Zelizer, B. and S. Allan (Eds). (xiii-xviii). New York: Routledge. Noris, P. (1995). The Restless Search: Network News Framing of the Post-Cold War World. Political Communication, 12, 357-370. Parks, M. (2002, January/February) Foreign News: Whats next? cjr. 5, 52-57. Pool, I. (1970). The Presitge Press: A Comparative Study of Political Symbols. Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press. Riffe, D. (1998). Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content Analysis in Research. Mahwah, N.J.:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

PAGE 100

92 Salinger, P. (1982). Le Monde: De Gaulles Only Legitimate Heir. In Rice, M. and J.A. Cooney (Eds) Reporting U.S. European Relations: Four Nations, Four Newspapers.82-113. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press. Scheufele, D.(1999). Framing as a Theory of Media Effects. Journal of Communication, 1, 103-122. Schramm, W. (1959). One Day in the Worlds Press: Fourteen Great Newspapers on a Day of Crisis. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press. Semetko, H. and Valkenburg, P. (2000). Framing European Politics: A Content Analysis of Press and Television News. Journal of Communicaiton, ISSUE, 93-109. Shoemaker P. and S. Resse. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of Influences of Mass Media Content. (2nd ed.) New York: Longman. Silverman, M. (1999). Facing Postmodernity: Contemporary French Thought on Culture and Society. London: Routledge. Singer, J. (2001). The Metro Wide Web: Changes in Newspapers Gatekeeping Role Online. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 1, 66. Tillier, A. (2001, October 22). Le Monde Sets New Course. The Daily Deal. Retrieved November 23, 2002 from http://www.thedeal.com. Tuchman, G. (1978). Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. New York: Free Press. Weber, R.P. (1985). Basic Content Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Zeiler, B. and Allan, S. (2002). Introduction: When Trauma Shapes the News. In Journalism After September 11. Zelizer, B. and S. Allan (Eds). 1-23. New York: Routledge.

PAGE 101

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Allison Aiken was born and raised in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. She completed her B.A. from the University of South Carolina in journalism and mass communications in 2000. After spending a year abroad traveling and working, Allison began work on her masters at the University of Florida. She graduated from the University of Florida in May 2003. 93


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110109_AAAAXG INGEST_TIME 2011-01-09T16:13:23Z PACKAGE UFE0000626_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 4646 DFID F20110109_AABREC ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH aiken_a_Page_042thm.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
f506caf1ddb71e8a84043d55befddfa7
SHA-1
eb247973c2c84c5ab530fe9eef2d862683662fbc
1787 F20110109_AABRDN aiken_a_Page_033.txt
ba1e5f5aa09f285ee491ffd78cafcb3f
b0a23daa32a16865a8278668850e20d77de47c53
1948 F20110109_AABRCZ aiken_a_Page_042.txt
0c0c10d32ae4cebb64cf2b1d8bca714e
3b8b48ef31d0a2eb4d79d935ec562f5f9f8d5a63
2022 F20110109_AABRDO aiken_a_Page_055.txt
85bc70eeea8dd489a8c98f2c6ae249a9
28ae43eca05d7b7a1f1959ebe7b205d198e9b724
84169 F20110109_AABRED aiken_a_Page_022.jpg
fe00a28b0ea7d9136a87774b092e80d1
eaee9a209bc28c7855cca8db3e841304f589aa30
208885 F20110109_AABRDP aiken_a_Page_005.jp2
ff3e31ebec1fa5d30a55d49761eb8b9a
704b29550655ee01a8a58a2355759443aa60580d
51305 F20110109_AABREE aiken_a_Page_022.pro
e347179944dd96b726ae40e45e21ea67
382e24f87f41453db747b3fb51294d122b2fda9e
109902 F20110109_AABRDQ aiken_a_Page_023.jp2
a23d7139fe39f7940399f057c7a9f099
67a05c586b3de48ceb49ec4a8a4ac2ed93af3404
7990 F20110109_AABREF aiken_a_Page_035.QC.jpg
502d2bb4092c0415cb53ffe2d3fa7fd0
fd3c146df54d80c7a77280626851036de71f019f
25613 F20110109_AABRDR aiken_a_Page_075.QC.jpg
15959d6343b961379b794de23e8d39c5
0c1e9e269031fac98c7dadaa4657400f44314e9b
1053954 F20110109_AABREG aiken_a_Page_088.tif
20f947b2fee95d7c8fcaf65e7e81d0fe
d5f0ecd363ae65521dfa0e2b3123fabaef8d54cf
F20110109_AABRDS aiken_a_Page_040.tif
330d1187d09b48cf025153dfeb0d380a
a659304b043fa0b6bb344e6a6a67402698e820d5
49755 F20110109_AABREH aiken_a_Page_048.pro
a2e0be95a5ecc3a8fd30ffd7c46cbf1e
d219a431bd04becfa1b38cdeba64fb1a96e9a707
27045 F20110109_AABRDT aiken_a_Page_089.jpg
0e8cb02e68ec82df45f1c1c11d1f413f
fc8d35b3f85a2cc47107a3353f3422224fe8740d
6770 F20110109_AABREI aiken_a_Page_071.pro
3e5e21a9575ff0935f9227de14333acc
a832cd36edfdb1e25e335030b506dfe1d4c9d9a4
1984 F20110109_AABRDU aiken_a_Page_079.txt
271b4d92a03c69139106a321b93b892f
314525fe5051054f76ad88e280151a6c020c52f1
F20110109_AABREJ aiken_a_Page_089.tif
e78f156aa4d128d453ee83486cc39f47
8bc2312528913f9a37d861a347ba4167fe196ce7
F20110109_AABRDV aiken_a_Page_074.tif
b204f769e5c3bb20c5aed31124e4cb12
c1450411212f528269de29a55cad841d1b5cedae
26275 F20110109_AABREK aiken_a_Page_074.QC.jpg
8a2ac610f52170c1c166257d0ca347e6
cf7eb6dec83dd5d54d85a4ee01bf1c4399de650d
3565 F20110109_AABRDW aiken_a_Page_070thm.jpg
72984d2111a3d2b6f69a16a4ba4279d7
f9bc1b3705fa8eb2240f8911ff00b567add606f6
F20110109_AABREL aiken_a_Page_050.tif
61ce47482c38c3fce6986f825365c7d9
b65996359a4aa0b2b70a0e72142ddbcb812c2d2f
2048 F20110109_AABRDX aiken_a_Page_062.txt
f3fea005535dae0029cb57d22a9db73a
e61dc26be937ae9a55131ee6aa70a1595998e978
1462536 F20110109_AABRFA aiken_a.pdf
82800b8778d1625cfec92f0bcb896813
f92545959f3f29787d18ec941faee25e3a59ed10
67374 F20110109_AABREM aiken_a_Page_072.jpg
c2826c97af8b981ca5174934d79c7f08
bbbe68bd2a0502c4134f877debcee3a695bf2c6f
11632 F20110109_AABRDY aiken_a_Page_005.jpg
5905b60d4efe5c544189034312555c30
490464d7d63e2b02a4a3d54acb0e03c350218444
6598 F20110109_AABRFB aiken_a_Page_002.QC.jpg
17a6e0f67f380c8df90be4e85d261701
504595cb72047dc1084207b9bfe76411c1b5ea2e
6028 F20110109_AABREN aiken_a_Page_040thm.jpg
a0c272d1dfd2b4245fe3c10bea41c15e
79e0da8a004f4f3878392b9eeee61aa97e107fff
39290 F20110109_AABRDZ aiken_a_Page_032.pro
785acdaa698caa820adcee5685045464
3cc057954256ef7ee195b4158eefd2510218d7d3
80943 F20110109_AABRFC aiken_a_Page_066.jpg
4b3fe3e2666220cd61bdd394a5c5e296
9931b976d696b817478bd25e0982b712df000e90
1413 F20110109_AABREO aiken_a_Page_096.txt
b7ac9153f34ef72f0e3e830ed0e526c8
4aa4476d855fc874c8db4bc0ab529adb6a95d425
2011 F20110109_AABRFD aiken_a_Page_060.txt
86ca32498acede13855d18130828674d
c52f5d69894e60c28af557d56dd6ab3e504ec25c
F20110109_AABREP aiken_a_Page_043.tif
ff5b46abc798492e17774782a1f0b623
51e954d4b3e176b1576f7cc8fb6edc6703265be7
47525 F20110109_AABREQ aiken_a_Page_076.pro
f3b854386f1911a2308679675e9e8397
d24ff941f4f1a1d3fc8007d5556c13817058a444
49332 F20110109_AABRFE aiken_a_Page_075.pro
e93455cadaa169369c6734ed27733d33
155ed94391e72541c3998c79f7805a6b99dc7694
5483 F20110109_AABRFF aiken_a_Page_085thm.jpg
84db784c8118517a75cfbe44ad2cb4ac
24760b9229bb911cd569688099d0616eb15fa773
4854 F20110109_AABRER aiken_a_Page_052thm.jpg
4514c1a199a5ba26b4e414e1152bb2da
1892d6811037b463245af660367d27313225f491
25390 F20110109_AABRFG aiken_a_Page_006.jpg
d3b332fe686e5c4072d8dca81a5287ea
67c37d4fdba1892269d5949d8dadd523bea3fa11
49469 F20110109_AABRES aiken_a_Page_066.pro
f84ee1db9462eb78e01e3ba2499d50ed
22bf8558a1efdb6b07c16867ea056e7983b3bea3
84992 F20110109_AABRFH aiken_a_Page_082.jp2
84529c36539bf9c6c4456a01ea2fab21
df7d1d255c782f863926f8719be267a6f39c6aca
5363 F20110109_AABRET aiken_a_Page_059thm.jpg
56a531b39d62a414a9352b4bb9991084
d0058aed63f1a734908e888f045c9abeb6b8e390
1951 F20110109_AABRFI aiken_a_Page_015.txt
7326aaf744109a7dad3ac72519893abd
8777dc70637243a778a83f99645e75cea681b91b
971 F20110109_AABREU aiken_a_Page_070.txt
60b6b543856a1e2a7c5fbc65d293bd18
93bb499775cd9d85bbc29057f2c6e874af7b9f15
26819 F20110109_AABRFJ aiken_a_Page_064.QC.jpg
73e1e17a8efe761e346399b91c6d2eed
c0e913b8b14398413ae312cb0d963d2f7aa45d9a
1941 F20110109_AABREV aiken_a_Page_024.txt
16c82efa5cfc1f6b75629b363a66d0af
7f24294dbee6e59d85f1b5c32e95e0d2e6d5d163
77457 F20110109_AABRFK aiken_a_Page_047.jpg
cb8855221e1f60f7206c2a85a04fa602
320bbbc0cb56c02d1dd05bd99aca380164b6ff2a
F20110109_AABREW aiken_a_Page_009.tif
3c16957aed2dd87c688d126004c9ec26
260ccf77d86566b8db4917a2bfd35363601bd758
1164 F20110109_AABRGA aiken_a_Page_041.txt
134e477ddcb11a328734ec7cc54444ae
01ccad529eca637039d15a07e8ff335f3fd8f7c0
24806 F20110109_AABRFL aiken_a_Page_027.QC.jpg
92eff790a9f63c7372ff28f44f9ea6c5
7f9104d6a00bf264bfdc7d0da9f68b74c1319683
F20110109_AABREX aiken_a_Page_021.tif
89278a395a74d39edac3f63c5e5c0a4d
c0f364efbdc7a5568a7a964a6ae4ff7d6c753bd7
26318 F20110109_AABRGB aiken_a_Page_077.QC.jpg
da2b8edcb0b11d994300dfe02208ef62
5505e4fe7689b9bb372b68fc9ecf503e8db2ebd1
78397 F20110109_AABRFM aiken_a_Page_098.jpg
7c700ad9125ad84c13d90722ebdbfe46
851cca8bacc7b17c711a4f26ee4f9c9c77b42c3c
21692 F20110109_AABREY aiken_a_Page_017.QC.jpg
3aaf1db30dde54b9d97a63dbbc599363
6e1fe4efd8b291117f2caed229767ae095e67d91
58701 F20110109_AABRGC aiken_a_Page_058.jpg
ddb91f57f48a8964ddbb6dc1f19bca22
b013fe6283cbcebc08aa68095646e58f1663c78c
F20110109_AABRFN aiken_a_Page_087.tif
c99383c5140523b88fddac0257310868
cddc3833ac8d16b12d253cecc6c94a8d079c3187
1707 F20110109_AABREZ aiken_a_Page_072.txt
9e6b5909a43a68362a4a5b1f1d516157
88ee3827cf10c0a64a5d633bcb6984fd903aeb2e
F20110109_AABRGD aiken_a_Page_084.tif
3b8c1015bf7fd7021acfae977d8a582e
4c14818b2e556c6017ecf9b970a12b1534e94740
79952 F20110109_AABRFO aiken_a_Page_021.jpg
5088cb9279eabf796398429f0d5847c0
60927a5cbbef5f85788807e99888dabd46c79684
5247 F20110109_AABRGE aiken_a_Page_084thm.jpg
53ecab6499013857e79cad87a1d6fcd1
d8857d16c372e73efb86fbbff4a49c74c0e09156
F20110109_AABRFP aiken_a_Page_096.tif
1b16749838ce740ab94bcaca343b9d8a
9d39cd542692b1bcc924b30ee709236b5fd9aceb
6129 F20110109_AABRFQ aiken_a_Page_016thm.jpg
c75738a669be1d340b550e6fc53bdb61
34e11d2d92b0bca516779bf4b75f4aa1c5f9928b
79772 F20110109_AABRGF aiken_a_Page_029.jpg
8ed3161923177350b4d110980b2d2518
6dfbc3e6b1603c3acfaac62cd4a650a5bb6fc757
68833 F20110109_AABRFR aiken_a_Page_036.jpg
060f5d8914f016f855d50dcccba3df72
f8fdcf73f1b6fc7b0da1927e26c2e158a8988037
46087 F20110109_AABRGG aiken_a_Page_054.pro
2f81db699a761834eec73bcee86c7eda
48e9aa49f97885216343bf0228b62ca4571f48fe
48200 F20110109_AABRFS aiken_a_Page_014.pro
3f31cc92c39fb4acc6bc1faa9b27026a
defb81702420cc993f2766a0570ad70d4a05274d
14332 F20110109_AABRGH aiken_a_Page_071.jpg
30da1a8bbc611fb536781f97d5ddd6f8
883762281c9e7f2448373557900b24fbd5f6f84e
1553 F20110109_AABRFT aiken_a_Page_084.txt
6698274b78096dcaafb5bfcde8c394e4
644988bd5c485127c1b33452a8f7936e2e2bc0ee
34852 F20110109_AABRGI aiken_a_Page_058.pro
08c85026a05fedfdb2658938b812e733
daf8069b73dcb51e4d2f6618b4f8aee7a4228d46
85943 F20110109_AABRFU aiken_a_Page_027.jpg
1fa1c432dffa685f5f79c1101d8c2111
7a41a7bf414aef2023b8539df1127bfc8274c369
41770 F20110109_AABRGJ aiken_a_Page_059.pro
80a1697b4eaffa106885052f266a2271
502c15d642fe97bcbabbeae5955cdc115edadad1
70714 F20110109_AABRFV aiken_a_Page_059.jpg
203ada08e807f940b6b22a7be656ff5d
010b2e6f94f2fb4f6ee7b1579ef4bb9c2efac9e3
112047 F20110109_AABRGK aiken_a_Page_062.jp2
f98d110dfa8218e721e85550545e25b2
4109259dc54f22afd1aca2f85d3ed359672bf2d4
78180 F20110109_AABRFW aiken_a_Page_038.jpg
46ef2f2b9c3bade15beef3f5c9dc76dd
8b1ec9353f5d6438b8a8972dfbaa3cdaad3a09da
23755 F20110109_AABRGL aiken_a_Page_037.QC.jpg
0d01d17933ee5a382348cbc16fcb5c8a
3b00e4a65ab4db85be17ae64472ed49a61204c60
F20110109_AABRFX aiken_a_Page_012.tif
ee1e6d52b282810c655a7718911cc900
84c841bc541ea39501836ae33975881d51f38c82
6953 F20110109_AABRHA aiken_a_Page_087.QC.jpg
82e84629f2f5268cf58ade9f2ab671fc
77cbbf701ee0de26a5650b7a87643e1a94466e37
5130 F20110109_AABRGM aiken_a_Page_036thm.jpg
12d1e37fe2240bb9bc9cbfec852471ad
aa52ede2a6d0e365ed519fc49b71e79ef6f14211
70214 F20110109_AABRFY aiken_a_Page_086.jpg
fe1e3dda08281fb8a4da837a9b92552a
a2e08343a06353173d9e07c8234b7c2227f8331a
63016 F20110109_AABRHB aiken_a_Page_084.jpg
e6702c1b837f83b8295afd605015eae5
031ee9e3e66ef764d1bf10a3406b73e9ef6edd22
5643 F20110109_AABRGN aiken_a_Page_044thm.jpg
f7e41105674b1ec663501c4e17fa0b19
b713553423046cf62fa246caf1e46b3ab4ab718c
10183 F20110109_AABRFZ aiken_a_Page_002.pro
b5df8a344c0532479da0549e11dee693
fb89a8f590462e2f1bd47c6b75da9be51a97e466
90942 F20110109_AABRHC aiken_a_Page_100.jp2
cf41563e56236cac4f6e03b9fa75dc32
7f03d17a504599964e3dd1e935aa49d8bedf5b62
F20110109_AABRGO aiken_a_Page_010.tif
86f7e71c20177d50ccc30996e5e748ae
796a65d94b54bffce22ffbc9afda3cc1ca1d9daa
F20110109_AABRHD aiken_a_Page_016.tif
2b4aa70f716bd113e776df02e343142e
750dd732c4075e66b8405ac76d62009c8f3a0753
6194 F20110109_AABRGP aiken_a_Page_027thm.jpg
59210790825f0ed424fbaea5b8760076
d1a039a83743de4ecd1410f3500a35f652995bed
F20110109_AABRHE aiken_a_Page_053.tif
eb525337b9fb27bac63823deaf60b20c
2c31efed72985bdfcc9fa151fab9855a2c0940de
39967 F20110109_AABRGQ aiken_a_Page_072.pro
7988bc32ba3643deae981cdc2976b2ed
792ab6a99f94770a8a8616b6a61cc39fd59fe095
20614 F20110109_AABRHF aiken_a_Page_072.QC.jpg
71e02cb388ed3ccb3dfcc5f5baac8378
b83660a59638cc51fdcff0ac05b6e4bee326b2b2
91400 F20110109_AABRGR aiken_a_Page_036.jp2
7b48fb5f510f374d5501eb3c376df4ed
886c18d4e5bd1628cbadf21e19701feeb0d75485
67867 F20110109_AABRGS aiken_a_Page_068.jpg
68050e78e5b5c3a090026b8404b8db99
25950e849f4640d98bd02bbc83112fc462f14696
3337 F20110109_AABRHG aiken_a_Page_069thm.jpg
f62d4109aedb384b05841a9fd258e05e
f5e28207e4dd0c18fa4128979d7dfddff5fb450d
22546 F20110109_AABRGT aiken_a_Page_095.pro
ae2b650a62d32c9d8a41c2d297d559e4
1465ce5806f5b59753a59f660b3ebb1337cd4d03
37476 F20110109_AABRHH aiken_a_Page_070.jpg
ffc03b4020fd28ceb8edc3caa56c2b5e
fad0fe4e1912c9bae5e57589620600b407dbb4e3
F20110109_AABRGU aiken_a_Page_051.tif
a62b24f15680dc817da79f7f8040ef22
387f1388152341dabc4c33a349f91f4f8c76a2f2
85490 F20110109_AABRHI aiken_a_Page_062.jpg
aac5a7303a59ca07b701e0b0c975852e
a3796d34c624242d98c8ad28e6eb6f441a9c261d
F20110109_AABRGV aiken_a_Page_058.tif
7c4b71cb070e0e023e6be2505de8e456
800ba704f13f4a57c8adb9c4c65694f219200609
2007 F20110109_AABRHJ aiken_a_Page_048.txt
e9bee17f6860fc33e4cc8b9cced0be9d
4d596f00dad48eb4e4ba511e8faf1aed21ffef39
62550 F20110109_AABRGW aiken_a_Page_043.jpg
c8c6cd67c6b39134ecd9a1c62aefc87e
a62bde33020dcac039d6c30eeb461497ae560bfe
10696 F20110109_AABRHK aiken_a_Page_087.pro
d50335a69786ff01508502f4575dc79e
d8db6bc277d12d7ee1a5291032fb7457297ca118
3213 F20110109_AABRGX aiken_a_Page_005.QC.jpg
4feb878f8e04f94eb8d296c05ff62c33
872a219c3398c328938718f3e4d1c1097c83e72f
5922 F20110109_AABRIA aiken_a_Page_078thm.jpg
9d8d29cf243ff6a49ac3a2b6162826d9
ab15a6afa3dc4551abb8becc572e75476a9728ce
1436 F20110109_AABRHL aiken_a_Page_081.txt
d4ca39f83e1290ac55a2e1392901afcd
f618449b66e95c26892c604eb0d03dc819377d07
5314 F20110109_AABRGY aiken_a_Page_051thm.jpg
adfef21a1db93b212b042cc9df0d0dcb
599c23c3bae51369bd8ec9ddcff63d0bd6dba018
1855 F20110109_AABRIB aiken_a_Page_040.txt
d79ee616c654f32483c1bccc0c68787e
792a0e84e5191e3596fb74e4a329046968726772
F20110109_AABRHM aiken_a_Page_057.tif
49827b8c83f46478706bcda2f23a185e
405635f9c4b05f5515515040fa3ac95c4c39918a
43431 F20110109_AABRGZ aiken_a_Page_052.pro
09e920563a034be8da4b3d008ac81d45
c9e037771745d4ec14e4e74244df6790bc589e34
6345 F20110109_AABRIC aiken_a_Page_022thm.jpg
2748b7e06d925cf92a890df3e0713413
d45a20a71c1a59e2644ae9632097b2f79c8b9d15
6019 F20110109_AABRHN aiken_a_Page_024thm.jpg
41453616bbbe8a2ea8c4749352080edd
ef399eb78fb19a5365fd88486ae23bd1bd27aa80
F20110109_AABRID aiken_a_Page_002.tif
4d39e2c6639f0a51fefd8021a123d010
d2f3c72989ea4faffbbe1ea5149c8bb080437ca8
1370 F20110109_AABRHO aiken_a_Page_071thm.jpg
77076da86bb9b0f9a67746dbbd2ed04b
b266c9fa994e0c6bc26b26bb29ab4ee9fc6185e1
6100 F20110109_AABRIE aiken_a_Page_049thm.jpg
89092a0117dad7e155746b906a2fcb23
8ede73a7c6aefc9532d45ff4ed540f5e10350b21
2098 F20110109_AABRHP aiken_a_Page_016.txt
892cc7eb946eb202457643103539a127
5131aaf86415f5a144ede34c0ad8bf22665c654d
111618 F20110109_AABRIF aiken_a_Page_016.jp2
f305520a1172a67e6f1249731d993508
be401083bb8650344a5309bbde3bed99c88c7e35
3709 F20110109_AABRHQ aiken_a_Page_004thm.jpg
20525912ad5a86930974641572c594f4
0cfed9722b5062eac33c9b5145edb2751b5c647a
6214 F20110109_AABRIG aiken_a_Page_057thm.jpg
2ff76c47a727f4a56d57c181a3f7168f
90326a0e59082865e6d142d9d21da96d3c315629
1397 F20110109_AABRHR aiken_a_Page_058.txt
6519f383683ebbb323b02870340e1e8f
290590652fe418d5ba228ca3a954d5654a9ca0d0
F20110109_AABRHS aiken_a_Page_054.tif
3f2f8ddbf1ac0b0dc983c49b24a96341
3abd38bde5b8523feecd842d620a9568c9900508
3031 F20110109_AABRIH aiken_a_Page_092thm.jpg
7fcff02118b3a76071b67d59a3aecdda
dba02551ac59a28d4fc24b180528843074da8e04
47941 F20110109_AABRHT aiken_a_Page_012.pro
eb5005ec5060ab6082baa784adae567e
c30b45b3ed4e7d804299b036c52303cefc9ebcbe
1051985 F20110109_AABRII aiken_a_Page_004.jp2
4e5dafb9842c2bd1ca5fa47d3ede4cd8
1e3b3b5704f2926396fbdec53f72f1bd262840e6
109899 F20110109_AABRHU aiken_a_Page_013.jp2
9ffda38c66e7fdc8cc3a578fb472d3d2
0d8ba67fa2922dbf852731e25a4b8adcc9bb6eb6
4770 F20110109_AABRIJ aiken_a_Page_100thm.jpg
5dbe6eeb6ed30ae655239b6945b8a267
411205ddbde6da2de03a2d228b0419560109c825
47490 F20110109_AABRHV aiken_a_Page_065.pro
e3b59553c8736a30dff93842540d152d
9034122f260292e32eab41fa1d9a8cdbbeffdbd7
3823 F20110109_AABRIK aiken_a_Page_043thm.jpg
9758361df8a0c6991a0149d21cc7dacd
19a6d5a0ca90a04378535c72131e6eaf35da92d8
51362 F20110109_AABRHW aiken_a_Page_074.pro
3e9d2a448467a26eb6a109f8e093cbc6
62a1e921a58a27a577f3be5dc1bfb51286398acd
25199 F20110109_AABRJA aiken_a_Page_067.QC.jpg
8dc9b5c985804df1c27a5f3bd357fedb
d448fd823dfe6bfb0f37a85dea25905ad0c1155d
112035 F20110109_AABRIL aiken_a_Page_027.jp2
b620230e9adcb7fc8c05f71de9b89e96
09fba1ef030980c62f352d630e60a3f6c7a2a028
F20110109_AABRHX aiken_a_Page_047.tif
c421b83348ff4848eea14e6cd85a04f0
61a3f6ca7091e59a9299bf91044e2e3882be41a9
2421 F20110109_AABRJB aiken_a_Page_053.txt
884d81567263108edeeb4e426ae48e50
5cee574ac80ec929b120d5e0a00c44ec35c30f13
25457 F20110109_AABRIM aiken_a_Page_010.QC.jpg
a1f09a66f2737521e09254437dc10e01
ddee7b5d8172506fe7440f79071b540c303d6a5c
107525 F20110109_AABRHY aiken_a_Page_021.jp2
14a66dcaba571a289388058ff681ddf9
9b0d65ff6dfd9fdaef9cbbc94ef39d4519007db6
37408 F20110109_AABRJC aiken_a_Page_096.jp2
8b26c7f172095ce1bf9164dbb8c2a3ce
5130cf483c522b0151a18812a51c30102e1c7d3f
6298 F20110109_AABRIN aiken_a_Page_066thm.jpg
cb6a452628278e874fac15d097db7f3e
635007c17a71a6ef4e1554f841c42652a900aa26
2642 F20110109_AABRHZ aiken_a_Page_019thm.jpg
a141b57a465e6258c54cf78d8f8c0fcc
f7e3c92be5bc3e7a9960d8a756575d4d481f51d8
1722 F20110109_AABRJD aiken_a_Page_009.txt
bce61ddcf439000f69e9d654c2bbee1d
f7e532430259cd558d65399e1286a20a8f960ae1
6516 F20110109_AABRIO aiken_a_Page_011thm.jpg
e2ca59a1d31463ee84c8c243376b1caf
d09826d1bb21a7e40cee03d0a8dea1918966f12d
22409 F20110109_AABRJE aiken_a_Page_086.QC.jpg
eb384bf7c5e20bd50ac4b0968419e2e0
360fb34bf46afde68fe7c52afef99e29c3fec2d6
1826 F20110109_AABRIP aiken_a_Page_034.txt
8acaabf2e1c57394e121df05d2349cfd
7be1d95bb2eaf49d6ad188827bb73bb439b29cd6
1998 F20110109_AABRJF aiken_a_Page_075.txt
dfb6e71d1b842376a998760b31437987
10851a83d0ce67993051caff4783c78c3fd807d1
F20110109_AABRIQ aiken_a_Page_077.tif
5bbf398e4067bacdf8d81eff10460dd0
c5df8fab49ffd4f394ce1de329ea87e7e328ec1f
1906 F20110109_AABRJG aiken_a_Page_014.txt
e67fbb25e0fd3782917e6417185dbf97
a223a7248de489f4d68a2492f9ad7e59c40d1215
1828 F20110109_AABRIR aiken_a_Page_087thm.jpg
c897e877f79b4d9acd029d7a7b6c74cc
e3b383d60e293b857171d0344fc90fc10de0d585
46827 F20110109_AABRJH aiken_a_Page_098.pro
23af401663e2e885bd5dc7b3232127bf
0b6f24648d49339005d4314939d9a161599895bb
75156 F20110109_AABRIS aiken_a_Page_033.jpg
b2a358e6faaaebf6d1822baf7da0e772
6f4f60ce0036a2b91b572fa83fa8a44365a54b94
110694 F20110109_AABRIT aiken_a_Page_074.jp2
a954fc99f5746a66cc79ba3cd234fd24
cdbd1ab1570d3edfc9d1cb202b3df5dd45795d73
24380 F20110109_AABRJI aiken_a_Page_040.QC.jpg
ccb5f8b0cd4a1d1f7f4bccec294fedf9
e6e3615659ce3905c4ea56f7780b3a63e3a04394
F20110109_AABRIU aiken_a_Page_034.tif
a98a0772526dc82be74b52e1f8cdc94e
b32e855ee1630e4f4340b5b68361322c2a46a87e
6139 F20110109_AABRJJ aiken_a_Page_014thm.jpg
95dd482c4ae7510c14822cb1b6c65a92
06904f9447f0001c5ea87b1f214963c6502ed00f
80381 F20110109_AABRIV aiken_a_Page_055.jpg
88b2a58a20cda513d64c73d54d442fca
f5b8b44f4f1ad69f90ed8741c29034ea5150c7e1
1723 F20110109_AABRJK aiken_a_Page_094.txt
a06dd343117b3dfc3d4fd85f80ee2597
c204d5469887cb7fa2d2adfd01269db601725ae6
33361 F20110109_AABRIW aiken_a_Page_095.jpg
f400697d26c8f167ed838123b72921bb
2ab57ce7b1eeaee1932425ceeb0dbb4e09d786e0
3003 F20110109_AABRJL aiken_a_Page_093thm.jpg
b8478cc41957e9a52d134d375aae11d8
f9fbeda8f08186a2b23bc7275db20473b8827ffd
82325 F20110109_AABRIX aiken_a_Page_057.jpg
e012d3e7fd3a9854efe57bb5e33e050b
beab58d79363b77c646873b90020107a40054189
972 F20110109_AABRKA aiken_a_Page_006.txt
3fe4ece0b3f4e1a9dcf54f329fc709ef
afcbb948a1bd4021b5c924b0a3706496d0eb5204
F20110109_AABRJM aiken_a_Page_052.tif
8d2123d61d490afbd68d6609fab3dd3b
27af1d62b2fa4804b997df5dabac8bc77f620bf3
6529 F20110109_AABRIY aiken_a_Page_062thm.jpg
289e858611fdb6c889493926554d16da
33e3f8b3821fcb20d995390f42ed273d5280c347
27030 F20110109_AABRKB aiken_a_Page_092.pro
917416ca9aa96905da130c09860dfec5
42a7933d354abec73ffc6462d13f517d65e776c5
2043 F20110109_AABRJN aiken_a_Page_039.txt
dbcba5f5b63470cd54c4ee5d5cb0f7d0
fe6aafcdd5ddf9957f1854ebd19ecbed25e0f090
43772 F20110109_AABRIZ aiken_a_Page_044.pro
9426d0a743b74c7fcaf2f72da886b5bc
f5e6a2ef94048785b52c2c2d44d5b58bd3e33283
F20110109_AABRKC aiken_a_Page_024.tif
13e1a104e3ab82e76b14f329e1c0fd8a
6bb248633a02ca48ef6cb3783ab13758845ce35d
89903 F20110109_AABRKD aiken_a_Page_085.jp2
a33159d6882b9757683063f80d38cae6
4f213f5f957eb3b9b9c98388c10ccb2a75080e40
28983 F20110109_AABRJO aiken_a_Page_050.jp2
8434d936665ad9a80b6ea5de95be3fe6
77270bbe9ac70103133247fa8edf5816438f0a8a
108416 F20110109_AABRKE aiken_a_Page_026.jp2
cc55509ab4193db323935fbc812f616c
57057a28bbef93f27ae985d79b82db622ff5a219
70687 F20110109_AABRJP aiken_a_Page_020.jpg
660b2b28ba01d24accfa0738b3c89d91
6f834659b7ebd0530f2d536248f4b0f14d09c0a3
F20110109_AABRKF aiken_a_Page_056.tif
21a3924af07fd0afc2adf1aedfa1868d
4f500da68807b14cca9cdeb436e7831639b9dbc2
F20110109_AABRJQ aiken_a_Page_069.tif
d2d2a944a601c29a828d2ad7e78c108a
4457e7d81064101d04716cfd222ca4dd46a431b1
6007 F20110109_AABRKG aiken_a_Page_075thm.jpg
82f09423634a07a1b4948f4522fa558f
df46f8bb73813d626c0238de7104ed336642c0c5
2029 F20110109_AABRJR aiken_a_Page_074.txt
2dafb1c738b00da7f110ec8edd54de58
eed65fcab8a341b498f593df0bb98d8e5d0dff1b
81830 F20110109_AABRKH aiken_a_Page_049.jpg
2a2f1251d669e150178f3ad1565d7d3a
084686ebdf3b0514d02b923e9ea5aafbd0901331
6983 F20110109_AABRJS aiken_a_Page_097.QC.jpg
600e41d27fcf3aba02998e779c719437
521b08865dc9025a5e31188a48841f726a8c66f0
105355 F20110109_AABRKI aiken_a_Page_012.jp2
b683719a9cc6b16b531c1aada16dfd61
d6b491898eb437b2a7f967f42640785ccfcae645
32496 F20110109_AABRJT aiken_a_Page_088.jpg
0224af215b47d666c90c8c3adcc7b442
ce3a6d719b8856d6d7d4aab10aa4f3aa1798bdbe
24921 F20110109_AABRJU aiken_a_Page_002.jp2
47c2a60e9b0a1d4c9caad185fc7e037e
f57a62cb6ae4dc0d34abefa428589b00acf7d946
F20110109_AABRKJ aiken_a_Page_099.tif
f191454efe8044f8570c1d7d52879ae4
848dab771b51df09cff836beadcc1636f4e1707f
10178 F20110109_AABRJV aiken_a_Page_088.QC.jpg
fad2b1900c8edcde912578a1264af372
ed5ca0a0c755ccc1d9724a266f30ff31818a08d9
11751 F20110109_AABRKK aiken_a_Page_069.QC.jpg
d2efb3a2b26bda9005b5f9496387f7ae
2d734dffcf7f52dd9498520a1aee36dbe92b0dc6
48056 F20110109_AABRJW aiken_a_Page_038.pro
1e2ac94330ab2aa70f207d38259e84a1
e7f084b59ef09c7de802d04598c301f603131c77
101140 F20110109_AABRLA aiken_a_Page_054.jp2
6315ab23bf2a601c907c367ff9581f70
af608a398a51c6003b60bc6c133fceccb1462d83
40878 F20110109_AABRKL aiken_a_Page_068.pro
8aab3c1004571a57525ee8e756eec7dc
79d55284df7be3be71144ce80b72073a1162872e
26016 F20110109_AABRJX aiken_a_Page_025.QC.jpg
38a370b8a4522eab3bfb79c49de98f38
1c72eb7fa54efbe7795ebff8cce20c29f9f3c1ab
1841 F20110109_AABRLB aiken_a_Page_054.txt
2c578ba73cdad25995ed4a9c210b847f
d85cb2eaa171163decfdea4f9302fa1e65ed34c3
1965 F20110109_AABRKM aiken_a_Page_057.txt
2f8a943d9bb822393cfe665d1015fd77
3048dc84a02acd29cc7d774c5328915530b7dba7
24176 F20110109_AABRJY aiken_a_Page_083.QC.jpg
978bc3625097baa0261a4c0e299da348
096b0f6a053668211eb6023ff8e0f968110440e8
29341 F20110109_AABRLC aiken_a_Page_090.pro
bc8d542a2ad9ddc863d7983167c0b3a2
725b8f9e8929fad1745ce9b9d19e3f8c42aededa
51156 F20110109_AABRKN aiken_a_Page_011.pro
f01a4297c69a69ced387c7fe12807698
bf16efea96baf3b6cc1bdaf08740efbdcf93b411
22472 F20110109_AABRJZ aiken_a_Page_006.pro
8ef7fff330793a9fd743ddc5749a1f63
5896f9fdcf2a2de03f9ac78d96fdd9a72817eaa7
101831 F20110109_AABRLD aiken_a_Page_040.jp2
b944b6de25630ec1e3d38f81a32d5ad3
75897f7f889a8cec94e50675f3ba22def4220111
26809 F20110109_AABRKO aiken_a_Page_011.QC.jpg
d707fc55a59251405f54859471094d7b
a33729a889a6ed62c182b91f6766e33941663ad7
F20110109_AABRLE aiken_a_Page_068.tif
58c09046ab6793309ea16f884a693887
60686003b5708a0f6d480327e4d99dadc6152e06
2110 F20110109_AABRKP aiken_a_Page_063.txt
df290f8ed7a5497f82d304aa45958a8e
9900cf0e1a2327b65b2eaeccd550ba3a029f670f
25490 F20110109_AABRLF aiken_a_Page_015.QC.jpg
45dd1ddb211d3094dbc12102ee19ad29
66e258a61f8cc14f74dfa4116f94fe3aded15f61
67814 F20110109_AABRKQ aiken_a_Page_100.jpg
b405d9fb0a3b10b89321397240996563
864a8a445cd51a2856f6881f211a24850168f105
1834 F20110109_AABRLG aiken_a_Page_078.txt
ffc7ffb534a03f40cdcf4011bc3e7f85
02c9b935f1fd3bad2326ef0408a2b2d20202be93
84561 F20110109_AABRKR aiken_a_Page_064.jpg
11a5eacf30ac1b3e3588178cc68d5a0f
0bc3d630671b04c50d0b15719feca2b37f7591e9
6454 F20110109_AABRLH aiken_a_Page_015thm.jpg
e5d3506d2bdd5cda390c3eaf4c1b9e0a
b2c95b8abb10696363f7ac500c205425a3167eb9
25271604 F20110109_AABRKS aiken_a_Page_003.tif
af860ea310c3528e9e791ec774820928
77a695ffa9a2256335b5dfd1aa4debd2b23af66e
43813 F20110109_AABRLI aiken_a_Page_008.jp2
20bce4c7569d9e5c752f28bf0eceefcf
d56ca6d3efe2e8cb81fe8a7b2f361097f950ba0a
50465 F20110109_AABRKT aiken_a_Page_064.pro
0f0ceea095affe6ceea3546cdfeb9d4a
5d1a94a5bc7ffd9de4fcbd4e163865f75d91ffca
F20110109_AABRLJ aiken_a_Page_061.tif
bd66098e6ab6c1fd945922f9e7904f6d
e49080207b77bbe6e5bc6f9bf8d28dbf7fc4a9d8
52853 F20110109_AABRKU aiken_a_Page_027.pro
8a7d0e7ea9356a9df497cf8012fe37de
eb45f42697082aabaecb903700a09a61488d5633
3189 F20110109_AABRKV aiken_a_Page_088thm.jpg
0121b1ce09fe4f964a8972f4567902f3
8cfb8faae7872fe230a2f41c551f94d71e293fb6
20189 F20110109_AABRLK aiken_a_Page_032.QC.jpg
08bd95399525a27eff005c5439a4f20d
8b70869c5ea97750b0e10c427c27168b00708ac4
77887 F20110109_AABRKW aiken_a_Page_056.jpg
ea47e993e3918f62d1175296d971a631
a840666bce551ccfeb0df2b1337be2b613bc0d6c
1724 F20110109_AABRLL aiken_a_Page_090.txt
e1c0aafafe9ca1efa1851dd3c00c3c86
e2892b3cdc419798ade45f04e3cf97fd844a39c2
F20110109_AABRKX aiken_a_Page_038.tif
70a7ad12ffb4285fca322728f2ad485c
8dc9ed8a8f2753fad2493fd81233c716a6fd5907
2942 F20110109_AABRMA aiken_a_Page_094thm.jpg
2b512ae6754107827f336872a79a3293
7bdb81db003b6bd75a2522fa510a65539d802d39
2710 F20110109_AABRLM aiken_a_Page_008thm.jpg
0e58effc497aa5a4565339851be9fce7
8ef98bf13ec9042dccd9e3f10b2ac8eea0f0f8e0
25265 F20110109_AABRKY aiken_a_Page_055.QC.jpg
00daa26f2d67e1398592c5ba2d9ea54e
0cff886a01bf810b34c1594b2a16e695c854cfee
26828 F20110109_AABRMB aiken_a_Page_093.pro
9057afc8dc26672243640b575aa6187f
871bff481172c245dc0fd5f29f092b8bcacc37e2
5959 F20110109_AABRLN aiken_a_Page_054thm.jpg
5e11961648469779053ae0383c12f00e
f825fbba82275ab90da6d5f4f4d1291a0abc3cf6
1823 F20110109_AABRKZ aiken_a_Page_083.txt
c7e0adab533fc6b5799382d105b26889
9ef7ce8678c1b45dbfa5edbbe0aecb2672ae7337
89367 F20110109_AABRMC aiken_a_Page_009.jp2
6e3417613038c1c9da44272ac7ec9fa8
ba062a8371f1a1ad1156ccc65fdeba19977baed4
90657 F20110109_AABRLO aiken_a_Page_059.jp2
721c3e17df340054b812d3fbceed4e30
62a70c41ee55a57c41744c406555bfdcafe0597b
80743 F20110109_AABRMD aiken_a_Page_075.jpg
2e121ad465c24420c0e6e674de1047dc
f08cb7904dd137ed5d77f3d844fefc2f1b317860
13804 F20110109_AABRLP aiken_a_Page_003.QC.jpg
2045ab5b9e76ee0aed306a5a14670cd2
b6cfe8a77adddd058a300ba3ad11bdc5d1e5932a
105136 F20110109_AABRME aiken_a_Page_038.jp2
e2dff37612a6801ebeaff42799a1995e
8a95a78381da2167e3dfaa3a5c7fc72c1d8f25d9
34648 F20110109_AABRLQ aiken_a_Page_081.pro
b6bf4da09bc88e70428d085d31521c90
dea7424023184f28b5c6bec13ea57bde2cac6b46
102217 F20110109_AABRMF aiken_a_Page_073.jp2
abcd5be44bc5b55d9a450d2d4a7daaa0
7bdd6039cd774c9979e496c64a418b25607ed68f
110098 F20110109_AABRLR aiken_a_Page_022.jp2
9c2dd86defc692ac0f661dc252e63788
b805bc5f2e16535f01bd5250faf8d9dfa5f2d65e
51616 F20110109_AABRMG aiken_a_Page_023.pro
38da5a99a4dc057a2451dc02e5a97db9
f536e7957628ed20cb9a0a3b4e52403e2ce134c4
93315 F20110109_AABRLS aiken_a_Page_020.jp2
2ed6dee3ddeed549be9ca213c6cc1806
5007190ba9e9407c8d5e7cd31d7bb72d7bf31675
79655 F20110109_AABRMH aiken_a_Page_012.jpg
ceead0e2eefb5a2d55e4669645375c63
f558cac80647c6d594903e20a84ebe6c3a093885
23537 F20110109_AABRLT aiken_a_Page_054.QC.jpg
b8b3315550d187e78acd6b63420e3f48
41bae65d3d3b494031dc93beb88a76d280f86757
F20110109_AABRMI aiken_a_Page_070.tif
35072c7fee3fd91afe659e48ccfe7d56
0dff8c71a782851804fdd633e0f7212fcaa93bf9
F20110109_AABRLU aiken_a_Page_082.tif
b4be1bec1f7b2176852d777030d16064
5f939dc1f5878d82a793216b3e7f0f2170c64f50
51921 F20110109_AABRMJ aiken_a_Page_026.pro
8f1136445c077d773edbdec9e4bbfec4
b86b4501e106bb00a4cba14171acbcac5bcbf5b8
5649 F20110109_AABRLV aiken_a_Page_020thm.jpg
196f1435c38ff5509cf3c7c09b97d7fd
656132091d70b1a747b5d92652f199b67203a8e4
26718 F20110109_AABRMK aiken_a_Page_026.QC.jpg
5570224b48d289a48a97032f4d7d2875
c3eae380ce162a7fefd5b4518a5526c4e1bf618c
30903 F20110109_AABRLW aiken_a_Page_089.jp2
872738a289cfba00b2ecfc4c6fc394eb
79827ad7f6f8a987cbb297adcab42b9b8a7a107f
F20110109_AABRLX aiken_a_Page_048.tif
c886b20a3c86c65ce74892ad3f363b0f
9a9a4fb77f9cbedc83839295e2bd0ad31a442df9
106894 F20110109_AABRNA aiken_a_Page_079.jp2
337690b73a5a96ae5f9767a720f9d1f4
76c4bfa75bd25e4747d18579868b16bb136ad5a2
72631 F20110109_AABRML aiken_a_Page_044.jpg
7406ffe884d3765df8919da3546de177
b6983bb7a88a421ab22e3e86a73b3ccfcb9e0b86
1597 F20110109_AABRLY aiken_a_Page_043.txt
c7144e56300f3e86b8cc675f7455c2dd
06f4992aceeecb467003ae1dc4fc8b89de900e2a
F20110109_AABRNB aiken_a_Page_006.tif
61f15a9d3a6ec8992444538141362132
3cc2196267baff7434c4f21cac7cabbdea64f1c2
749 F20110109_AABRMM aiken_a_Page_019.txt
3ab4d3d94a110e8a6bbc3986d06fde55
956abe1d3b5b3d93b18926699bbc612c1d2d598c
F20110109_AABRLZ aiken_a_Page_079.tif
49b446dcffe7cd16289d88fc78e87ef3
c738107665e71296b793511a520f2002f8b85606
29590 F20110109_AABRNC aiken_a_Page_091.pro
958f73ccd55098b34eaffa953d9fbb77
bde9a6d6d11d045b0c68bc5a3fc4524db632e977
23155 F20110109_AABRMN aiken_a_Page_001.jpg
5927a77bdd2025d2776a3334cc729fb7
26ad76eb4584f7e135db3933a9b7c6fb78574cd2
F20110109_AABRND aiken_a_Page_065.tif
37158bf354c9b775e1436c702a975b95
3e895927a9bd8661934a857b903ddb809a84ef3c
2269 F20110109_AABRMO aiken_a_Page_052.txt
3567c3283d002e8b8fc378f1f175f56a
ef5581ef2c264b158d9c82b97b828fed661656fb
24554 F20110109_AABRNE aiken_a_Page_038.QC.jpg
989c1423833e792208dbe47d2157cc72
796f08b0e2bb69c89c6063ab6139202ec85d5932
F20110109_AABRMP aiken_a_Page_091.tif
f17e01b907aa58898e663c4197bf0fd9
d67cbcca49a7266917b9c8176c650043f2183a92
46518 F20110109_AABRNF aiken_a_Page_045.pro
b3b98074c2b13f48163666f27d409958
d01a68b51df9bba7665e9f3b79fccba80056ec5d
6525 F20110109_AABRMQ aiken_a_Page_099thm.jpg
30ed9544e35f80c88f4cca07ee670080
50c69d2b74e51fc543678106efbe8cce81c291b2
9949 F20110109_AABRNG aiken_a_Page_101.pro
3673dacc6335ed41d33ef9abc1438cac
5f278ec36746362dc1b1e74e8dd05629c02a0ca8
5977 F20110109_AABRMR aiken_a_Page_033thm.jpg
51f75d863871924c2beec736382ebdd1
dd8be82a10996d3712838ca9da91d732f94b890f
5263 F20110109_AABRNH aiken_a_Page_009thm.jpg
07c09e0f06a15c237bc8d95cc3a35c9a
2df9d1a61f17a457fcea5dcc134c85bf86d29a3c
78785 F20110109_AABRMS aiken_a_Page_076.jpg
2abff31bb6466f6b513e1cc2ffdda79d
27db0428f4cffb4ff95848a9f3a7b5258f86005b
26329 F20110109_AABRNI aiken_a_Page_031.QC.jpg
07dac997be17ed262c807020ced1db4e
f7af4d2fc7a96de2a528abb71d34f3a0c08fa722
49374 F20110109_AABRMT aiken_a_Page_057.pro
a195884ca6d6f3c3bacc6750498d755e
fcc976965eaf65cd569fde391b92b092cef34651
F20110109_AABRNJ aiken_a_Page_035.tif
a05eb18d9296c50804113d92671340ca
22e3920f5f2cab61bf726a43c2b84b7dde652834
107597 F20110109_AABRMU aiken_a_Page_015.jp2
c00d7b89a36b7769fd7071e5cb84e978
8cc5759cc1cdf22fa4aeaa3ca5bfcbfba9d93d3d
1893 F20110109_AABRNK aiken_a_Page_012.txt
5916e7f8ca4df9a67b5938f47fcef4e0
e9058fe2a2ba642e2e593792fc5084bf80587bb7
1911 F20110109_AABRMV aiken_a_Page_037.txt
a19f25421bf724d0d7d7f7770495016a
b2c6973134769e98ca11792c82bd53cb5d4af12b
7121 F20110109_AABRNL aiken_a_Page_050.QC.jpg
c703f4ac228a299bde02bf2f1d9f6fa1
247f22601e2712899a9882e01483f4885ff4caa6
F20110109_AABRMW aiken_a_Page_049.tif
7493fd0138a4b0caf5af5238adf2c9ab
6e25d3b5195b1d445555397e47e12b5fd8d3c819
5965 F20110109_AABROA aiken_a_Page_076thm.jpg
3b9701b787ae2a1045bda122d3dd32c5
02f63b5daa9e69102c8fcc8c52594167c3f26e34
F20110109_AABRMX aiken_a_Page_092.tif
e2527962737754390c1dea1188395460
9d326572e399afaae80600bbc60aeb82d47b27d1
47823 F20110109_AABROB aiken_a_Page_056.pro
ad827b7cdca280c23661daf5e624589b
d73c6a32db8297fe916e0db6559450c4766eda07
5835 F20110109_AABRNM aiken_a_Page_047thm.jpg
0c0889494118ac1cb68d3cf18c384efb
88ab32dafcf0580666b0f47fd303ee9e51fc2665
23184 F20110109_AABRMY aiken_a_Page_034.QC.jpg
b13b62200b51dd71332478921ac3689a
c89b609aad0672bb5832e297f3e33d9bb7a49e68
20876 F20110109_AABROC aiken_a_Page_097.jpg
71011dfefd18aab07aceeafae111bc28
a754c245c25e2ae6a61584e42ecffcc089502ffa
F20110109_AABRNN aiken_a_Page_086.txt
2cbc1e3102dc28ca4adf255577c6c455
7200abd2bb538c6e65959cf2166cd8c25aa0a637
6260 F20110109_AABRMZ aiken_a_Page_046thm.jpg
d4074ba7e05ce40cf128af353adf9e38
f5bc64e07160af35bed0f027ba5593d6d8ece2a8
2030 F20110109_AABROD aiken_a_Page_064.txt
9efcac3ef3728427cd8b72409773d57e
7e9207ee1b22ae0c3ed6624709c29430f159a0dd
445 F20110109_AABRNO aiken_a_Page_101.txt
f4f47617a8ad00061c70cb12782763e7
d1ed74eb71155ba128d141102b73ca639394e46e
49333 F20110109_AABROE aiken_a_Page_015.pro
62ed2e38fec1df5acd551e783d12946a
fa1289293026274300248db90cfb362430933eeb
1716 F20110109_AABRNP aiken_a_Page_017.txt
796c3cbd998f53a9e092433b48000d0a
ea384bc6502fef21cb072cd8eb3124adf7c5e27b
68515 F20110109_AABROF aiken_a_Page_009.jpg
2d9857ae1da6823670e9f26ecc2959b2
9e147c58a6a160c6423501facef56511362a293f
106835 F20110109_AABRNQ aiken_a_Page_066.jp2
f5d7f1d4f653d0f89138bf0d4ec80251
24b9d0c17d9d96371244163f47b5cd0e6a874958
99070 F20110109_AABROG aiken_a_Page_078.jp2
3eb254d6923d318f212e52fc84204fac
89823672756642b8079fed606a2dde103a75faf8
40312 F20110109_AABRNR aiken_a_Page_088.jp2
e9eec09c1356fad072d6a5f818a31bf2
3450be7845f96f6d2b2684a98fb9aaf6d2eafccf
83826 F20110109_AABROH aiken_a_Page_074.jpg
98ec6bf64e3f9ec9a4dda3c8e5df8f78
dbbe94f401480d3f6066f9db6d13d0e118666788
78509 F20110109_AABRNS aiken_a_Page_058.jp2
a793b3a8752fb031850b74689d6c4f37
08a43ede2b6a8595eef13d31dae91f51474ea33d
1731 F20110109_AABROI aiken_a_Page_085.txt
a4cfb3e41bdd4ba2045abb6e021d1a62
aca38d3e742adf150d6fc009cb9588036df195c2
44169 F20110109_AABRNT aiken_a_Page_033.pro
b8616670f6bd0256c1556a71eed5abb8
47bf22ea4906199367de4191374436c1862b9d78
66862 F20110109_AABROJ aiken_a_Page_003.pro
c9bdd795b7e093fdef9bb93a8d4a686c
6129c524558ceb12195bf6ee435c1caa920c8213
F20110109_AABRNU aiken_a_Page_014.tif
9ddd15db49acd9878fc7f7db2a11bf89
056ff0011afda49d11c217656b6dee03b345c81a
F20110109_AABROK aiken_a_Page_023.tif
df774d6058012867d557486c50f8dd9b
0638f9c39dfce67ca0ce0a3ad041e6da5e2f0ab0
6509 F20110109_AABRNV aiken_a_Page_061thm.jpg
3759c9dfd5e4faa4e60b5c30301c69b5
9df6bdfca5cb7644f76cf1324477751b46aa225e
105555 F20110109_AABROL aiken_a_Page_055.jp2
5a9fc13ed60518bec72fd9fbfc72ef10
b72ba24f181e9319acebbeb7184c2e6c1507fe05
F20110109_AABRNW aiken_a_Page_101.tif
af4d77814869e18178cf31c1b677fc9b
cb958948345e2ab49411e2712ada1a12a1fe6a69
22056 F20110109_AABRNX aiken_a_Page_068.QC.jpg
3026dfcdf5af3ca1ba8bc8dfb8a9e416
f060c8da68a08b3ac609fc1c63ed09aeb99b565e
F20110109_AABRPA aiken_a_Page_085.tif
b935bff91e56125aa6f46b599055695c
ace81a54fbc48aa4b2292077c275a47f9b45d34c
F20110109_AABROM aiken_a_Page_098.tif
ddb38c1505db0153717ce6b497d0b762
338f99ee72d1b98e85989a8b34c3881ae614ea68
19522 F20110109_AABRNY aiken_a_Page_042.QC.jpg
365ba62bc979b97c4cf74879f7156345
78f8ed3a3c89861b886326490fccb633807799ac
46677 F20110109_AABRPB aiken_a_Page_053.pro
375342875edeb9a9623d6db924bae727
fcb27cd8b3b8c569ab171b040e4cfa0c6128dfa2
1231 F20110109_AABRNZ aiken_a_Page_088.txt
c819316342a385d6c05cc9858841c262
a4be2ba6ba80bd932603bac2ce85f682c294faec
6061 F20110109_AABRPC aiken_a_Page_065thm.jpg
616beff9abc2e6fa19dfc0e93def1d9f
b2c86f619ba65aa1bca6290f7744658aeffcd04b
F20110109_AABRON aiken_a_Page_046.tif
67b28d2f840cb36143912b413a11a06b
e69400b018bdaa4fe8afa4efff5e9c9b8bde92a9
6130 F20110109_AABRPD aiken_a_Page_039thm.jpg
d39bf1c10814a808d9b5591c6dd11397
7914bcaa6ab6f762cb9560269a72e2a979779e85
5729 F20110109_AABROO aiken_a_Page_021thm.jpg
1ceb2af249331908b32177fd926394dd
8fd87c17e74e5f01f85517a52528e1fc63c6cdeb
50662 F20110109_AABRPE aiken_a_Page_060.pro
9362b5183c5df272a84078f94fa1b8b1
567d9704a39b49ed49acbf3c3577a19d1ab3f3ab
F20110109_AABROP aiken_a_Page_028thm.jpg
c129cbce8338df99535210985801761d
3d16660b65790d37e4d4bb0aa83bcfa731f750f2
13897 F20110109_AABRPF aiken_a_Page_004.QC.jpg
d543beedff550f7ad60218ab8ca06ad4
60dbcf18bafc7377e4117b6fc8101bb5e5a05761
1947 F20110109_AABROQ aiken_a_Page_067.txt
0f77d09680e3ddd809d29376df555f69
1cecd687a8afbf2e5bf7b50680b28f0ac4bc527e
553 F20110109_AABRPG aiken_a_Page_035.txt
befeb50a3540ad878b26fd0ad9115252
4ffa58767b3851dccf5e9fa77249bc9d2a33b8c0
5624 F20110109_AABROR aiken_a_Page_080thm.jpg
048945763b44aec6c7bb94015dbf3034
5ad8656a0169332ef5a8d7b5987d65e7e1e21d06
18904 F20110109_AABRPH aiken_a_Page_058.QC.jpg
0848c0f9f4d0f5219b85a870c444d532
b94aa160f3ad859367bd5c0fdddce7a4ccdbb980
80449 F20110109_AABROS aiken_a_Page_030.jpg
a8707862b5bf46c61a87cea78d3dad43
e879dfb74026694216d5c4ae2b0fe96141b1dd48
23744 F20110109_AABRPI aiken_a_Page_045.QC.jpg
10d4b70a58a8208faf0a3f41e6735aa5
c2b5889c2e92eb649211a594d60de48620b05c91
F20110109_AABROT aiken_a_Page_030.tif
caf11fcb832f9a7be4b881e75e23a936
1b583a5ba495469301bffdd97dd5343245579156
F20110109_AABRPJ aiken_a_Page_066.tif
19bae44885cef6d961e6e512e7ed76a7
b12a6187775bf7bf0560878126ea0106ecd202fa
2084 F20110109_AABROU aiken_a_Page_006thm.jpg
c478e77d825a2f09b3a79c71301a6e31
50def116f99d5eabed8d11b59f1295e6c4a5036e
107091 F20110109_AABRPK aiken_a_Page_049.jp2
54a7c7c01f9376191a986ca643c33af6
89ffd9d7359b0dc92cfe3b72e0442cc9b803fa37
24372 F20110109_AABROV aiken_a_Page_056.QC.jpg
83e7094f0a3bb1284b4f9a2f527391fc
fc6ef398403f407f24a237cc82dec75f6aaa06b5
38905 F20110109_AABRPL aiken_a_Page_051.pro
4d097708002d283f9aca7642075e26eb
288d4f43e80f5243a4c44f16a24fd9719205514c
38415 F20110109_AABROW aiken_a_Page_100.pro
0a2de9eb4b4572a7116ffbbf60548433
fadc1b72ae31d7704429f345b68d9e6d2e0c1088
98789 F20110109_AABRQA aiken_a_Page_083.jp2
d99ed5ffffcadb4f3fd7ba5304cfc3fb
d49b2c75fe0e50ee37995687374176bb65155f8a
50083 F20110109_AABRPM aiken_a_Page_013.pro
17532f68475499b7368724bb11ef76c6
4a5d773e35b9674d8d1e8d514df7b1aad6628f36
F20110109_AABROX aiken_a_Page_080.tif
0620c8a091172b8e47327a058141c41e
23d46c83cc9d922ae51214d1ca5b02cbba306bd2
52055 F20110109_AABRQB aiken_a_Page_062.pro
d45360f59efdfaad0a369497b8036fa2
907a8b7137acddcc11a5278fa824ea30fb1be7c6
84088 F20110109_AABRPN aiken_a_Page_013.jpg
bd81470ba59f15179ce1acfc6bdde7de
fa70d4c3cebd2d04b3bc20d4bf9d3a064f5c7448
1842 F20110109_AABROY aiken_a_Page_101thm.jpg
9a702254d700628b0c1868f39e89433e
f8e8ee41eb5712deb625ad64d09314164c907bf2
F20110109_AABRQC aiken_a_Page_073.tif
8ad770b75ee13424c49a703c553934eb
8fe0b66015648e5a5a3b2de1f88379e34e7786cf
F20110109_AABROZ aiken_a_Page_094.tif
04ca550eecd95276b6e96e2a11b231a1
1bcc8314470b880dce4ecf7716c8c7c9ac6deb11
21044 F20110109_AABRQD aiken_a_Page_002.jpg
c69adf151930ec5da1d941562741e7c7
cadb96fdac3aeef21cc049e35b9ff0dd8357ea39
1106 F20110109_AABRPO aiken_a_Page_005thm.jpg
fef7ca7045da6451900c07755b612446
736c34f03c8ed780982960899da3e7097e391621
F20110109_AABRQE aiken_a_Page_100.tif
6ddba01b007d7d29b9a02a3a55109f1a
fde3f7c11102ad194e34953e84afee823671247b
21872 F20110109_AABRPP aiken_a_Page_097.jp2
982136f72681697f336980aa83abaa8d
582ab68b6c43d8f6842ba2845fdb5e296f67bcbb
76968 F20110109_AABRQF aiken_a_Page_040.jpg
446df0d4a4706b5ff8249adb98834a00
b362b6a0216c923401c3f07f07311ba072f62334
1025684 F20110109_AABRPQ aiken_a_Page_045.jp2
cc1657a3f8bef50e63b2519d06c4276c
941bfc4d6f88296fe9ba6752fb2a588ab3dd344f
59412 F20110109_AABRQG aiken_a_Page_052.jpg
89ab40133062f506651fd65f159883ce
8e1bc53077463face990c9ee8de38c3b55a849e1
4998 F20110109_AABRPR aiken_a_Page_082thm.jpg
fefe1900854f4191f45380bb8d6394aa
7c0fe9cefc9a8f6a86f206531fc81ad5e4b53fd5
2117 F20110109_AABRQH aiken_a_Page_027.txt
96af13fd1edd10add42d2489e62cd888
59f142d4df003b6671431edabab4142fd24e8dc7
80855 F20110109_AABRPS aiken_a_Page_048.jpg
50690678f86720662cb8024beb51dc05
360d5e2c6902def13b6adfab31b2eabd8132f50b
100878 F20110109_AABRQI aiken_a_Page_047.jp2
839ab3db6fbbda0e07a6550717d3464e
e92023e995403d5e957afddc96e5a75b8e155d4f
33798 F20110109_AABRPT aiken_a_Page_008.jpg
c5a18ce3fe1a24dac871411ed539f4d9
0bf13bc34e032684d102d208fe941d28dd2757c0
5441 F20110109_AABRQJ aiken_a_Page_068thm.jpg
e09bbe055d9a2a5cd90b9066859f2821
3e15c55f412f85ba50a0fcd46082e15342b19262
5559 F20110109_AABRPU aiken_a_Page_086thm.jpg
44417c019cec59ece8b43c47177a6531
7912ae44b2dff859af5b8a33889e31c4cce67576
F20110109_AABRQK aiken_a_Page_060.tif
7e9527e826cdb81d30d6054bc710823f
9283b8dc073ff5b7d96f861553bd6d9ed8311e58
F20110109_AABRPV aiken_a_Page_093.tif
770e65c00966a06cd3908c7361ec9749
5754c7fe9d9def8ff6f4ae1fe6a6a7ad958fc584
F20110109_AABRQL aiken_a_Page_028.tif
6c267dcdfd6a335d3a24846e58b8e7a7
b302243728bd498135adea4b90bfe0866aec7ce7
F20110109_AABRPW aiken_a_Page_004.tif
44cfb72e11f0a72a87fe1c1b94a8a8aa
2d130deb50e67d307e927d1093582019cc839f9e
10780 F20110109_AABRQM aiken_a_Page_008.QC.jpg
ec69c98aceedc03d3915a10a24de9a06
af761c4058638dc55abfc79022cd8ca257c64282
F20110109_AABRPX aiken_a_Page_042.tif
5c52ceb8ca55476a4c446ed5a283cc16
689fcd267df1d1f36f263fa070a31d65b96e5cd0
103938 F20110109_AABRRA aiken_a_Page_029.jp2
432b548de9c6fd5c31c5a93a714b0e1b
5d9c5a8fb958fe0074a812df0aad1c00497b9b65
F20110109_AABRQN aiken_a_Page_063.tif
5de313d2e9b3e56a4aeed069ede582a0
a2209d92fdcc450923f0d805f620ef865ec1758a
F20110109_AABRPY aiken_a_Page_001.tif
c8342a92f1988bdca95024c9d0090893
5b11b849b9c824f24d783f1b57f54c5923c2ed98
F20110109_AABRRB aiken_a_Page_007.tif
8d0126cc266e2eae9e8ef6cf2d6d72b7
bdce46144c80020ee6aadfcce5020880e26242e9
81005 F20110109_AABRQO aiken_a_Page_079.jpg
231e4dfc3923f21b72229f3644992bf9
7d19e3b701e02356f2ac316453b6e4b82f3f9432
17241 F20110109_AABRPZ aiken_a_Page_071.jp2
c3f9878aa5f3f9b0ca443a4a09d1ea98
6ae3dfb06baad6811605c076e80a078fb57bed3b
62890 F20110109_AABRRC aiken_a_Page_041.jp2
3dc24029015e471e80836bba5099f054
7d7baf600a6d583a997689c8e0ffae3645bdbe6d
11192 F20110109_AABRRD aiken_a_Page_092.QC.jpg
2a9460aec2d5bb7b1da3c3c8ccbf97d3
1db74c99e4567fa9200d2c2a5c9852cfeb3bee06
18686 F20110109_AABRQP aiken_a_Page_081.QC.jpg
e43173644f4cca36b0093034ac46c0fd
c84cb387d5ca0888ec4a6a54d1db5f1059dbd733
24532 F20110109_AABRRE aiken_a_Page_012.QC.jpg
b4d722a511798207ff5f6b8203abb7a1
d2552eb1f955ddec3c75a66bebe4736fd450cb62
1986 F20110109_AABRQQ aiken_a_Page_021.txt
309759e27864c57c5b90fb614746e209
e4663e80022810958f66c6b20c143935ce155112
3023 F20110109_AABRRF aiken_a_Page_091thm.jpg
44e6666aeb033e5cf355a90757689625
9c08a9c446026558ac5af61b0df6d0f92416788b
F20110109_AABRQR aiken_a_Page_041.tif
babc762cf7efeee9e8582ad84c4ca9d5
62643973bf43a2ec81c870b5bc11d227242a56a8
6462 F20110109_AABRRG aiken_a_Page_031thm.jpg
8911220596808d477bff1bf99b56ce65
23a3e15df85e69681dfd00be5e5faba17ce2bb97
61046 F20110109_AABRQS aiken_a_Page_003.jpg
84017314d217f1f9b6d90d4ebc86a021
eb8e232625a8715141ad24bce64014eb4d0fad16
F20110109_AABRRH aiken_a_Page_015.tif
4a920d58bc03ea7a60e930973fedbf7d
ac79d0541275c8facc98353f0bb43484f8ab2a45
80337 F20110109_AABRQT aiken_a_Page_014.jpg
3280ab4fe13b4e077674fde2dfe6c5ea
0986e9387201f0d64ec65b1e04db8cdb6246d8b8
74648 F20110109_AABRRI aiken_a_Page_042.jpg
7990c1afbceb9b1e6d3c8826c80dfffd
cf947d302d9884682edb6af5e967adbd557fb51e
2996 F20110109_AABRQU aiken_a_Page_096thm.jpg
1e595433096de7f326d1f20431f51dbc
a0852adc40d60265276c3f741a0fb74a914f909f
27969 F20110109_AABRRJ aiken_a_Page_063.QC.jpg
9b12e4ba44547fee25ffa479af10a599
21938660b71e77e3c45c72f5dba1b8f5236a721a
92155 F20110109_AABRQV aiken_a_Page_086.jp2
71dc0b8ebc94f4fa267d6236bf4c7520
fa631b5cd595059755e447e8ea2b66532991f20c
2057 F20110109_AABRRK aiken_a_Page_061.txt
a1095ede9fca5855313c014e1e90ac05
128a2924896cf9f9dea98e6d51958f3efb16347f
1391 F20110109_AABRQW aiken_a_Page_092.txt
a86c02a0774e03f55a25b7fa28b6fd22
dc0fe6a0127abd6e6b692bf204242671ee9cb762
106099 F20110109_AABRRL aiken_a_Page_075.jp2
e6a6d11030f7879a23ad072a55337457
81b4f578e60e3d84803f9c73d5e7cac49d2f1665
F20110109_AABRQX aiken_a_Page_027.tif
38b7a3ec6d1e33bbd5a3c83996aa7f45
cb8bbaf9fb16660ea322bb791a4cd6583c88a350
21151 F20110109_AABRSA aiken_a_Page_084.QC.jpg
b9fb54fba7495bf10fe6dfde1cc212b8
3bc09fa08697f042254b2dddc31faad8d0f72fed
1849 F20110109_AABRRM aiken_a_Page_073.txt
46d75b7a181ec881b5ebc8f41d8087eb
b76d745b578992cd21e987a29b996459474d22bf
48811 F20110109_AABRQY aiken_a_Page_067.pro
d1d5e28fa39cf769398f2f545bce40a9
62560286f8067903676c01bfe313454bc284c9a2
F20110109_AABRSB aiken_a_Page_055.tif
2876813eddfb2c31db4e67b325553393
bfce51f59232e0a0a3a18494cb8596750f14a4a0
F20110109_AABRRN aiken_a_Page_062.tif
d690f64891689793d638e1955e7248c9
fda4dc74e47b6e9dea2f4c2f879755212b9a5179
83911 F20110109_AABRQZ aiken_a_Page_061.jpg
1012fdf6f64ec4d2777e8f441be6cca5
5f2de945ebcad2983084ca67654732193ceebb73
109553 F20110109_AABRSC aiken_a_Page_039.jp2
97d37219b73ee6fa1f25207c5064dd5e
e4f6aaa4bf2bb8592c023742707cd88562683856
111224 F20110109_AABRRO aiken_a_Page_011.jp2
bea0899d7b61a377be771090cfb34df2
66bf9e8a65b01dacfa307112f86fddece7f5e8b1
64122 F20110109_AABRSD aiken_a_Page_082.jpg
010ed93580eec6687401b05c3d5ca01c
bf176a3fbe4ec3877b6b9013dc536ecfbcaa2b63
24926 F20110109_AABRRP aiken_a_Page_018.QC.jpg
0ec471064f6d4dc8b7b0b8c81b0cefe7
6dd3813e038ce333a7254279ef7918e73d158751
116985 F20110109_AABRSE UFE0000626_00001.mets FULL
14cd1c23c242736bffaa6c61a40b20db
59395e56e8d1534f6097830de7f6f953515ca7a5
2635 F20110109_AABRRQ aiken_a_Page_089thm.jpg
845860556cd10f3c3877544f444ebe82
bf6032f432355d9dad359c61d50b5e79c1206d84
16338 F20110109_AABRRR aiken_a_Page_043.QC.jpg
ae518d9dddb4f0525898b195d13cc96a
3c505a02b3d29d478105908fbf07c57d39be0078
60621 F20110109_AABRSH aiken_a_Page_007.jpg
7048125c3f4153a372ef0e7ca81ebed5
4265d0015a5c33d846659fe1c0379ea837fe833d
27713 F20110109_AABRRS aiken_a_Page_041.pro
7bcf3521b3c381db94c95ae5accf8e59
bb2f577468a0941ee4d97652c4f400691585dd83
83018 F20110109_AABRSI aiken_a_Page_010.jpg
c0392688ea5645375b700254cae15501
8ed8f62c710a612632d190486e736c316a1e30fe
88659 F20110109_AABRRT aiken_a_Page_063.jpg
a755a77388a5241c191e2e5d09b6f485
2d39d0c3c07bc5e3728c1620d0e8b1f0120cf7c5
85111 F20110109_AABRSJ aiken_a_Page_011.jpg
cb5fc24cc437796fc58888f8bb0c5842
e7ee1f17109e5556e06551da7a2ca634c3a6905d
5630 F20110109_AABRRU aiken_a_Page_017thm.jpg
1bb73394b8c217bd238271600ecdd0ed
be1350925acb1dc008349c3eaf1314da1d5efb24
82006 F20110109_AABRSK aiken_a_Page_015.jpg
3caa4e8547fd0b90b5b07c069fa3c189
acef5325e067154e8d8319188ffb1b817cbb54af
6005 F20110109_AABRRV aiken_a_Page_073thm.jpg
fde801e6cbf5f7b85b270ab84323ce6b
a01e953aa3a53960e4bff5d112da8dfe6651692d
84930 F20110109_AABRSL aiken_a_Page_016.jpg
8979fe511d7c4b13a441920b0a5d47c4
8bb400ca627e65b2fe7484adc2be63129f9ca934
F20110109_AABRRW aiken_a_Page_019.tif
e74915a2ff3ee2d76b5e47d9dced12bb
d01fb312094999809a697b2c7bcaa5104f3c8b21
22089 F20110109_AABRTA aiken_a_Page_050.jpg
d2fe5691c77a7402cf23c4d69fdc1334
813769c2d9e9e3a930c321bfdc4fab4afb8d4d87
68755 F20110109_AABRSM aiken_a_Page_017.jpg
5826c17adac899a049100ed2d2fd6dab
bf77d8c7c4f663e09dc2f7091613222a8774b4e7
F20110109_AABRRX aiken_a_Page_097.tif
a9ac9babea40efbbd8289e374b403fab
8391f4dcc42e7b700b10a9d51e56f321bafe7708
66778 F20110109_AABRTB aiken_a_Page_051.jpg
a57eb08855c512ce70847ed6b81ef92b
a329b5cf7ece221f29f9d46be39a02988a4c9a7f
33786 F20110109_AABRSN aiken_a_Page_019.jpg
30f03f1d97f96d86224d48e9498ba42e
ad323dbd8f44113c577a75f1b6d3969ae0c5b74d
6415 F20110109_AABRRY aiken_a_Page_067thm.jpg
b021d0184c343a5265c30cf3c1004ddd
0c3a7c29d47db0f47b899e7a1a8f538c915bf855
65303 F20110109_AABRTC aiken_a_Page_053.jpg
40c132c3ae540f199e5998e1b7703acb
d4380053b0ddc54dd0bbccf08bfed5edd0de36ca
83713 F20110109_AABRSO aiken_a_Page_023.jpg
826d7f44a74d55f8d5fc3567f79ce975
58d2af902cae4d4ea42991fe4782902ef3984105
49283 F20110109_AABRRZ aiken_a_Page_024.pro
ce9bb89116f7dbc3e940ac11a9455d7a
0f5219fc0bca31bc70ec7d5f93530ed0840a4998
77281 F20110109_AABRTD aiken_a_Page_054.jpg
a490e104ffcab89c84987bcc6b17a048
715bad654dfe40b3494cff9b56eba2b09dd6a75f
80820 F20110109_AABRSP aiken_a_Page_024.jpg
7ebf1df146b35d806d4c12c663dd8b8a
7e10ae5f7771220281849b18f93b6463c60ccf56
79320 F20110109_AABRTE aiken_a_Page_065.jpg
7a17c8b5fca51800583f30e475552b60
fb16c132fb8d2e646148d58f4cc0e4a7426ee794
84384 F20110109_AABRSQ aiken_a_Page_025.jpg
dd04e584977301115a7a6678525d1db0
fc081b0a72123d5affcc8401169d46de20bbd411
77688 F20110109_AABRTF aiken_a_Page_073.jpg
ae7db3f0ca22ed6b19b919433a246cf6
1b530b6654c81ac1967201d7fffc55cda3714f80
82725 F20110109_AABRTG aiken_a_Page_077.jpg
a64a0fe3d0c3b492c286b605fc4bc3a2
aed945b4d90e0a40b5c59f0d2789e44bfacecd4d
83832 F20110109_AABRSR aiken_a_Page_026.jpg
398dee8614e06e53f4dce01945314f67
df74682f940d8592cb80230037f9d7a3f0f96987
75451 F20110109_AABRTH aiken_a_Page_078.jpg
c81bf0c10b7c8bb0ead1a5961d28e376
10707093a86df3aba80d3ed7ffc3c98337cd3a11
84567 F20110109_AABRSS aiken_a_Page_031.jpg
638ffcd066079d515092eb1557a25afc
e488855d70a495641a3ad241a7f91c72b8a4070d
74803 F20110109_AABRTI aiken_a_Page_080.jpg
9984640b549df9f8742b061360a47223
3ef6a4042b0b3bceac571f5d8a3d1e613b564bb2
64701 F20110109_AABRST aiken_a_Page_032.jpg
c602c6e2965169f465fe23efd9b40d90
c823878f9a7a4c3a85be6537fe0e5e3021b48c6b
75776 F20110109_AABRSU aiken_a_Page_034.jpg
c6fda36ec6cbfc1088c250170115b9fe
74d23a9e2703fc150e1c42ef8dfd92cb24773742
59697 F20110109_AABRTJ aiken_a_Page_081.jpg
a401bb96c975454fcf0fe3ae6d35063a
9f9add0fcc0cb7f74ed84da174478a5ff1115c46
24344 F20110109_AABRSV aiken_a_Page_035.jpg
d141e33665098e469e8a7e0313667eb8
ab1368dd8f93360aa1341bdd3a50b03e1aae5ef9
75891 F20110109_AABRTK aiken_a_Page_083.jpg
09631ec317f5e241d87d9fa4f79e5d61
8ff8fc737c40dc82b2398e80a058f5e6abdefade
78228 F20110109_AABRSW aiken_a_Page_037.jpg
51a6a3536960e05ff747a1eb527c581f
4a3eee8162c3c71f86e32a50073af7b8a0b4a366
20703 F20110109_AABRTL aiken_a_Page_087.jpg
e750e3a8ab033c39ce029badca069db2
1e046751048bb04afc0ee9a587ebfb8d930032fc
84131 F20110109_AABRSX aiken_a_Page_039.jpg
01c76ca4de24b4f5f6d4455d42ef5ea6
11e45a3e636f19e820b7fdd93f242bb6786cba0b
110492 F20110109_AABRUA aiken_a_Page_025.jp2
bea5af2a7909ed6d46a16b5156a4afde
c5bd8d8f1b61c43a1e200d4dde7e4d02969f3147
32112 F20110109_AABRTM aiken_a_Page_090.jpg
a17c33460cec858a7615044f68b30f04
ea9f5e7b6822198b870c2a1c2a5c0d67d4c2a932
75880 F20110109_AABRSY aiken_a_Page_045.jpg
d6ac736a348ab7e5380e229388501d4e
f923d79c7afeb62285d62c10b06a04b11ed84cc1
106855 F20110109_AABRUB aiken_a_Page_028.jp2
739ccc3840cbed9daa7baee7c6eacc66
b6807e92d971dbc7fb81ee938db4a91a7e56ae8a
32968 F20110109_AABRTN aiken_a_Page_091.jpg
a78b24655928398147fe7e5b86641076
2bf6c3b29b88b49ca386312e7ebfbf4cc73ed19e
80651 F20110109_AABRSZ aiken_a_Page_046.jpg
18ccfcaac879ab972e21e81d6199aaea
a160ede9318de4814f4964440135d1a6842ac085
105999 F20110109_AABRUC aiken_a_Page_030.jp2
b23f9bb093d274f4461213be823c2e12
072ac093cef42cd511bd07b596d694e9ff562b92
35142 F20110109_AABRTO aiken_a_Page_092.jpg
783da97185c7e44136e5bceb54e670d6
2232d8ad075eab335dfa235e3fe6267c08a66ea4
110477 F20110109_AABRUD aiken_a_Page_031.jp2
0044e1b5515e9d9b27583bccdca9c325
7dd4d64e5fa418da7b1a684aebba0a341ca2daa6
32974 F20110109_AABRTP aiken_a_Page_094.jpg
60b9b005adb960e33db21f292d5d6bc8
5e6694cb1312b6bbf6babe382c64f34a60b2f325
85985 F20110109_AABRUE aiken_a_Page_032.jp2
2eef5d8df95aa9c39b847ad1a62936a1
1f240de221f3c6a50b1db7777655d941d19081fd
35234 F20110109_AABRTQ aiken_a_Page_096.jpg
303630e64c2024da262638ba39bace94
d3a0e5457c1e5435e106846a506c86e4ce6dd966
96113 F20110109_AABRUF aiken_a_Page_033.jp2
68fa1159d211b9e695251a915dbe2f0b
ed44c1ab5d0d1d33c217b0ae66a6df6532b3044d
20654 F20110109_AABRTR aiken_a_Page_101.jpg
40596886d00deb9c6830f354d29f926c
dcb4045e144522b84b1e288a033f3e1c1ceb7a0c
151502 F20110109_AABSAA UFE0000626_00001.xml
fef5d0749df3a6f7e80a6876826f4d48
0ca99d1ec34e41dccc0dcf4013e4c59c21ab16b5
98942 F20110109_AABRUG aiken_a_Page_034.jp2
9d67308f58b7c18ec3d30a1273b5c3d8
57c5591f3409caa4d5f0a96ebb7e53c8c66933de
6871 F20110109_AABSAB aiken_a_Page_001.QC.jpg
07f64aeb9d52c8f8053ccdd1192b079a
ef202c295489e2940ac35bb4c466adecf639729c
30896 F20110109_AABRUH aiken_a_Page_035.jp2
8efe1ad0aeec919e932882df21428c45
09a424700b4e60c1cab7f74fb667049355209210
26432 F20110109_AABRTS aiken_a_Page_001.jp2
020b6eea6f261ec2a3062746b55b676e
e51def4f11091a98e00d968bf6caf3cfdb8eca4e
F20110109_AABSAC aiken_a_Page_001thm.jpg
cf5f0bf5638dcbb647b751aa10083840
2e186bc7d41afd5d4a98041020098e69c49f3167
103549 F20110109_AABRUI aiken_a_Page_037.jp2
448c516b9a7d45b290cb130e3ad3c052
2207281e5871eabf0091936645e04b0c8a71e20d
557889 F20110109_AABRTT aiken_a_Page_006.jp2
6bf10e7c1f08ac601e72357e221992b9
bc76acd1d887f3e0cf79752d8eff19eb2f7c5360
3536 F20110109_AABSAD aiken_a_Page_003thm.jpg
436b16ea0b9b14e9a1aa662ce1b4dd2f
f3b9d7c171c52c41bc5cccf9a5f761a2c993a1f7
95128 F20110109_AABRUJ aiken_a_Page_042.jp2
c71795a85c74673dc9aea8b8a8818b4b
5e5d2ec2363597883f63ed6bc8197b4af755e586
78427 F20110109_AABRTU aiken_a_Page_007.jp2
5816594bdeaf8a5a4b44c15e77541775
21fc3afa1ef650076c048e68509e804f9c84e052
6860 F20110109_AABSAE aiken_a_Page_006.QC.jpg
fd76f0056b6899b3925c2dd6222df02e
da5d55a8f2f175613897c1a77847c3ef9e2590e7
78037 F20110109_AABRUK aiken_a_Page_043.jp2
2b4c157edea198ab98bc24e01cfb421f
3902591cd16de57e7fbbac813bcf3b7065d23866
109186 F20110109_AABRTV aiken_a_Page_010.jp2
65dc447503bbfbb46c4893fd584fbb0d
d9733394392be85a6e24ef379a00aaae1b1f8df1
17588 F20110109_AABSAF aiken_a_Page_007.QC.jpg
be97c40fd4822aa4c1d566c766b1c932
247a564b91424c471f400d02bcc5375a2a01dc09
93949 F20110109_AABRUL aiken_a_Page_044.jp2
af87d7ddf102a9783f290c3161769521
01c501f1c980f721d7ac54abb206e869876dab96
104970 F20110109_AABRTW aiken_a_Page_014.jp2
d9dd5fc7b38afad8bfaddc30b17cddcd
956b329e6a12efefadcc3cff512f0ada74907c2e
102289 F20110109_AABRVA aiken_a_Page_076.jp2
623dc1136d4e6a73a417a6bb56226ba7
f2e8a5b46b3fd0f14f8fc34d95c9ccdcf081d6b7
106033 F20110109_AABRUM aiken_a_Page_048.jp2
205dbc291e570ac0ad159ec32751f027
b9a645f4ce05e0d41ad3f266d7c3c9bd2f2bd810
91569 F20110109_AABRTX aiken_a_Page_017.jp2
793e79a4ff2cd0cbda3aa1e3e474ca97
9651f45a7e2c208db67c7f846e155e5bf2f97b69
4638 F20110109_AABSAG aiken_a_Page_007thm.jpg
871846fcf8ffd0837bd2db7ece411ed1
1d3a688e79e869973c6e63111878bac103db9073
109814 F20110109_AABRVB aiken_a_Page_077.jp2
cd3cd8eae156196f96c78a060628a7d0
061c7057f667adecba7cd64d4f0a5c71e9949b5f
87386 F20110109_AABRUN aiken_a_Page_051.jp2
17b80707aab844950d42396fdff8ade3
b5d732930f3cfde25ca88be8814a695f6238a352
100977 F20110109_AABRTY aiken_a_Page_018.jp2
81a97deacceb6a4685893462c0584428
41dda295fa2ad37a12a84c621b9eba783e80fbae
20952 F20110109_AABSAH aiken_a_Page_009.QC.jpg
762daeeaea80cf26adce34bfebdd5090
a5fd0422c1e545f40a3cf63d7b538b2bfd13f944
98507 F20110109_AABRVC aiken_a_Page_080.jp2
e2206ad7e6de0af4b05d9ac0a171f822
546261d6d035655f7de824be25abb39b980efd44
75630 F20110109_AABRUO aiken_a_Page_052.jp2
0863a6ced0b2fa4f57625be77619d51c
f588801264838d354568fa8e1fd6f3f0bb7cd72b
104797 F20110109_AABRTZ aiken_a_Page_024.jp2
3c2603a3e4e8ec36ec00edd5b0014170
6dd178153871ebd8cb9fc1291efd6802add4f6ba
6199 F20110109_AABSAI aiken_a_Page_010thm.jpg
168cb75e369bf93e1c28fa97fe1f1b1f
eaa608d9a30b756de3fb05f6a6731084b6b13fd3
78192 F20110109_AABRVD aiken_a_Page_081.jp2
ad66614a3e8dad70cdca71b462534fea
67c982c1d0f4748d8bca3dc210937d3f20b64fd8
81551 F20110109_AABRUP aiken_a_Page_053.jp2
b970943921e4c81092fb0817735776de
1e65e709f914f8a20872c4dc1f3338d48378953a
6241 F20110109_AABSAJ aiken_a_Page_012thm.jpg
0386b72ebda7e6dd77d4d9c55c420a63
ef7170b2969f829ad58bf19d7f0dac420955d632
82582 F20110109_AABRVE aiken_a_Page_084.jp2
a86632b7d4d2db660857fb4c2be52da0
9e2776ff30a15f42ca03bcaee213e988de0f0aa4
107074 F20110109_AABRUQ aiken_a_Page_057.jp2
81c22f7e147665fa7312bb77af2e8b17
50c1d066746c9ada3af727f19420843a885c44dc
6233 F20110109_AABSAK aiken_a_Page_013thm.jpg
6b86bb3c6365eb581528b9abc7efa88b
6db769cb639861869ea4a650b24e005a6c32d856
26252 F20110109_AABRVF aiken_a_Page_087.jp2
078277e75cd52d40356e2465d8af0ec5
f49cd049a9fb6853a145a2746a55414d907fac8d
110218 F20110109_AABRUR aiken_a_Page_060.jp2
812f013f45641a31f6ef3b5114462864
e861e00e62c5304f1708441d0832430f2752c149
24680 F20110109_AABSAL aiken_a_Page_014.QC.jpg
d6b2af35440b707b47d8d465d731151d
f7cf18a63a2329704435a48b1825c9e7aefa71ed
34176 F20110109_AABRVG aiken_a_Page_090.jp2
6483c213d5d46095ca8b838914aa40c0
59b5453726717684380678152b1fdec35b84fe33
110005 F20110109_AABRUS aiken_a_Page_061.jp2
87de3eb828ea5f8236d95775bf0fd06b
35db7173875dccee0f48c52f04fa0826d4dcffa1
5956 F20110109_AABSBA aiken_a_Page_034thm.jpg
2faabac81116b9c43abf470a73db11ad
32e375f10c0b064efde39a9adc3e0ebcc6822c4e
25833 F20110109_AABSAM aiken_a_Page_016.QC.jpg
836236dc1cefdbcb137abfdc862ca556
b0a0f7cb07ddfb5be62c5004e4e9ea6d0acd8036
36085 F20110109_AABRVH aiken_a_Page_091.jp2
b7f9143ac632dab5a9f61c0f9d9fa3db
389e851363edd8776ece2c609650e1e39d218509
1897 F20110109_AABSBB aiken_a_Page_035thm.jpg
bf16f915e4c1a7c81e8fc92df31aae75
a67ba72885bcd569d298776e019a64f39208f1ca
10756 F20110109_AABSAN aiken_a_Page_019.QC.jpg
df491cfcd6458e1d2331114aa3863b69
e87bcebb9caef6d11b06bc864d2ac9f3c06a7135
37754 F20110109_AABRVI aiken_a_Page_092.jp2
e5b430fff8870155f0bc5adff5dff945
5f870e6d2042d7c34bc05ed21693114870a6a2bf
109828 F20110109_AABRUT aiken_a_Page_064.jp2
1664b8034d63650932cf03436f9c32a5
f1b988a94315e428fc4048be472481826ad63345
20853 F20110109_AABSBC aiken_a_Page_036.QC.jpg
72745dc65ee49926a32c3392bb31c729
0f2e834437b3f1b8b3f45d3f09a2561670a34d40
21313 F20110109_AABSAO aiken_a_Page_020.QC.jpg
b7c92be0449f8bb83d37952c660f25d5
d2d0536a8de7ddc406af9e39ef6b596d35ae3c2b
35348 F20110109_AABRVJ aiken_a_Page_093.jp2
e3bd50be13a0ec542e130d5e8122a760
0c89d74e63e2212f4223f4c26a7570a86081b716
103140 F20110109_AABRUU aiken_a_Page_065.jp2
60f74541b7dfc6fe7ce4e7ce4dd3e7b3
6a585009ba62d56cd758e981feb8ca78d1bd70b2
6008 F20110109_AABSBD aiken_a_Page_037thm.jpg
dfbbb1e07ca44400f69f3463e2e0605c
2fb4d8d0d7c7a8ff0433767606a19967a8ab435b
24409 F20110109_AABSAP aiken_a_Page_021.QC.jpg
3228d24161fbf4d1c7cb5f38ec4cf8ed
085078544a02e360ec793c17d054d3fe0e55c2bf
34531 F20110109_AABRVK aiken_a_Page_094.jp2
345871d52526f23862a86d98596db73f
6a31bc1c5f6c43f5aa50d8877a8895f1881b93bf
105809 F20110109_AABRUV aiken_a_Page_067.jp2
da9ae4ad9f03b64a8b8d02489c9b6ad1
3c6710036bbbfa7e2df081dcaaf878dd44b0c076
5811 F20110109_AABSBE aiken_a_Page_038thm.jpg
5268d5b6723c5dc235eeb87887446bcf
74a0ac6520d41c5b8cb5e0b482b68431de874e89
26014 F20110109_AABSAQ aiken_a_Page_022.QC.jpg
6fe00ffa1f0536746034b5f96056f7a1
278e2ca867c4bbad58780b995c1eeaecdddd9ddb
34904 F20110109_AABRVL aiken_a_Page_095.jp2
63a9ddaa9aa5e4a5743a5ee0c0c32882
3d9a011152ca0fe555fe1c9ffe3a0267c727cf40
89901 F20110109_AABRUW aiken_a_Page_068.jp2
b2ed5744e88e8e55712d2a721805da42
6c5d9a6e3ae5ee7191f8e29d176196d0905f24e1
26371 F20110109_AABSBF aiken_a_Page_039.QC.jpg
04ea60e657664c8e0488ac3a18469e55
122edb45321ae64bbbe743fd31675e83f87d4e89
25746 F20110109_AABSAR aiken_a_Page_023.QC.jpg
5423b2cb3f9a48024ae534fec080719e
b1e836816b22d15cac3d9839ad087f4a5a35a396
104502 F20110109_AABRVM aiken_a_Page_098.jp2
964fd9ffe526ec7b71d41004c5caadf1
d914eb0741c43640f8cb34234db3ffbc4387907f
44165 F20110109_AABRUX aiken_a_Page_069.jp2
59e6293f4e8e1f682a9e901d009b9f5f
ebf8986890363533cb4026741add968b91dff28b
15547 F20110109_AABSBG aiken_a_Page_041.QC.jpg
55bb6f0c5096d6ceb802eef442bd94d4
652c6638e4bf73344a2aa9061a2f53842be5e618
F20110109_AABRWA aiken_a_Page_033.tif
b323cf686abda47dcb4e5927447f6899
bddba471577a4633e96170b102a9d27bca08a5c7
6240 F20110109_AABSAS aiken_a_Page_023thm.jpg
df1d26c90c406dd1759a7dd3f1f6a2cf
eb30feaf44d83ec63509d6a8aa6c2b0e8a78c385
26055 F20110109_AABRVN aiken_a_Page_101.jp2
932ce1b6c68d01eea9f7672147265c8b
40cc0f9967ea0a097c65a8efaab2eab255e7a567
47211 F20110109_AABRUY aiken_a_Page_070.jp2
ee2213b3698d06e23e561cbc2e7bcb7e
64ad8cf7b2f16960b2728ae73f5a558b25cad027
3944 F20110109_AABSBH aiken_a_Page_041thm.jpg
b13359eaa6233640a84b8d5892053049
c394c42a84cf4d6c948ed7b243f7a937cfbeefd2
F20110109_AABRWB aiken_a_Page_036.tif
190f4f8a41211e82d58f260212d12224
c98a82ff1fb77baedd8e78b042b30d8df53396a9
24676 F20110109_AABSAT aiken_a_Page_024.QC.jpg
b6737b2361b0db29c18ff488859c7b43
229bf6e63b50702dc0d6e542f192736abe82cf63
F20110109_AABRVO aiken_a_Page_005.tif
517b9855e678933e2c24cb4a5897dc6c
1f96138e52cb265b45a35a2c2eefe1c4ed4cc2e6
88944 F20110109_AABRUZ aiken_a_Page_072.jp2
e72e13d26343371fd522f4e4ecf514e1
6be3c481a7d1808e1ca4e84f98ace7a250c8f732
22207 F20110109_AABSBI aiken_a_Page_044.QC.jpg
308239c946dd095004622e75b75c28f3
d339d284a09838f91fba27463f0c0e8b4086e413
F20110109_AABRWC aiken_a_Page_037.tif
f3e1e55af4ac48817708df3a1b25f58b
254a2e1448b3f73df36fd4ad8328f20ee81a09f6
6218 F20110109_AABSAU aiken_a_Page_026thm.jpg
1e7e744c4503b90752d2a214867fdfae
8b5a849e3ed72e7263bf22fa8642df405fb7354b
F20110109_AABRVP aiken_a_Page_008.tif
a59306e330208dc8b9c59e6b40d3f3e8
1f87b0becf1e0523b90699fbfa6c425ea3d5f0be
6112 F20110109_AABSBJ aiken_a_Page_045thm.jpg
577fa0e6d98a36009fbc0396c4b348f1
5292ff10ac9126d8d1baddc8fff6951dfe8e53fd
F20110109_AABRWD aiken_a_Page_039.tif
8080acce9000b4fd920a89e67215fb6d
082d1e750966ceef8a244850527ca891dbe25685
24124 F20110109_AABSAV aiken_a_Page_028.QC.jpg
aeb3bf9b874dc79528943a5e8a4bfda9
0585096ef02c9ab3e9eeb5dce05902efaf3efd7d
F20110109_AABRVQ aiken_a_Page_013.tif
efc9926963ed43327674f473ea826562
505315876ce0c94062e961b76ec8a97ecf4a3f92
25240 F20110109_AABSBK aiken_a_Page_046.QC.jpg
411b9f29cc16ec640a575ba16c6e5502
3e47d85e4685ff47409f18eaf381b79a7871062f
F20110109_AABRWE aiken_a_Page_045.tif
5bc22d6474bfb13be445610c7c9e3c7e
f4a42f07c081beb072d8e9e15e20d8c36991c4f5
6076 F20110109_AABSAW aiken_a_Page_029thm.jpg
02cfbdd94c52112ef08c832619310f72
c585ef21859a580f4802c0edcc861621c365c9db
F20110109_AABRVR aiken_a_Page_017.tif
fe0878b0708ceec1ecb40cff3468b5d2
d35a6c221e6d76246f464e7f521e1e778020a81f
23926 F20110109_AABSBL aiken_a_Page_047.QC.jpg
a2c9e52937bebc8ed175d82898329798
e18f013f480acf1de0f9aa99df785f1a1d758581
F20110109_AABRWF aiken_a_Page_059.tif
677a3af274c5bd2e465c6e89f7631dfa
56783cbc37978dd048c5d193c134d100460eedca
6274 F20110109_AABSAX aiken_a_Page_030thm.jpg
3422735adf81a92b73554886a22e833a
53e41bd87e96e6e1d85ef849def838cf5e4c93c2
F20110109_AABRVS aiken_a_Page_018.tif
e4af99e985fb7847c914315236f4aa37
9ceb8e8907aa8d96257860d0a14157b8cba243c5
26758 F20110109_AABSCA aiken_a_Page_062.QC.jpg
213d79926bd8380ae1518cc5f130dae9
8a0ee13beb23a1ac07f2c8721308b03ae68b367b
F20110109_AABSBM aiken_a_Page_048.QC.jpg
e88008fba50481c4c737529b20a30cc3
66cfe4f32773999018609bd4ba65def22e50117c
F20110109_AABRWG aiken_a_Page_071.tif
5f99c089577a93afde505bbcaf7dcb19
988f6bf610d73bf82589e28fc6d3b3babeb79b6c
5364 F20110109_AABSAY aiken_a_Page_032thm.jpg
9e780af4be8289195fe9dfa4d4341ce6
f7f77aed2972eaf1e848a75fb93a14fc33d625dc
F20110109_AABRVT aiken_a_Page_020.tif
5fdbf5cdacba8e576fb5dbea31e38bc3
3ae375bb5c568e92b691bbf9f0495904d700c7db
6589 F20110109_AABSCB aiken_a_Page_063thm.jpg
d8f7c8f5adb70941160626274cddaba2
cb67c2a9cee77fef473096cb7d15cc13099496b6
6138 F20110109_AABSBN aiken_a_Page_048thm.jpg
2150140651b2e001cfaa3e67ae50b192
8daa60c79c7a3cdad311571fe7c547b0693df483
F20110109_AABRWH aiken_a_Page_072.tif
1679f3d500b14f002e6503ed59c30c39
de43d6abed815d320429f154e2d5cea01c0f00a6
23422 F20110109_AABSAZ aiken_a_Page_033.QC.jpg
89e15e3336baac96521a847149342853
08231abbf83b1da7313bb01f26330957ad00a82e
6467 F20110109_AABSCC aiken_a_Page_064thm.jpg
a8b49575614d547feffcba3962526046
f688c31a602717e5c2398db97c4f2d9f4955e1df
26142 F20110109_AABSBO aiken_a_Page_049.QC.jpg
51955661d7dde550a62a178d7ff33c7d
4ed34bf73fcaf9aa7995ecf2e5b03e197d3f5bc0
F20110109_AABRWI aiken_a_Page_075.tif
64a450e8ea9c6b7500e85f683f8e53d4
f878e7b0049f44c2119a286b5126e6d6952675a9
F20110109_AABRVU aiken_a_Page_022.tif
0e7fb3c229c2d0c81edf037398303521
f33c33cf72d954702b8b83c3d378b515348cb07a
24918 F20110109_AABSCD aiken_a_Page_065.QC.jpg
8ec4aca8f9a403013658eab46c2629a7
80acbba877afa515b3d689f8acfadfd4309953fd
1759 F20110109_AABSBP aiken_a_Page_050thm.jpg
12a10dad8d453ef207c91496489296b8
fe9e3cff814bfd090cd888e7d0752aea0589b35c
F20110109_AABRWJ aiken_a_Page_078.tif
5d4496248c32a6db217b299577cbd7a3
c1f9b86e6dc3fe41153b4051d0f8914260b4a47b
F20110109_AABRVV aiken_a_Page_025.tif
83790aea842d526c8f358c3a2fd73d40
e29a7ef13026218036e4b13a9322aa499d3f4686
12529 F20110109_AABSCE aiken_a_Page_070.QC.jpg
a0caf8162e1706c63385cb54565b2581
1b1eb4898cdeafa0afa338b2012b570679ebec5b
18605 F20110109_AABSBQ aiken_a_Page_052.QC.jpg
a7898c588ab63b995b0a04f090307918
fe847bddfe3a6e96543577d5297c997c78ca6928
F20110109_AABRWK aiken_a_Page_081.tif
033868893b2e64b2f5c58548e9332bd0
27e404b31ae0fc079bc2b025b7ea67344fbc2fdb
F20110109_AABRVW aiken_a_Page_026.tif
99d0be7ba033f4114c897e07e0381308
803616d8e7baa40315f4dc8ce898abe31fbd09c5
5134 F20110109_AABSCF aiken_a_Page_071.QC.jpg
9ee5fba08af851a95ddd56d096146e1c
7324cc9dfe605cfb3bc341c706a504324fd33bf2
20058 F20110109_AABSBR aiken_a_Page_053.QC.jpg
fcd27090be079bb4f1913a34cbd3d497
79c0c4410b874ba4cc74a9babb32f0468944de4b
F20110109_AABRWL aiken_a_Page_086.tif
08b82813bc53a0a47aa1ffc39d5e25c8
c86140164220cd08d417b5fd45ed59fc289b8c47
F20110109_AABRVX aiken_a_Page_029.tif
cd1c92b5f9fa09de13ada0f7cbd0026b
7feb61f7365ef76005c5ccf70128ea1e26ec81ef
5036 F20110109_AABSCG aiken_a_Page_072thm.jpg
c4aff554fd60c4d883f9cc7315c0a5cf
05a90ef742356c8bbbfef599e94e735b07628cb8
50398 F20110109_AABRXA aiken_a_Page_028.pro
84b3d3df26b8eef658a5fa8d14d09d15
43cb1639e09ddb365fdad4d00e0427d5fa76a4fc
5284 F20110109_AABSBS aiken_a_Page_053thm.jpg
9f3780d4fb5cbbb0f4af6a495b73b3bc
0b6e5245443278bba68c04832ac480ad6086d9a6
F20110109_AABRWM aiken_a_Page_090.tif
0409ef719baf508e4b817061deaec9d7
285417a1a07aef099ca2647bdbfce30597cb987b
F20110109_AABRVY aiken_a_Page_031.tif
b3d4627afc7de987d917e196a95e85c5
59bc5e6a787706afb7746c4bad5484d89f98316f
24086 F20110109_AABSCH aiken_a_Page_073.QC.jpg
e5507f35f1dc762e7448b4a7eca2e270
0d93148d502dfbe891b5a0abf4291037378ec609
48019 F20110109_AABRXB aiken_a_Page_029.pro
cdc2a673859e544fd69d8645bf81ffb7
794fc324962faa99065a175b001e5ba34af34f11
6143 F20110109_AABSBT aiken_a_Page_055thm.jpg
6346508a85009dc5cc00ce63159cfa88
05f0bbe4b8e52f86b191f932fa54769327e53d44
F20110109_AABRWN aiken_a_Page_095.tif
f183585223c48a54fb9a77ade7875c69
70eb6d721ca3d5cb241289aaa55f468d4cd984d6
F20110109_AABRVZ aiken_a_Page_032.tif
2dc8af154a1d0463bce7dbf8f4c43c12
f441731cc699d6fa5192032da7bfb683a046bf3e
F20110109_AABSCI aiken_a_Page_074thm.jpg
cdf3134bb01d95c185d054c10a112e20
c488549bfbc38c69a4d16ab0f29dc79c41fff135
49419 F20110109_AABRXC aiken_a_Page_030.pro
32d4831ea73020ac496106af8d74f19b
bc2b45ff766a0aa1efc0e3203dfaf8c338f5a467
6081 F20110109_AABSBU aiken_a_Page_056thm.jpg
53fa4ff7df2bfa83167af85f2a0fd182
fd9ee1ff73d8e03a41eae9104146878821dfe32d
8747 F20110109_AABRWO aiken_a_Page_001.pro
f0950c775f24f5a1fe99c73b756c1cc6
c1506bc9378e8050c8318a8a28c62a972af0b0b2
6339 F20110109_AABSCJ aiken_a_Page_077thm.jpg
27de4298b277fdf82f3c7ad6bd33f0af
6206d4fb37920d24b907626a9322db246e9c8f20
51990 F20110109_AABRXD aiken_a_Page_031.pro
f94b1176e1a13c83fc6d687a844e29e3
b52d673c6c90984a64663829e9a6567ca024419c
25602 F20110109_AABSBV aiken_a_Page_057.QC.jpg
b1674df7ea615fba3d8f89e7ac2888bb
9023843fa0e939af444f372ff5e9546de4fdf6dc
76247 F20110109_AABRWP aiken_a_Page_004.pro
2a1e0aa8794af7ba99a99ce102f252f5
926b35bb90db91f660de1d63023abaf9b1a6dc49
24003 F20110109_AABSCK aiken_a_Page_078.QC.jpg
6ce50eb19c4ab515e04abcb1ff33b80f
55c1d2948210e81efe5a5570d17a98538f8217f8
45441 F20110109_AABRXE aiken_a_Page_034.pro
c5c554398f41a8d6ae05ebbb101bc183
f7ebc40c16b0bfce000efc33a2a6cd6bd67c4779
4535 F20110109_AABSBW aiken_a_Page_058thm.jpg
65809589218e370f8e06ce84407fcd84
e1c6d659eedf3e9212cd1c3bd2b9efa3906c0152
9251 F20110109_AABRWQ aiken_a_Page_005.pro
a0ba9026decce08f718067e4c18e78b7
922aea00f998d20016f62ea8c5f601ae453922b9
24902 F20110109_AABSCL aiken_a_Page_079.QC.jpg
bd896095d33c31dfe00edb22c0ed93bd
b324bc32867426317ae45b3434efb7b685ff2c63
12739 F20110109_AABRXF aiken_a_Page_035.pro
391258b47bafc64c7ecff1d768f1de60
f3a26c1e2a5ed4748fbcd628d7aaf24f2406fe67
21671 F20110109_AABSBX aiken_a_Page_059.QC.jpg
babcf5df0265d9973bba86d2ae95bbf9
cef6faf21144aabf45e17529cd71f981aa7c331b
18288 F20110109_AABRWR aiken_a_Page_008.pro
a683917f715945a54379b59ee5fbe8da
72b30fcc01be9ce0488387f189226c9e37ad2f31
6105 F20110109_AABSCM aiken_a_Page_079thm.jpg
3f2e4861f9dfa7eeda553761cff34ffe
a37c51966e606cd41708534b68379b16bb0492b8
48214 F20110109_AABRXG aiken_a_Page_037.pro
158203dbcb533fecfba3b907742ed666
2801c39ca867af8af0da022c5c40892665286f55
6528 F20110109_AABSBY aiken_a_Page_060thm.jpg
b3495ade7217f7b6f98b63c7b57d2924
bc49ffb33241105bcf5a731d1dbecbba2884ecd9
40652 F20110109_AABRWS aiken_a_Page_009.pro
b80b2404244b0f6a2b88356eb5ed589f
f11f9bfc2e4746e3680dae3b9156c5745e2b4cf3
4604 F20110109_AABSCN aiken_a_Page_081thm.jpg
5a0b184f5d8ab554c9c09b1244e5a0de
fac51340961124aa5bfecaf6dc5f35ef532424dd
50878 F20110109_AABRXH aiken_a_Page_039.pro
708e61b14570dcb3e2dda6de847da91e
3a48b70d6b4b4eed43b38aa258b3f0752941eb8e
26783 F20110109_AABSBZ aiken_a_Page_061.QC.jpg
96bc456d90d930f15b3af06f1c393b57
1f3057f45b6bf54ae3dfce66d3eba5bcab0d82ea
50015 F20110109_AABRWT aiken_a_Page_010.pro
5088b4c69ee1a38a30b3b6534fbf181c
cfc526fcde6713920a05f99e83643e389a2418a1
21882 F20110109_AABSCO aiken_a_Page_085.QC.jpg
50b993b23780ba768259ca6082556324
7379ed08d80f06af5d6c13d677f8a6c34f1bee96
46751 F20110109_AABRXI aiken_a_Page_040.pro
805eae39537d46e464a9cca5d3880862
e72422e1a4ce3d6fd0a2c14d5b3dc204673f8c75
52018 F20110109_AABRWU aiken_a_Page_016.pro
b34fcaae6a1ca1d66283fb89ad82945e
4f031b6673595ad93b8d24ca82b2d856b76c63a4
8664 F20110109_AABSCP aiken_a_Page_089.QC.jpg
4c3868d19f8f4eabef223b29febb12e9
8d603881609029b0ebad6b46cb49d5a839761391
44979 F20110109_AABRXJ aiken_a_Page_042.pro
4b4200d72b173c9ed34a0fdb4ded101e
9166463deb2ed0166b9a8ec843032cf998cc36b6
10258 F20110109_AABSCQ aiken_a_Page_090.QC.jpg
283b1829bfe678a9fcb4460830863702
0acfc543cfd374f8f525aad1b366398c3235f697
36621 F20110109_AABRXK aiken_a_Page_043.pro
fb88d11c5830fb70103446d8247ba617
0e0b9bb9136b4190f48ddc5504b450d52e4da732
41704 F20110109_AABRWV aiken_a_Page_017.pro
25683dd009899d6785112619b3b0ee61
a9c72c245f0fca88c97b4c778877c77d1028cc6f
2990 F20110109_AABSCR aiken_a_Page_090thm.jpg
807060855462804abf18c389dc0369ef
0706c15f423ac97f009f9c7817ae2a95830c2e3c
49209 F20110109_AABRXL aiken_a_Page_046.pro
88dee5d8a0652c098f1f15ec5895658d
018d40387d570e8fc21886cc4c8a9759489c317b
47658 F20110109_AABRWW aiken_a_Page_018.pro
4023098402186721d061f4236bef6bcd
17c1cb5c17ba8a6cd0cf4d8f0501e267d05e36a9
21247 F20110109_AABRYA aiken_a_Page_088.pro
9d505bee5fd02bc3b1779e763241c722
fc839c68a835202200a12a233b0f18e021ea2491
9625 F20110109_AABSCS aiken_a_Page_091.QC.jpg
175975bf44443465e66c6c651ec86f6a
43672badce40566ca4cd786babeebc8d783b8195
46932 F20110109_AABRXM aiken_a_Page_047.pro
f54c3c628bb9642159b2a5e0a1f1c0cc
73ea6ef25d26be1f7c9523fc508ce65daf8a1f52
18626 F20110109_AABRWX aiken_a_Page_019.pro
5108021875c5029992378eae1bdcab97
fc7f7779dca76b2ecdf76271ce8508ddad4ee566
26965 F20110109_AABRYB aiken_a_Page_096.pro
dcdb62117a8f85577dac9586fe5b44c0
2f1479ed3bcdda88425b6524550ada90b0fdd324
11045 F20110109_AABSCT aiken_a_Page_093.QC.jpg
5e9669042835ef57d50df581aa275863
c564f9f7b9d9fb3903838334b7450ccbbcee9cdf
50162 F20110109_AABRXN aiken_a_Page_049.pro
9ab704b879a21b83674bc33d8ac5cf6f
da743d6ea1249737e0fcfaef49990f4e9a84e7fc
42761 F20110109_AABRWY aiken_a_Page_020.pro
0efd1c87c80c3cff12ff8a3bf196a94e
ee53adab0bed353deec5e2f8b42192b45e385082
16003 F20110109_AABRYC aiken_a_Page_097.pro
71cfa8bb0ee215a3338f3988affad7c2
f2c1b2644614cf3840e7162c017f443118b293f5
10523 F20110109_AABSCU aiken_a_Page_094.QC.jpg
e309b55a2eb1cea3f74a60053796fa33
035a4bdb758c1b45971d085dc7356c7eed930aed
49143 F20110109_AABRXO aiken_a_Page_055.pro
5d4eb06cfa8a49e3dfb7de8327bd348e
a65f37217d1a95f98b7ea934f6a400f6281cce27
51944 F20110109_AABRWZ aiken_a_Page_025.pro
b9ba79dabc9e8b6efb50c5463402dc30
4fc668f349d18f0c1078afcebd2d0be89f6b22f1
483 F20110109_AABRYD aiken_a_Page_001.txt
c3b5a48803c312b8583543fa68d98e66
1da67534d387f46ec70666e81a606fc71acb3b87
10606 F20110109_AABSCV aiken_a_Page_095.QC.jpg
29ebdcb53b0de3342b2c9f8c5c9cefe3
438478372e20987d784b265f4d85c33991821aee
51484 F20110109_AABRXP aiken_a_Page_061.pro
db30b2f9e50abc5e24757732e87390a2
3882219af2f068ffd88b03b2008308180cff54c6
455 F20110109_AABRYE aiken_a_Page_002.txt
098277466ec625bd1548f0e549e9ac7b
2693bb48c58c80b2f10172464630314742c32d41
2939 F20110109_AABSCW aiken_a_Page_095thm.jpg
47ddec6dc2a47c1293805a664d4d8095
0aa6656f766063bd8a1c1affa34e7bd6200a13d2
53445 F20110109_AABRXQ aiken_a_Page_063.pro
d81ee505a3c626b9e6bb4473e5bc2bd3
6f920526daac2e1a30eddaf5cdf03ee1a0ce520e
2744 F20110109_AABRYF aiken_a_Page_003.txt
5a95d820a2b8423fad6ba4af3f0b3dc7
a868729736beabfe678b13a4fd69569a71976cfb
5822 F20110109_AABSCX aiken_a_Page_098thm.jpg
54d82dd776b2b4bb970bfd5d56d0337e
2f49c397d84447fcefcd509599dfe6152d59d950
19161 F20110109_AABRXR aiken_a_Page_069.pro
27af77e2b6162357003c722827f7b6c3
2853e878955afe66c73d2d57a811731bd883a230
19126 F20110109_AABSCY aiken_a_Page_100.QC.jpg
2439c17c4399d10c3cf1c46c54ed6161
26af0c90519c71d9d07bf4cfeea9eacbe1ccf2ba
21616 F20110109_AABRXS aiken_a_Page_070.pro
6da99a92b366964b3bd35a61a2fba105
8b3399676b390327d02e3e555fcd7543f581f910
3124 F20110109_AABRYG aiken_a_Page_004.txt
60b0605459cf3e485454b23cd0e2f9eb
e26e925377e3e587bcb5bc8c09b08f3f771baa65
6522 F20110109_AABSCZ aiken_a_Page_101.QC.jpg
c8db49f64f6287682fd0da6c88aca24e
a1a7a518d51ea9aed643de060c197e7777e21d50
46441 F20110109_AABRXT aiken_a_Page_073.pro
d096dfb532817057ecd3e47e2dc9424c
0fb8bddb9831b0770c6b143b61fd1092e6e642e7
508 F20110109_AABRYH aiken_a_Page_005.txt
bf68a9efea6d6e12ebf8434784e84e56
63f347f3c3152ee3803d291169f603fa8f42d36d
51332 F20110109_AABRXU aiken_a_Page_077.pro
25b977b28a0407f6f34a2f0b2df5a1f9
28c1af99b17acc0641633f9a01c84fbbd7bf1f06
1557 F20110109_AABRYI aiken_a_Page_007.txt
505c8c75d730d3aeeeb3772b52ecf038
e6945c5e4909c5524409647c860434913e46e098
46035 F20110109_AABRXV aiken_a_Page_078.pro
64e36e867cd46a267a806387b2b73567
8a9ff929a35f2b11702ee47ae24fa778943b6312
736 F20110109_AABRYJ aiken_a_Page_008.txt
2a15201590bb454d819a4091ff5cbeca
be80b185adbad1423d32d213b2567249fbe9d9f0
1972 F20110109_AABRYK aiken_a_Page_010.txt
c26e75519aef25502f00e1a40f95a2bb
01abdda2febc12e81fab80fbfd1088909423b3aa
49398 F20110109_AABRXW aiken_a_Page_079.pro
32e39e99f9b94a11c98eabcbd7fb0808
bf619fd8117b11403f24d6b8a2e28f84623f0bb0
2015 F20110109_AABRYL aiken_a_Page_011.txt
a6aafefdf6be94b41d35012e76b2ba52
bcd1083d50bdd64e7b29a748ae8aa61059a968ae
45475 F20110109_AABRXX aiken_a_Page_083.pro
af2d34c0d350cb6f56ed14bd81cc6a5c
86513b8d503635e9516b087119d30c8021bbb151
527 F20110109_AABRZA aiken_a_Page_050.txt
6c59e9530a00a6131e181b0e83a00030
b45a6ccda016725d1592cf15431a0c6dd4b5139d
1991 F20110109_AABRYM aiken_a_Page_013.txt
8d20694dc7b160092f29dbe2895075ed
654db8b76d0a91ddfd7968979cc1ff316f6ccea4
42796 F20110109_AABRXY aiken_a_Page_085.pro
b9f2c3d3a33a2844e5fc245c5eb75f3a
1c288e38b81f9d33aa6c99746392a94e659153d4
1667 F20110109_AABRZB aiken_a_Page_051.txt
5c388bfcfc9adc9927931acacfed6644
9f8d126c1fb5761ef13327f96e830050f651960c
1930 F20110109_AABRYN aiken_a_Page_018.txt
49e52dae79046a283fd94ea979103f17
3c66bb6a717d596aff66d431b06e46c8bfad1e7b
42487 F20110109_AABRXZ aiken_a_Page_086.pro
718fc4ab82b2e9f6aedfa6eb810a6a96
a945e83df3e1e149a79d7fe6c62d62fc5626bcab
1907 F20110109_AABRZC aiken_a_Page_056.txt
345b770e9b4c4f32273c245ba6069a3a
152398e1cfe70a97d92188f8a990963a958707b2
1802 F20110109_AABRYO aiken_a_Page_020.txt
be47c662dd4fb1076240aaafdf7135c4
e4eeb65bbd7f757c16498580d6c18144a4a51198
1763 F20110109_AABRZD aiken_a_Page_059.txt
dda91fd3deac03a2031dd1c53b68c92c
32b1019a7f972dbb391becd4eb7c1bc4b2c702de
2040 F20110109_AABRYP aiken_a_Page_023.txt
4b3bb91281e45f3941590132c8ebcfe3
98f8bf0929c804ab4af6508e6ba753193f4b3958
1892 F20110109_AABRZE aiken_a_Page_065.txt
18b17cb71f379402d6cd8b7bd80b4045
721610426a3e350eae07eebbd8cdc4a20e21119d
2045 F20110109_AABRYQ aiken_a_Page_025.txt
89049fdea4ca14cba5a4ccdfa16940a1
6fabdb1924394c23eb61e73cc2ad1223e3a5e8a7
F20110109_AABRZF aiken_a_Page_066.txt
faa84af357626650257943a5268bfa6b
9b933c0de69d2f627e9f2a584be9558ef7f65a66
2072 F20110109_AABRYR aiken_a_Page_026.txt
43b46577e34aebfc542008d7f37e5697
6a48e4eeb8c5ad97d1e42ec433f2f61a06ebf4a4
876 F20110109_AABRZG aiken_a_Page_069.txt
290920dd90593c49da75a8cf8c310830
1538149cd2e8215fcabfa69d17725173691caeb0
1914 F20110109_AABRYS aiken_a_Page_029.txt
7a80c8b565ed4ffd790a5862507b26fa
8ab8381f64ecd0f54a9426b0a44250ecf846c5c9
338 F20110109_AABRZH aiken_a_Page_071.txt
f56954e10506f8a2a396b0f688f879f2
2a3add71de10d226ffab17e4c4489934877eacbb
1964 F20110109_AABRYT aiken_a_Page_030.txt
be861e625bd4c8bdbc416856f5c3831b
47323849ceefd82306004dca7275207b724f3f17
1140 F20110109_AABRCA aiken_a_Page_095.txt
feb8dfac018ace2f74f7953bce714b25
18a4c17fff16a78b282786310f9a31f9b1215572
1886 F20110109_AABRZI aiken_a_Page_076.txt
cb148dac08ee09ed82205b41b74b48ad
4751a8f6f6987cfcd100d268531b092e7d7f7a70
1656 F20110109_AABRYU aiken_a_Page_032.txt
b44d0663582c3b9491ef5092d4b8be42
4ef0cbfb23aa27acda4e71f5e42837ffcb45e6b5
2060 F20110109_AABRZJ aiken_a_Page_077.txt
90db99e82d1ad4f4813950a37618c198
50a482d8d04acf9ec7951d4295b520b34b86b1ff
1743 F20110109_AABRYV aiken_a_Page_036.txt
e4237d1aecc6a787bf9cf72130a7d827
abf5e6bf63df0c1226aca869b4846943922d45a7
6099 F20110109_AABRCB aiken_a_Page_018thm.jpg
7360f5b69ce6cf2bd4e10150a6f0c48c
1dfcb256c6ad06bc4736639739cf875dc76305c1
1804 F20110109_AABRZK aiken_a_Page_080.txt
39631acc84f977f7a87cf467634601a9
63af0e24087016a0bfb7b1c00e39c6cbd1416402
1966 F20110109_AABRYW aiken_a_Page_038.txt
08188e37de593eb35750a6a2cb895a48
1a04a353fb6f2b1cecbb35e201c35fb07fe32a1b
82975 F20110109_AABRCC aiken_a_Page_028.jpg
8d95aea67fbbb37c193f8ba6387868ff
30ac2fc407f63965dae9994dfef5b7993d31e50b
1600 F20110109_AABRZL aiken_a_Page_082.txt
13ab368e743387f9a946e14c315d5183
66a2e4dff3a75d398d71128b5c563a32c7e75f59
1782 F20110109_AABRCD aiken_a_Page_002thm.jpg
0bf3766d6151d8d18ce17a9384bcba02
394c0d8ea1b410e30a6bd5fe8fb6d1bd327b51ad
54010 F20110109_AABRBQ aiken_a_Page_099.pro
2eeca9b998d9fb37ac1547f1a1b48880
d704b306694c71810f3a027161aa04a57de3bea2
482 F20110109_AABRZM aiken_a_Page_087.txt
731237f7b8fdbcaa37d7669ff29b0f2b
55c4b12777119cd458fbe76dbc4a8c7bbe17e0a6
1765 F20110109_AABRYX aiken_a_Page_044.txt
9f549217ef56f18adf54c6893cb7c9ac
5cac3f0c66e16ae72a90502af9f18e09b67cb060
F20110109_AABRCE aiken_a_Page_044.tif
7ed04aef5a412872d2fc277cdf43fc56
6946d3c5d75f95651e86c313d70fa34a040a6a4a
F20110109_AABRBR aiken_a_Page_076.tif
d31e939c3093f12564834d428964f3bf
1b4bc2366eac1fcd6f25f747524e5f815a97cd36
1558 F20110109_AABRZN aiken_a_Page_089.txt
679bae230437a8022f193cd817c32db7
0963bccfdfc24a83bcfa81d016f6a0aaf43f2bcb
1955 F20110109_AABRYY aiken_a_Page_046.txt
40b5256e0d5f00a7ad9f0b35b9762f6b
81165e3c59689ef9afb90faff765403200accb00
43265 F20110109_AABRCF aiken_a_Page_019.jp2
7bf0e056d4582b1c3f454be6e8575ac9
2bdd8e9697b3ce399d2dbcb6f5efd8f3757aea56
47611 F20110109_AABRBS aiken_a_Page_041.jpg
d9e4de97c6c60fb134f246bf428a96b1
3cd60c08f2a230d5f5131eaf65fdc475b0100ec5
F20110109_AABRZO aiken_a_Page_091.txt
9d2c96984b8fc15a3c253a69c22e0607
473f670fa69dc2afa1cf09ac9c8f2dba6931f3c4
F20110109_AABRYZ aiken_a_Page_047.txt
f81ba5e0a516e1bcfe5797ccbe1a9e15
7ce29553dbdc577692d1f50ec6eeb0d9ac3b10ef
19723 F20110109_AABRCG aiken_a_Page_051.QC.jpg
f0f597852a6c7dee23d3152d21e56c53
24f48d56c88036eb6819c1862312d6de55062a4b
106706 F20110109_AABRBT aiken_a_Page_046.jp2
a5cb07f12f9629f64477956d54eceb77
693fa599e6849f53a6afac4b1a5f1abccd91db2e
1405 F20110109_AABRZP aiken_a_Page_093.txt
8a41719da06c729da924c6e62d0a906a
d45294dc08005bc262783cdf53db4eb77743e173
F20110109_AABRCH aiken_a_Page_067.tif
d7d5fdb49edb6cd82a11d82a96a26cb7
c0111692639634cce459ef4678925c1d09962851
121727 F20110109_AABRBU aiken_a_Page_099.jp2
69bb6f740c3f6a3a2716703a58f121d3
25038ca73a9a56175ad3c1cf8e87f0fec1ff97fd
859 F20110109_AABRZQ aiken_a_Page_097.txt
bc5e0686d748dec41def05ab2b18387e
2f6e4ca2393fad2a380b3ce727a344d40b019d52
105139 F20110109_AABRCI aiken_a_Page_056.jp2
a41b27b7d7dfbc633f1016ed62ac3435
e8aeb49b21154a905fd929f77251d3e78da0a627
11121 F20110109_AABRBV aiken_a_Page_096.QC.jpg
4c17467e9365191558ddab1cd191c45f
b4fc21735516ed2a9f176def2ab789535476e964
1968 F20110109_AABRZR aiken_a_Page_098.txt
acbf02fb2911f68f622c00219825c95d
65396c6f853c2eab1256fc34640498e6b6e2eb3f
26311 F20110109_AABRCJ aiken_a_Page_060.QC.jpg
96f5e94235043533272ca06eed00c95a
383eea1192e249df960fe5349f754eb9ace726fd
67307 F20110109_AABRBW aiken_a_Page_004.jpg
fbe2aa33c081863e849c14fb0636add7
9d332fe18db0ae8066c03feb8a8465adebc5f16d
2216 F20110109_AABRZS aiken_a_Page_099.txt
0be9f3036831ebe7131031dc81263b2d
64b6fbb18863ad07e7bd89cf095f9d91fea07f89
26646 F20110109_AABRCK aiken_a_Page_013.QC.jpg
452ce4424e268ea312104de9ad076c84
ebfe4c64f702c0fe36b698b4b11dbce620da0bfe
84068 F20110109_AABRBX aiken_a_Page_060.jpg
a29e0311c6d113799508256e4c784459
0d5e20b3cce7b501c3bccc4b07310199d5becf5d
1573 F20110109_AABRZT aiken_a_Page_100.txt
3bf071d651aeab8a6f431bf50e417d02
f8da311d15f7c32641d87080df7a2ca91982336c
69466 F20110109_AABRDA aiken_a_Page_085.jpg
26126ae4e4a2dea42f1d2f5f20a3a27b
22c6fa3bdd43db1a7e1ae13e5c73fe7c8862d321
24529 F20110109_AABRCL aiken_a_Page_029.QC.jpg
81173eb7cea2475ca6255c164690773b
e1e40acb89f53ebbd0aea2aead4b20562668854a
93577 F20110109_AABRBY aiken_a_Page_099.jpg
b75a837a094cc816da7045f74ebec433
007733c5e21f5de9c740ceab5e3dfb5e1b320b66
5795 F20110109_AABRZU aiken_a_Page_083thm.jpg
24cf0d23e2624f023c3089e78cbda452
72d5b5f6c2af598fe72694ea822b3564f462fa3c
F20110109_AABRDB aiken_a_Page_064.tif
9773dadb386fcf4329ec580802bd8314
96e9c32673a7e577fc08dfd731eb6813458bb8cd
2062 F20110109_AABRCM aiken_a_Page_031.txt
bfa8933a65c7a6383a3917dfa5915476
a46ac9595bf5a2d0f0a0b1b45decef80f30f31d7
41212 F20110109_AABRBZ aiken_a_Page_036.pro
0baa6b03c74a39f2ab19985627d64076
e66293d734bf44fb21f5fbb7b3526806152930cc
1857 F20110109_AABRZV aiken_a_Page_097thm.jpg
a422968e5bbb3ea22717fe6c8f86ddf3
142034648b8d9058e4c226b346c2064724d6cd67
33789 F20110109_AABRCN aiken_a_Page_069.jpg
ba988503f13983d28054c45a56805540
4e460a293c2919ae9fbcca6dac133f45a03c8c19
26812 F20110109_AABRZW aiken_a_Page_099.QC.jpg
5ae45abe263346978aa1cfdb99e8a6b1
36a12e933f96d0612d8c093d3dac8885833ef04b
12193 F20110109_AABRDC aiken_a_Page_050.pro
98988d7a8f9c1f674d46654731b75d81
4723eeba5de35ea64a70795fd6cb3bd53d796e9b
1051968 F20110109_AABRCO aiken_a_Page_003.jp2
bff42ae75652b058ea0ed82af1ec3d12
16184761823d32fcc78f6e6dbff7c2ec368070e2
20016 F20110109_AABRZX aiken_a_Page_082.QC.jpg
35bba2b1f1e207000d1134e39de1eb0e
345235dc9d1e02c88efe8cf6ef1afe7a157ff13f
2023 F20110109_AABRDD aiken_a_Page_022.txt
1e871ba0a25358a3b1ccaac53a3b1afd
2fbf16b6e00d586fafe435cc082a0c8e30d74a3c
34365 F20110109_AABRCP aiken_a_Page_007.pro
7347879567a00e65b96bc2c62fc8e0ac
0b8f76e3835557669d7cd9a0f0b27dfec85d1732
49490 F20110109_AABRDE aiken_a_Page_021.pro
b9cd7ce136cdfe404308ccf8fd1280b6
2cca3ca544d3ed2a9105897e20f4d78b93a26af5
1848 F20110109_AABRCQ aiken_a_Page_045.txt
8c5149d0ebcc0c6038a9018d34f24b26
42360d1bf4b205f338f5e6a9d7331e8e528e17c6
6463 F20110109_AABRZY aiken_a_Page_025thm.jpg
ebc3289f5855f94bc1bff3ee6a3c5e24
9694b6473b4512d46a29934ea4d50a691d470da6
45161 F20110109_AABRDF aiken_a_Page_080.pro
58f469c2dcd3a328f551c546a10cd76f
2440d58ab04ad07a0ce2800ec002134886c2e486
22830 F20110109_AABRCR aiken_a_Page_080.QC.jpg
746b1ec900ed2478d070afdf8aa3f101
be216c6d7d7e39b8af480cbc77e63d11c208ea65
26462 F20110109_AABRZZ aiken_a_Page_066.QC.jpg
df2d7351a17df850b3779832d05ef5c1
44a14fc581e10e76238afc1d128b15ac4782fbf0
29879 F20110109_AABRDG aiken_a_Page_094.pro
0f2eb60dfde03d4d1c87fd1b28c74124
0393f3028923d78c098df128cd98344d75b9c8db
81422 F20110109_AABRCS aiken_a_Page_067.jpg
9e78513dc120e9b23b1e2f1f415e03e2
5248309537d571d851622f508f804253d5bdc0c2
23483 F20110109_AABRDH aiken_a_Page_098.QC.jpg
9b4775d42c2cc513c72962d678659b67
d5534ba04dcf5e1cc51f8f71f8d2303c422f7870
F20110109_AABRCT aiken_a_Page_011.tif
b7a70a3f9f5febab42532dd089a8cfee
7b334c6e8b1c45f20417d2b58d11f73c9165765a
F20110109_AABRDI aiken_a_Page_083.tif
77be149887a87b2da24f194e48e2c76d
e4ac07dc4986865036248807e7b2f802e2767c70
38057 F20110109_AABRCU aiken_a_Page_084.pro
5163632555751ef6eddaa95e95714d7b
01c12532efc1872cc68223f23241e1fa6b94515d
2017 F20110109_AABRDJ aiken_a_Page_049.txt
fb3e87e02d3ec1843927932d90155a74
41f857bf0e3268391125201a654fc1e43ff1c44b
25592 F20110109_AABRCV aiken_a_Page_030.QC.jpg
bcf1205e5d7fb5b443bea3fd754dff0f
384373f70523cdee8d9a7b9fbc2704fefd17cadf
34220 F20110109_AABRDK aiken_a_Page_093.jpg
83f9bd3b1eb63e0304ce0b91a5b6cf00
90755b619ad99199e1b0a5aa580cadb3b5e0e709
78495 F20110109_AABRCW aiken_a_Page_018.jpg
3e2898cf310e24fe79f57fa130ecb1d5
e01bfcc015f5af7a25d17d3e9254a162ad748ffa
114633 F20110109_AABREA aiken_a_Page_063.jp2
d26bdef812f4c530c2050f0f45e577e9
dfed2b3be1e000a7cfccc0d011de377970080861
1747 F20110109_AABRDL aiken_a_Page_068.txt
c0ee40358d8622f5f37cc22a1567bf48
b3f379bc2cb2d0d32af5d1e4811b31c20a169106
26286 F20110109_AABRCX aiken_a_Page_089.pro
2c3ae011fca3bfbf3e8c5e33bdd34e2e
98a3b41f8edcf8f86da278026a33966e2f24e93f
24221 F20110109_AABREB aiken_a_Page_076.QC.jpg
0b92009d9ec13954a263c201928478e9
ec0e3633c50e710f18ce3a22903ab2f0a18393db
38029 F20110109_AABRDM aiken_a_Page_082.pro
71522721b95941d5cb755c3f92c4bf6d
850c3af592bd828f9c5eec9690521101132b692b
F20110109_AABRCY aiken_a_Page_028.txt
0bf5bdadb583ac24e2caa46169ed4488
cccce16872e6900ce655dab428945389b75db538


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0000626/00001

Material Information

Title: Framing analysis of the New York Times and Le Monde following the attacks of September 11
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Creator: Aiken, Allison Irene ( Author, Primary )
Publication Date: 2003
Copyright Date: 2003

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0000626:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0000626/00001

Material Information

Title: Framing analysis of the New York Times and Le Monde following the attacks of September 11
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Creator: Aiken, Allison Irene ( Author, Primary )
Publication Date: 2003
Copyright Date: 2003

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0000626:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












FRAMING ANALYSIS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES AND LE MONDE FOLLOWING
THE ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11















By

ALLISON IRENE AIKEN


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS IN MASS COMMUNICATIONS

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2003















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to first and foremost thank my committee chair, Dr. Kurt Kent, for his

continued support of this thesis the past two years. I would also like to thank Dr. Leonard

Tipton and Dr. Ido Oren for their support. I would additionally like to thank Dr. Julie

Dodd for her continued support over the past two years on this research and my general

well being.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ............. ...............................................................................II

LIST OF TABLES ............. .............................. ....... .. ...... ............ VI

AB STRA C T ... .................... .............................................. ................ V II



CHAPTER



1 IN TR OD U CTION ............................................... .. ......................... ..

W hat Is the R ole of the Press? ............... ... ...................... ...............................
The Decline of International News in the American Press .........................................5
A m erican and French Press ........................................ .......................................8
D e fin itio n s ........................................................... ................ 9
Justification for Study ..................................................... ... .. ............ 10


2 REV IEW O F LITER A TU RE ........................................................................ .....12

F ra m in g ................................................................................................................. 1 2
The Elite Press ......................................................... ....... ...............18
Description of Newspapers Used for this Study ....................................................20
L e M o n d e ....................................................... ................ 2 0
The N ew York Tim es........... ...................................................... ............... 22
S u m m a ry .......................................................................................................2 4
H ypotheses ................................................. 24


3 M E T H O D .............................................................................2 8

C o n ten t A n aly sis ................................................................................................... 2 8
Quantitative Content Analysis ...................... ............... 30
Qualitative Content Analysis ................ ........ .... .........30
Study Materials ......................................................................... ........... ......... .........31
V a ria b le s ....................................................................................................... 3 3









F ra m e s ........................................................................................................... 3 3
S o u rc e s ................................................................3 7
A n a ly sis ..............................................................................3 9
R e lia b ility .............................................................................4 0
V a lid ity ..............................................................................4 1


4 F IN D IN G S ......... .........................................................................................4 3

Brief Overview ..................................................................43
Results of Application of Method ................ ........ .................................... 45
N nature of Sam ple ............. .............................................................................47
R liability A naly sis ................ ..... ... ............................................47
Descriptive Analysis and Hypotheses Results................................. ...............48


5 DISCUSSION ....................................................... ........... ................. 51

R results of A application of M ethod................................................................... ......51
Descriptive Analysis Discussion ......................................................53
Post-hoc analysis ......................................... ... .............. ...... 56
Sum m ary of H ypotheses .................. ..................................... ...............60


6 CONCLUSION..................... ..................64

S u m m ary ......................................................................................................... 6 4
C o n c lu sio n s.....................................................................................................6 7
L im stations ...................................................................................................... ....... 69
F utu re R research .............................................................................................7 1
Implications ...................... .......... ............ .................73


APPENDIX


A C O D IN G PR O TO C O L ......................................................................... .............74

I. Project D description .................. .......................... .... .. ... .. ........ .... 74
II. S am p le ...........................................................7 5
III. Length to be coded ............................ ..... ... ...... .. ... .. ............. 75
IV C oding L og ........................................................75
V Filling in the coding sheets ....................................................... ......... 76







iv










B D A T A ...................................... .................................................... 8 1


LIST O F R EFEREN CE S ..................................................... ................... 90

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E T C H ...................................................................... ..................93




















































v
















LIST OF TABLES

Table p

T able 3.1 V variable definitions ............................ ...................................... ................. .34

Table 4.1 N um ber of articles each day ........................................ ......................... 44

Table 4.2 Fram e usage ................ .................. ........................... .... ..... 44

T able 4.3 Source eliteness............. .......................................................... ...... .... ..... 45

Table 4.4 Source in relation to event ................................................... ..................45

Table B.1 The N ew York Tim es .................................................................... 81

Table B .2 L e M onde .............................................. .. .. .......................85















Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Master of Arts in Mass Communication

FRAMING ANALYSIS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES AND LE MONDE FOLLOWING
THE ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11

By

Allison Irene Aiken

May 2003

Chair: Kurt Kent
Major Department: Journalism and Communications

The terrorist attacks of September 11 shocked the entire world. The media frenzy

that ensued was unlike anything ever witnessed. The present study looks at the first ten

days after the attacks to discover, using framing theory, reporting differences between the

United States and France.

Using The New York Times and Le Monde, the present study content analyzed a

ten-day period of articles about the attacks. Five media frames defined in previous

research were employed as a means of categorization for the articles. In addition to

analyzing the frames used in each article, the present study also analyzed the type of

source and the eliteness of the source used in each article.

There was a significant difference in the way the two newspapers used the five

media frames and elite sources. Le Monde used the economic consequences frame more

significantly than The New York Times did, and The New York Times used the human-









interest frame and conflict frame significantly more than Le Monde used them. Le Monde

also used elite sources significantly more than The New York Times used them.

Additional analysis was done looking at the data in two time periods different

from the period under investigation. The data were looked at for the first two days under

investigation (September 12-13) and for the eight-day period following the immediacy of

the attacks (September 14-21). The two-day analysis showed no significant differences in

the newspapers' use of frames or sources. The eight-day analysis showed stronger

differences in usage of frames and sources than the analysis of the whole ten-day period

showed.















CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

The tragic events of September 11 not only shocked Americans, they shocked the

entire world as well. Media all over the world were suddenly faced with a huge story that

needed daily coverage. The media were faced with the daunting task of quickly providing

audiences with what they wanted and needed to know. As Navasky (2002) put it in the

foreword to Journalism after September 11, "[it] would be a mistake to minimize the

difficulties the media faced covering the uniquely traumatic and unprecedented events of

September 11 and their aftermath" (xiii). He also adds that it would be a mistake not to

recognize the achievements of The New York Times and others that came out of this crisis

mode.

The pressure on the media came not only because these were traumatic and

unprecedented events, but also because they were where hundreds of thousands of people

would be getting their information of what was going on in the world and right around

them. As Navasky (2002) put it, "it's based largely on journalism that we make up our

national mind" (p. xiii). And with that being said, the pressure was on for the press to get

out there and tell the world "what to think about" (Cohen, 1963, p. 13) this international

event.

What Is the Role of the Press?

In this study, the researcher looked at frames used in The New York Times and Le

Monde in news articles about the attacks of September 11, 2001. The study also

observed the types of sources the newspapers used when reporting on the event. These









items were observed for a ten-day period after the event occurred. They were observed

mainly to see if the newspapers remained true to their traditional roles in society during a

time of international crisis. Studies have been done in the past that have become the basis

for communication research showing a definite role of the press in society. But, what has

been the role of The New York Times and Le Monde in the United States and France

respectively?

As Chomsky (1989) argues in Necessary Illusions, a problem prevalent in

democracies since the beginning of democracy persists: "Decision making power over

central areas of life resides in private hands, with large-scale effects throughout the social

order" (p. vii). He continues by arguing that in advanced democratic industrial societies,

this problem is often approached by depriving democratic political structures of

substantive content, while still technically leaving them intact. Chomsky believes

institutions like the media, which channel thought and attitudes within acceptable bounds,

take on a large part of this task. So, would The New York Times and Le Monde do this in

their reporting of the September 11 attacks? Would they deprive their audiences of the

content they wanted, or would they break from Chomsky's mold?

It is difficult to come by just one single answer to this question mainly because of

the differences between the press in these two countries. The United States had been

experiencing a serious cutback in international news coverage. Cunningham (2001)

reports that U.S. newspaper space devoted to international news had dropped from 10

percent in 1971 to a mere 6 percent in 1995. This being said, American newspapers were

now going to have to devote more space to international news than they had in the

previous three decades. Since non-American media systems had not been cutting back









their international coverage as the American systems had, the non-American systems

could have more page space and air time devoted to pieces about the effects of the attacks

felt in other countries than their own if they wanted to. Their space and time could be

devoted to emotional/analytical concepts, while the American media was going to have to

devote more time and space to the traditional who, what, when, and where. In fact,

foreign news sources that were available in America, such as the BBC, experienced

increased audiences. Those seeking to escape what James (2001) called "tunnel vision"

turned ever more to sources like BBC World News and ITN World News for Public

Television (The New York Times, 11/9/01).

In a November 2001 poll by Gallup Europe, 62.9 percent of the French surveyed

used their own national press to keep informed about the events going on in Afghanistan,

Pakistan, and the United States and the impact they were having on the rest of the world.

Only 15.9 percent of those surveyed by the same poll in France were using the press of

other countries. However, 21.4 percent of Germans surveyed were reading the press of

other countries for the same information. The French seemed to be relying on their own

national press to bring them the information they wanted to know. The French press,

perhaps, had a different role to play than that of the press of other European countries.

Le Monde was on the scene in Washington and New York as soon as the attacks

happened. They were on hand and able to report to their readers about the events and

aftermath just as The New York Times'reporters were. Both papers were there to answer

questions being raised in the minds of their readers. Thirty percent of French surveyed by

Gallup Europe in November 2001 were fearful of "imminent terrorist acts," more than in

any other EU country, while 39 percent of Americans polled by CBS and The New York









Times said they were very concerned about an attack where they live (retrieved on April

22, 2002 from http://www.americans-

world.org/digest/global_issues/terrorism_emoResp.cfm). It seemed both papers had an

important job in front of them to fulfill the needs of their audiences, who were fearful

of more attacks.

A 1992 Chang and Lee study found that only when there was a perceived impact

on American security and national interest was an international news story selected for

U.S. daily newspapers. If it takes a threat to national security for the American press to

print international news, then the attacks of September 11 were exactly the type of threat

that was going to demand newspapers print international news. Even though this was an

international event, the American people were going to be demanding information

because it happened on American soil and directly threatened American national security

in a very prominent way. The New York Times would have to send out reporters

immediately to cover the ensuing events since they knew what their audience wanted to

know. But what would Le Monde do? Because of the attacks, they would also have to

send out more reporters to different countries to cover the crisis.

Sending out many reporters to so many different locations across the globe would

cost time and money for these two newspapers. Time and money would have to come

from newsholes and budgets that the media in America had been cutting back. Parks

(2002) argues that most U.S. newspapers would have to commit more space to

international news and hire editors knowledgeable about the world to pull together

packages from wires; TV station would have to give up that crime story in the evening

news to make room for a longer foreign story; and networks would have to commit









correspondents, producers, crews, and time on their main news programs to keep up with

what the American audiences want to read and hear about.

Perhaps, now more than a year after the attacks, it is time to think about what

lesson all this has taught the American media system. In a cjr [formerly known as the

Columbia Journalism Review] article, Andrew Kohut (2002) argues that the attacks and

the ensuing responsibility placed on the media have re-emphasized the importance of the

public to the media. He says it shows that the "public's need to know trumps everything

else" (pg. 54).

The Decline of International News in the American Press

This unexpected and huge demand for information posed a large challenge for

newspapers, especially in America, because over time the amount of international news

in American newspapers had begun to decline. Newspaper studies showed that

international news coverage had dropped significantly in the past two decades

(Cunningham, 2001). Parks (2002) discusses a 2001 Newspaper Advertising Bureau

study that showed coverage of international news in newspapers in America before

September 11 was only at 2 percent, which was down from 10 percent in 1971. With the

closing of international bureaus, the newsholes in newspapers and magazines began

simply to be filled with more domestic and entertainment news. Therefore, the American

people were beginning to know less about international events and developments than

they had in previous years. Cunningham refers to Nina Burleigh, a former war

correspondent for Time, commenting that "the foreign news blackout means that the rest

of the world knows far more about America than we know about ourselves" (p. 110).

Some argue that this decline in international news had created a new isolationism

within the United States. Parks (2002) report that Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster,









told a 1997 conference on the issue that the media only cover instability abroad "and

have made international involvement look very undesirable" (p. 56). Parks also report on

a Gallup poll that found those who described themselves as "hardly interested" in

international affairs went from 3 percent to 22 percent between the 1990 and 1998 studies

by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations. It seems that after the Cold War ended, the

United States felt safe within its borders.

However, after the attacks, for papers to simply report on the "what" was not

enough for the public to truly understand what was happening, nor was it what the public

seemed to be saying it wanted. In a September 27-28, 2001, Newsweek poll, 15 percent of

those surveyed felt like their life would never return to normal (retrieved on January 3,

2003 from http://people-press.org/reports/print.php3?PageID=22). The public needed and

wanted to know more about the "why." Reporters and editors were faced with the

daunting challenge of filling in these gaps for their readers in a very quick manner.

Papers had to get reporters to the scenes of the events quickly and keep up with the up-to-

the-minute changes the U.S. government was making. As Zeiler and Allan (2002) put it

in the introduction to Journalism after September 11, throughuh it all, they scrambled to

provide breaking information, offset panic, and make sense of events that had devastated

most existing interpretive schema" (p. 3).

This coverage was not going to be any ordinary international news coverage for

the press. It would entail more than simply going to the White House for daily briefings

from the press secretary. It would entail hard news gathered from primary sources in a

very timely manner because audiences were looking for reasons and explanations to









questions that they had never had before. Parks (2002) argues that many American news

organizations began to play "catch-up" (p. 52).

But why was the American press playing catch-up? Parks (2002) suggests the

threat of an Islamic fundamentalist attack had been clear for years with the World Trade

Center attacks in 1993, Air Force housing in Saudi Arabia attacks in 1996, 1998 U.S.

embassy attacks in Kenya and Tanzania, and U.S.S. Cole attack in 2000. Shouldn't the

American people already have known about the "who" of these attacks? Parks suggests

the answer is "not really" because the previous attacks were only covered episodically

and had little investigative and followup reporting. Since there was little and mostly thin

reporting on the previous terrorist attacks, the "who" of the September 11 attacks was

quite unknown to an American audience.

Had the American media been failing their audience? Parks (2002) reports that

Bill Wheatley, vice president of NBC News, was self-critical about the situation. "We all

have done a good job since September 11," Wheatley says, "but I and a lot of others wish

we had done more to help the public understand the intensity of feelings, the anger,

among the radical Islamic fundamentalists" (p. 53). Parks also reports that Edward Seton,

former president of the American Society of Newspaper Editors, said there is no question

that they failed their readers.

Parks (2002) argues that the media failed their audiences by not acknowledging

that, even before the attacks, the American people saw the threat of global terrorism as

the country's greatest concern. Parks (2002) mentions polls that reported in the late 1990s

that American people thought the 21st century would be even bloodier than the 20th and

that protecting the United States from foreign terrorist attacks should be a top priority.









"Simply put, most news organizations failed to cover what a substantial number of their

readers and viewers believed was vitally important the danger posed to the United

States by global terrorism" (p. 53).

American and French Press

If the American media had been failing the public in covering international news

for at least a decade, how different would the American newspaper coverage of the

attacks be from the French newspaper coverage? Would they not report on the same exact

issues since this was actually an "attack on the West?" How would these two seemingly

different countries portray, or frame, the same event to their newspaper readers?

It is without question that each world power has at least one "elite" newspaper

that stands out from the rest. According to Pool (1970), these newspapers are "usually

semiofficial, always intimate with the government ... read by public officials, journalists,

scholars, and business leaders" (p. 62). Pool categorizes Le Monde as "semiofficial." He

acknowledges that The New York Times often doesn't follow the line of the government,

yet says it still retains some of the characteristics of semiofficial newspapers. Concerning

Le Monde, Salinger (1982) notes that "[t]he role of General de Gaulle in the founding of

the newspaper has not been without effect over the years in the treatment of the news"

(pp. 82-83). The differences between The New York Times and Le Monde may not be

blatantly obvious, but Salinger makes the point:

For an American reader, Le Monde (and for that matter the rest of the French press)
differs from what one is accustomed to reading in the written media in the United
States. American newspapers make an effort, mostly successful, to separate opinion
and information. Opinion is labeled as such, often confined to special pages of the
newspaper.... The rest of the newspaper is devoted to information. ... American
newspapers stress pure information. (p. 83)









The French press is more interested in analyzing the news, while the American

press is more interested in objectively presenting the news. But articles on the attacks

were not the typical news story for either press system, so would the attacks produce

typical analytical pieces from the French and typical objective news from the Americans?

While the French press has been noted for being a "government feeler" or an "unofficial

expression of policy" (Pool 1970, pp. 65-66), would the attacks create a similar air in the

American press system? This study attempts to discern the differences in the use of

frames in The New York Times and Le Monde in the reporting after the attacks of

September 11.

Definitions

The following terms are used within the present study. The explanations that follow

come from a variety of sources.

Bureau "A news office away from the main newsroom of a newspaper or wire

service" (Harrigan, p. 407).

Newshole "Space left for news and editorial matter after ads have been placed on

pages" (Baskette et al., p. 435).

Frame The parameters within which an author sets or "frames" a story. For the

purposes of the present study, there are five main frames that newspaper reporters use

when writing stories: conflict, attribution of responsibility, morality, economic

consequences, and human interest (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000).

Elite newspaper A newspaper aimed at a specific elite audience, which usually

is better educated and has a greater interest in public affairs than the readers of the

popular press (Merrill, 1968).









News story An article that is about a recent event that has been designated as

news by the editorial staff. Usually, a news story contains mostly objective facts and

figures.

Editorial ... [T]he unsigned, staff-written statement that runs on the editorial

page, stating the newspaper's official position on issues" (Harrigan, 1993, p. 411).

Column "A piece of writing ... that strongly shows the writer's opinion or

personal style" (Harrigan, 1997, p. 408).

Broadsheet "Term used to describe a full-sized newspaper page as opposed to a

tabloid" (Burkette et al (Eds.), 1997, p. 427).

Source "A person or document that provides information for a story" (Harrigan,

1993 p. 422).

Justification for Study

This study will look at the differences between the elite press of the United States

and of France with respect to their traditional roles in society. More specifically, the

study will investigate the difference between two elite newspapers in regards to the use of

media frames used when reporting soon after the attacks of September 11. The study will

look at the elite press of these two countries to content analyze the press coverage of the

September 11 attacks on the United States. The results of the study will add to the general

body of knowledge about the press system within the two countries. The comparisons and

contrasts made will help researchers understand the press systems and how they operate

in crisis situations. The coverage of the attacks has been used for the study to help put the

comparisons and contrasts on the same level, and the event was chosen because it was an

event that had international effects; therefore international newspapers would cover it.

Using the same event to do the research also helps to keep the results balanced.









The study remains balanced in the sense that the event being reported on was a

global event having global consequences. Even though the attacks were only in one

country, the entire globe was affected economically, politically, emotionally, religiously,

and in countless other ways. The events continue to have a global impact even today, one

and a half years later. In France, a new Muslim Council has been formed in hopes of

creating better relations between the country's five million Muslims and the French

government. In the United States, a new Department of Homeland Security has been

formed. These are just two examples of ways each country in the study continues to be

affected by the attacks.














CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Newspaper analysis is nothing new to the field of social science. Social scientists

have come up with varying ways of doing this analysis. In the 1950s, Erving Goffman

elaborated the concept of framing as a way to study interactions. Since then, framing has

been used in a number of studies on newspapers, and more generally media, coverage of

events in the news.

This particular study deals with news articles on the terrorist attacks of September

11. This study does not include analysis of any photos, or illustrations regarding the

event. These types of information were not analyzed because the purpose of the present

study was to analyze only text printed on the attacks.

Framing

How a reporter approaches an event and puts it into words has become commonly

referred to as how the reporter has "framed" the story. Framing has become increasingly

important in mass communication research. Goffman (1974) defines framing as a way of

organization that will govern (social) events, and it has often been linked together with

agendasetting in the theoretical world of communication studies. Tuchman (1978)

suggests that "mass media actively set the frames of reference that readers or viewers use

to interpret and discuss public events" (p. xi). In other words, instead of telling readers

what to think about as agenda setting does, frames go a step further and tell readers how,

or in what terms, to think about the issue. A frame gives a reader a specific way in which

to look at a reality taken from many different ways in which to look at that same reality.









Over the years of research, two concepts of framing can be identified: media

frames and individual frames. Kinder and Sanders (1990) suggest that media frames are

rooted in political discourse and individual frames are structures made within the mind.

Gamson and Modigliani (1987) define a media frame as "a central organizing idea or

story line that provides meaning to an unfolding strip of events ... the essence of the

issue" (p. 143).

Entman (1993) says frames essentially involve selection and salience. In other

words:

[T]o frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more
salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem
definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment
recommendation for the item described. (p. 52)

He adds that frames diagnose, evaluate, and prescribe an idea or concept. With

respect to these functions, Entman (1993) says frames define problems by deciding who

is doing what with what causes, usually measured in terms of cultural norms. They also

diagnose the cause of these defined problems, make moral judgments about the causal

agents of these problems, and suggest remedies to these problems. Frames can be

presented in a single sentence or throughout an entire text, and they may not include all

of the aforementioned functions.

Frames also have at least four locations in the communication process, according

to Entman (1993). The communicators make framing judgments, whether conscious or

unconscious, when deciding what to say. The text has frames that are emphasized or de-

emphasized by the presence or absence of certain words, phrases, images, and sources.

The receivers' thinking and/or conclusions may or may not reflect the frames in the text

and the communicator's intention. Additionally, culture is the stock of commonly used









frames. "Framing in all four locations includes similar functions: selection and

highlighting, and use of the highlighted elements to construct an argument about

problems and their causation, evaluation, and/or solution" (p. 53).

But the question remains: How do frames work? Entman (1993) argues they

elevate some bit of information's salience. He defines salience as "making a piece of

information more noticeable, meaningful, or memorable to audiences" (p. 53). Therefore,

when the salience of an issue is increased in a certain manner, it increases the probability

that the audience will remember the issue in that certain way. Entman argues that even a

small appearance of a frame can be important if it works with the receiver's pre-existing

belief systems. Even the choice of words is important when relating to frames. Kahneman

and Tversky (1984) experimented with word usage in a survey and found that frames

determine whether most people notice and how they understand and remember a

problem, as well as how they evaluate and choose to act in regards to that problem. They

also found that the exclusion of other ideas or frames was just as significant as inclusion

of ideas or frames. The frame used gives meaning to the event or issue being reported on.

It's the giving of meaning to the event that has been turned into the five major

media frames looked at in research: conflict, human interest, economic consequences,

morality, responsibility. Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) suggest "a reliable set of

content analytic indicators is necessary for studying developments in the news over time

and similarities and differences in the ways in which politics and other topics of national

and international importance are framed in the news in different countries" (p. 94). In

other words, these five categories are important because they help researchers study

communication processes over time in a comparable fashion.









Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) also mention that other research and literature

dealing with content analysis of the nature of the news in the United States and Europe

has confirmed that the conflict and attribution of responsibility frames were most

commonly used, which also adds to the ability to compare communication across national

boundaries. The ability to compare across national boundaries also permits the present

study to use this deductive approach of coding articles into one particular frame category

using the five aforementioned frames. A brief explanation of them follows.

The conflict frame "emphasizes conflict between individuals, groups, or

institutions as a means of capturing audience interest" (p. 95). The human-interest frame

emphasizes the human side of a story in an "effort to personalize the news.., in order to

retain audience interest" (p. 96). The economic consequences frame puts the issue in

terms of the future economic consequences the event will have on groups and/or

individuals. The morality frame "puts the event ... in the context of religious tenets or

moral prescriptions" (p. 96). Finally, the attribution of responsibility frame tells the story

in terms of who or what was responsible for the issue.

This division into five categories of frames has helped communication researchers

do testable and re-testable research. Since the Shoemaker and Reese (1996) statement

that "news is a socially created product, not a reflection of an objective reality" (p. 21),

we have agreed that there is some subjectivity in the news. Norris (1995) argues that

journalists often work within news frames to simplify, prioritize, and structure the flow of

their stories. Entman (1991) argues that these routines journalist go through when

producing their product create the frames from which the public draws its opinion on

social or political movements of the day; hence, the power of the news frame. Entman









even goes as far as saying that news organizations shape their reports to get positive

reactions from their publics, and these anticipated reactions affect political elites, who are

the main "sponsors" of the news frames. The only difference comes when the news event

is something "breaking" and new. Then, the journalists frame the issues on their own.

When something is breaking and new, journalists also use their elite sources "to make

frame-confirming data more salient in the news text and to de-emphasize contradictory

data" (Entman 1991, p. 8).

It's because these frames appear to be "natural" that they are often difficult to

detect. Entman (1991) goes on to say that "frames reside in the specific properties of the

news narrative that encourage those perceiving and thinking about events to develop

particular understandings of them" (p. 7). The understanding that the public has of these

frames is implemented in their minds through the continued use of the frame. Entman

argues that through the repeating and reinforcing of words that are in reference to some

ideas and not others, "frames work to make some ideas more salient in the text, others

less so and others entirely invisible" (p. 7). This reinforcement of the frame makes the

idea easily identified, understood, and remembered in the minds of the public. But, it's

not important that everyone identify, understand, or remember the story in the same way,

it's only important that a significant majority do so, according to Entman. And media

professionals can enlarge a frame so much that it penetrates the consciousness of the

mass public, or they can shrink the frame so that the public is only minimally aware of

the issue or event. News frames are embodied in "key words, metaphors, concepts,

symbols, and visual images emphasized in a news narrative;" (p. 7) therefore, it's









important to note that the news media can play a powerful role in determining the success

of failure of certain social and political movements, such as the "War on Terrorism."

However, as Entman (1993) states, "whatever the specific use, the concept of

framing consistently offers a way to describe the power of a communicating text" (p. 51).

This power is important to remember when researching political subject matter, such as

the "War on Terrorism." Entman says this power of the text is important because frames

call attention to certain aspects of reality and also obscure certain aspects of reality.

Therefore, he argues, political elites fight over the use of certain frames with each other

and with journalists. In other words, the frame in a news text reflects the power that

dominated the fight. In the same vein, Gameson (1992) argues that a frame can have

social power when used with a widely accepted term, so that to not use that term is to risk

losing target audiences. For example, the American press has picked up on the term "War

on Terrorism." If journalists stopped using that term to describe activities of American

troops in Afghanistan, they might lose some readers because those readers are only

interested in wars and/or terrorism or because some readers might consider the use of

another term as being anti-American.

The five frames defined by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) can be loosely

related to the idea of news values, which are taught to students of j journalism. According

to Mencher (2000), at least three-fourths of all news stories fall into one of the following

categories of news values: conflict; timeliness; impact, consequences, importance;

proximity to readers; the unusual nature of the event; and currency or "the sudden interest

people have in an ongoing situation" (p. 68). When reporters choose a subject for an

article, they usually are concerned with whether the topic has one of these values. The









five frames defined by Semetko and Valkenburg can help reporters to decide on a way in

which to present their chosen topic that will appeal to their readers. For example, if a

reporter decides the news event has the news value of impact (news value), then they may

decide to frame their article in terms of the economic consequences (frame) of the news

event. Additionally, if the reporter decides the news value of the event is the conflict it is

causing (news value), the reporter may decide to frame the article in terms of the conflict

going on (frame). Similarly, if the reporter determines that the news event has the news

value of being unusual in nature, then the reporter may decide to frame the article in

terms of human interest (frame). There is no real match for the news values of timeliness,

proximity, and currency. And there is no real match for the frames of attribution of

responsibility or morality. The present study will look to find which of the five frames are

used most often.

The Elite Press

All around the world, in every country, some aspect of the press has emerged into

what is now called the "elite press," newspapers read by the elites of their countries and

by the elites of other countries as well. Merrill (1968) suggests that these elite

newspapers express a "significant segment of international elite opinion" (p. 11). This

elite press is aimed at a specific elite audience, which usually is better educated and has a

greater interest in public affairs than do the readers of the popular press. "Through the

elite press is disseminated either the thoughtful, pluralistic, and sophisticated dialogue of

a free society, or the necessary social and political guidance of the closed society" (p. 11).

Therefore, Merrill (1968) puts the world elite press into two main categories: the free

press of an open society, and the restricted or managed press of a closed society. This

study deals only with the former.









The elite press is referred to by different names in different parts of the world, but

researchers often use the elite press, by whatever name, for the purpose of media study.

Merrill (1968) says these papers "open minds and stimulate discussion and intelligent

reflection" (p. 16). Perhaps it is for this reason, and that these elite newspapers impact

government policy or are a reflection of that policy, that these newspapers are used often

in studies. Merrill also makes the distinction between a quality newspaper and a prestige

newspaper. The difference lies in the prestige papers being what Merrill calls "kept

organs" of the state, while a quality paper is a "courageous, news-views-oriented journal,

published in an open society" (p. 15).

The present study concerns two quality papers, The New York Times of the United

States and Le Monde of France. Schramm (1959) differentiates between these two elite

papers, calling Le Monde an "analytical" newspaper and The New York Times a "news-

oriented" newspaper (p. 5). Merrill (1968) suggests taking these differences into

consideration when comparing or studying the two, but he also adds, "regardless of the

differences among the elite newspapers, they are all serious, concerned, intelligent, and

articulate" (p. 13).

In context with the present study, it's important to note one way that Merrill

(1968) describes the elite, quality press:

These are the papers whether they be dailies or weeklies, specialized or general,
large or small that offer hope to the world. They are the reasonable journals,
freely and courageously speaking out calmly above the din of party politics and
nationalistic drum-beating. They are urging peoples to work together for the good
of all, to consider all sides of complex issues, to refrain from emotional decisions,
to cherish that which has proved good and discard that which has been detrimental,
to consider seriously the basic issues and problems that confront mankind. (p. 16)









Description of Newspapers Used for this Study

In studies of the media of countries, researchers often use the same media from

study to study. In studies of U.S. broadcast media, the three major broadcasters are

almost always used (CBS, NBC, ABC). The same is true of studies of the print media,

with The New York Times being used often. The present study is no exception. The

researcher has chosen for study one elite newspaper from the United States and one from

France The New York Times and Le Monde.

Le Monde

The newspaper began in 1944 after the Nazi occupation of Paris ended. The

government under Charles de Gaulle called for a newspaper that would be respected at

home and abroad. It was built on the back of the prewar newspaper Le Temps, which was

considered one of Europe's best newspapers before World War II. It only took about a

year, according to Merrill (1968), for Le Monde to gain an international reputation and

circulation for an "intelligent, well-educated, and liberal audience" (p. 191).

There had been criticism about the loss of culture in France. The debate, as

discussed in Silverman's (1999) Facing Postmodernity, peaked just after World War II.

This debate revolved around:

the decline of a notion of culture founded on the intellect, solitary reflection,
meaning and a concept of 1'esprit and [on the other hand] the emergence of an anti-
intellectualist version of culture founded on an easy hedonism and instant
gratification of the senses; the elevation of mass and popular culture forms
(television, rock music, fashion, and so on) to the same status as classical culture;
the connivance of education in this debasement, or "dumbing down", of culture so
that the pedagogic, social and national function of the school ... is jettisoned in
favour of an approach which simply indulges the individualistic whims and desires
of young people .... (pp. 98-99)









It is in response to this debate that Le Monde began and continues to operate. The

paper was founded on the ideas of intellectualism, and it continues to operate on the basis

of analysis and objectivity in the sense of basing stories on empirical evidence.

The analysis is what sets Le Monde apart from many other Western elite

newspapers. Merrill (1968) mentions that while the straight news reports may be short,

the background and interpretation "wander through columns and columns of small type"

(p. 188). Merrill goes on to add, "Le Monde ... has an uncanny ability to foresee

developments, to predict, and to offer reasons, often days or weeks before headlines burst

out with news stories" (p. 188).

However, similar to what has happened to the media in the United States,

Silverman (1999) argues, the media and state of France have given up on trying to mold

French citizens according to a national ideal of homogeneity and high culture. Instead, he

writes, they are both pushed on by demand and consumer satisfaction. To steer clear of

being pushed in the direction bending to the demands of consumer satisfaction, Le Monde

has never affixed itself to one particular party or another. As Merrill (1968) states,

"giving a political label to Le Monde is made more difficult by the great diversity of

opinions and tendencies of the paper's collaborators or contributors" (p. 192). In general,

though, Le Monde is considered liberal, left-of-center, and internationalist, often being

recognized for its coverage and background reporting of international issues. It is also a

pacifist paper, calling for rational discussion and arbitration.

Le Monde keeps this non-label label by using a mix of news and editorial-style

writing in the newspaper. According to Salinger (1982), "Journalists (in France) are









encouraged to mix information and opinion, and those who do not have a point of view

are considered dull or unreadable" (p. 84).

It is without a doubt that Le Monde is valuable to the world. Perhaps it is best

stated as Merrill (1968) says one French newsweekly put it, "Le Monde ... represents]

today one of the last lighthouses that light for France the road of intellectual courage,

sternness of spirit and of political morality" (p. 195).

In October 2001, Le Monde voted to go public, according to the economic

newspaper The Daily Deal. The initial public offering of 20 to 25 percent of the company

was planned to aid editor-director Jean-Marie Colombani with his plans to enlarge the

main paper and create stakes in provincial papers. Colombani is credited with bringing

the paper back to life after its decline in the early 1990s. He helped restore circulation to

more than 500,000, and he helped Le Monde turn a profit for the first time in four years.

The paper's physical size is somewhat similar to that of a tabloid. It is 13 by 20

inches in size, and the front pages have few pictures larger than 2.5 inches in width. The

inside is mostly text, with sparse graphics and photos. Often, the main image on the front

page is an editorial cartoon printed in full color.

The New York Times

Started in September 1851, the New York Daily Times was published for a city of

half a million. It was a broadsheet four-page newspaper and sold for one cent a copy.

Henry Raymond was the editor, and he was determined to make the paper appeal to the

highly intelligent, who might be reading Horace Greeley's Tribune. But the paper added

something more than just a moral, conservative side to stories; the paper was more of a

nei' %-paper, presenting the reader a well-balanced and heavy diet of news especially

foreign news" (Merrill 1968, p. 270).









In the late 1800s, the paper was falling into decline. It wasn't until Adolph Ochs

came from the Tennessee hills, bringing with him "intuitive business sense, faith, and

imagination," (Merrill 1968, p. 270) that the paper began to rebound. Ochs coined and

put on the front page the famous slogan, "All the News That's Fit to Print." In 1898, he

cut the price of the paper back to one cent from the three cents it had been. Within three

years, the paper was back and had a circulation of 102,000.

Now, with a circulation of more than 1 million, according to the U.S. newspaper

trade journal Editor & Publisher, The New York Times is the United States' third highest

circulation paper in the country. According to the Web site http://www.infoplease.com,

the Times is also the world's 42nd highest circulation newspaper. Merrill (1968) claims

that "one can always expect to find a copy of the Times in leading libraries and

governmental offices throughout the world" (p. 263). He continues by stating that the

newspaper is more than a national paper; it has become an international one.

When comparing the Times to other elite world papers, Merrill (1968) argues, "it

is not as careful in typography as dailies such as Pravda ... not as tediously thorough in

certain stories or as well-documented as Le Monde ... but it goes further in combining the

worthy characteristics of all these great papers than any other single daily in the world"

(p. 264). In addition, the Times' international reporting has been considered one of its

strongest areas. In the 1920s, Ochs determined to make the Times'foreign coverage the

best in the world, and his many successors have carried this dream with them.

As with Le Monde, many find it hard to categorize the Times. Merrill (1968) says

it actually defies classification. "It is a kind of composite of all newspapers, aiming to

some degree at all audiences, except, perhaps, those seeking the lurid and sensational









journalism sought by readers of such papers as New York's Daily News ... (p. 266).

One thing that can be said for sure, according to Merrill (1968), is that the paper is

thorough, and this characteristic warrants the label "The Paper of Record" that it is so

often given.

Summary

Using the concept of framing, this study will attempt to decipher what, if any,

differences separate the elite press of the United States and France. The study will look

specifically at frames used and sources used. Results are expected to show a variety of

differences and similarities that should further the understanding of the press systems of

the United States and France.

Hypotheses

This study will look at the frames used to present the news of the September 11

terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon. The study will also look at

the use of sources in articles.

The first variable will be frames. Comparing the use of frames between the two

papers will allow for study of the differences between the two papers and show

reflections of national culture portrayed within the newspapers.

The second variable will be source. Comparing sources between the two papers

will allow for further examination into the differences between these papers, perhaps

related to the newspapers' relationship with and to the national government. Sources will

be looked at in terms of whether or not they are elite or non-elite and what their

relationship is in relation to the event.









The following hypotheses will be tested based on the literature review:

H1) The attribution of responsibility frame will be used more in The New York

Times.

As the September 11 attacks happened in the United States, and more specifically

in New York, the Times will be more likely to report on who or what was responsible for

the attacks. The readers of Le Monde will not feel the need to constantly be reminded

who or what was responsible.

H2) The human-interest frame will also be used more frequently in The New York

Times.

Because so many of the victims of the attacks were from New York, the human-

interest frame will be more prevalent in the Times. The readers of The New York Times

will want to be able to put actual names and faces with the victims, whereas the French

readers will not be as concerned with names and faces.

H3) The morality frame will be used more often in Le Monde.

Because the French media typically seems less concerned with the traditional

American who, what, when, where, and why, the French press will have more leeway

with analyzing the morality of the case. In addition to this, the Times will not have had

time to analyze a moral aspect of the attacks in the time frame being studied. They would

have to wait until all the "who, what, when, where, and why" questions had been

answered for their audience before they could move on to analyzing, and 10 days is just

not enough time for those questions to be completely answered. Additionally, according

to Salinger (1982), "reporters for Le Monde have a tendency to moralize ... (p. 84).

H4) The economic consequences frame will also be used more often in Le Monde.









Similarly to H4, the French press will have been able to devote more time to

thinking about and analyzing the economic consequences of the attacks because they did

not have to spend as much time on the human-interest side.

H5) The New York Times will have more articles devoted to the conflict frame.

Because American newspapers were being forced to spend a great deal of time

and space on getting their readers up to date on who and what was involved in the

attacks, they would have to entice their readers in to the huge number of articles printed

by using the conflict frame. The newspapers will continue with the conflict frame to keep

their readers' attention. The Times was inundated with articles on the event, so to keep

readers' attention, the newspaper will use conflict as a point of entry into each article for

the readers.

H6a) Le Monde will have a higher number of articles sourced by governmental

officials, whether French, American, or international officials.

H6b) Le Monde will have a higher number or articles sourced by elites than The

New York Times.

Herman and Chomsky's (1998) third filter argues that the media rely on

government experts. Their third filter also argues that since the media claim to be

objective, they need material that can be made to seem accurate. Yet, Herman and

Chomsky argue that another reason for governmental sources being used so often is

because they keep costs down since little investigating needs to be done. Gans (1979)

adds that news sources often represent the hierarchy of society, and as Le Monde is more

clearly for the elite of France than the Times is for the elite of the United States, it will

have more "elite" sources in its articles.






27


Merrill (1968) calls Le Monde "the most unremorselessly intellectual of the

world's elite newspapers" (p. 187). He adds, "Le Monde likes to keep its pages,

headlines, and type small and its ideas large" (p. 187). Concentrating on world news and

commentary, Le Monde supplements the basic details of their stories with "weighty

political and economical analysis" (p. 187). To hold that weight, this political and

economic analysis needs to be sourced by governmental source.














CHAPTER 3
METHOD

This study used content analysis as a means of data collection. Content analysis is

a research method that uses "a set of procedures to make valid inferences from text"

(Weber 1985, p. 9). These inferences are about the message itself, the sender of the

message, or the audience of the message. The present study compares the sender of the

messages, newspapers, and the messages they sent. As Budd et al (1967) suggest,

communicators respond and handle their messages about news events in different ways.

Some may handle the reporting of a news event by reporting on it daily on the front page

of the newspaper. Others may only report on the news event once and place the article on

page three. Some may present the news on the event with color photographs or graphics,

while others may not. Some produce long messages, some short messages, and some

don't produce at all. There is a growing need to analyze these messages and to examine

the factors in the environment in which these messages were created, and content analysis

has become an effective research tool for doing so.

Content Analysis

There are many purposes for content analysis research. Pool et al (1970) argue

content analysis provides society with a "mirror to itself and a way of observing the

external environment in which it lives" (p. xi). Weber (1985) notes reasons for using

content analysis, including disclosing international differences in communication content,

identifying the intentions and other characteristics of the communicator, detecting the









existence of propaganda, and describing trends in communication content. The present

study is concerned with the first use listed.

Weber (1985) also notes that an important use of content analysis is the

"generation of cultural indicators that point to the state of beliefs, values, ideologies, or

other culture systems" (p. 10). Additionally, the present research probes how the

concerns of one society differ from those of another.

Weber (1985) also lists several advantages to content analysis. Some are relevant

to the present study: Communication is the central form of social interaction, and content

analysis works directly with the transcripts of human communications; the best content

analysis studies use both quantitative and qualitative measures; therefore, content

analysis can use what is usually thought of as antithetical modes of analysis; compared

with other forms of research, content analysis usually yields unobtrusive measures that

neither the sender of the message nor the receiver of the message know are being

measured, therefore leaving little room for obtrusiveness in the measurements.

Additionally, Kerlinger (1964) calls content analysis "a method of observation [that]

takes the communications that people have produced and asks questions of the

communications" (p. 544). This format usually allows the researcher to work without fear

that the attention will bias the communicator.

A central purpose of content analysis is the classifying of many words into

smaller groups or categories. That is what the present study set out to do. Weber (1985)

contends that for the investigator to make valid inferences from the text, it is important

for the classification procedure used to be reliable in terms of being consistent, but there

is no one "right way" to do content analysis.









The complicated part to content analysis, according to Weber (1985), comes after

the job is done. The finished product raises many questions often found in other forms of

research: What do the results mean? Are there competing interpretations? How do we

decide whether the interpretation is in some sense correct? Unfortunately, there are no

authoritative answers to these questions.

Quantitative Content Analysis

The main objective of the present study was to use quantitative data gained from a

content analysis of two newspapers to discover if stereotypical national press patterns

remain true in the reporting of the attacks of September 11. Using statistical analysis,

quantitative analysis allows researchers to reduce huge amounts of data into a

comprehensible form and make inferences from the data. Quantitative content analysis is

defined by Babbie (2001) as a "numerical representation and manipulation of

observations for the purpose of describing and explaining the phenomena that those

observations reflect" (p. G8).

The present study coded articles in a ten-day time frame from The New York

Times and Le Monde according to certain variables. Those variables were frames, source

in relation to event, and use of elite or non-elite sources. This study took these coded

observations and manipulated them so as to be able to explain certain characteristics of

what was reported in the two newspapers during the ten-day period.

Qualitative Content Analysis

The present study attempted qualitative research on the same topic. Using the

basic coding results taken from this study, the researcher created qualitative

measurements to use in further research. Based on the five frames discussed below, the

researcher attempted to create new frames for use when coding articles reporting on an









international crisis such as the attacks of September 11. These new frames could be

termed "crisis frames."

Qualitative research, according to Babbie (2001), involves[] a continuing

interplay between data collection and theory" (p. 359). Qualitative research helps

confirm relationships among concepts. For example, in the present study, qualitative

research could confirm, perhaps, that the French press is more opinionated than the

American press. While the number of opinion pieces can be measured with quantitative

analysis, subtleties of the type or strength of the opinions can't be measured as readily

with quantitative analysis. The coding of new frames, arising from qualitative research,

would help uncover opinions that appear repeatedly within the present study. According

to Babbie, ... the aim of data analysis is the discovery of patterns among the data ..."

(p. 365), and the present study will attempt to discover new patterns.

Study Materials

The New York Times and Le Monde were chosen for study because they represent

the most prestigious newspapers in the United States and France. The articles selected for

analysis begin the day after the attacks and end ten days afterward, when President Bush

declared in his address to a joint meeting of Congress on September 21, "every region

now has a decision to make. Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From

this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded

by the United States as a hostile regime" (The New York Times, 9/21/01).

The study looked at a census of articles printed in Le Monde that dealt directly

with the attacks, but it looked only at a sample of all articles from The New York Times

about the attacks during this time frame because of the sheer amount published in the

Times regarding the attacks. As Weber (1985) suggests, sampling is used for the sake of









economy. Only articles directly relating to the attacks were analyzed, and only text

material were analyzed. No photographs, editorial cartoons, drawings, or graphs were

used.

Both papers have online databases available through Lexis/Nexis. After an initial

search in both papers, a secondary search was done to narrow down the articles for study.

The initial search terms used were "attaque" and "11 septembre" for Le Monde and

"attack" and "terror*" for The New York Times. The with "terror" was used in hopes of

finding all derivatives of the word, i.e. terrorism, terrorist, etc. These terms produced 68

and 242 articles respectively. After a thorough scanning, or reading of the headlines, of

those initial articles retrieved, a second search was done using "attentat" (bomb attack)

and "11 septembre" for Le Monde and "attack" and "terrorism" for The New York Times.

The secondary search produced 242 and 939 articles respectively, a much more thorough

census of articles printed regarding the attacks. For Le Monde, all but two articles that

were retrieved in the initial search were in the secondary search, and all but six of The

New York Times articles that were retrieved in the initial search were in the secondary

search. After a thorough scanning of those secondary articles retrieved and a deleting of

articles not directly related to the attacks, photos, and other non-related material, the total

number of articles was 176 for Le Monde and 846 for The New York Times.

Each article was regarded as the unit of analysis with the variables in each unit

being the newspaper, how each newspaper framed the events (conflict, attribution of

responsibility, morality, human interest, or economic consequences) and the types of

sources that were used.









While they did contain text, the photo stories, maps, graphs, editorial cartoons,

and charts that may have appeared were not coded because the text was only reporting on

the photos, maps, graphs, cartoons, or charts, and they were not whole articles. The

present study only deals with text articles that were found on the database.

Variables

Four main variables were coded in this study: newspaper, frames, source

eliteness, and source in relation to the event.

Frames

As established by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000), a set of five news frames was

used for analysis in this study. (See Table 3.1.) The first five paragraphs of each article

were read to determine which frame was used in the article. Just the beginnings of stories

were read because research has shown that a high percentage of readers quit reading after

the first five paragraphs (Bush, 1966). The frames looked for were: conflict, human

interest, economic, morality, and attribution of responsibility. As stated in chapter two,

the following is a brief description of each frame:









Table 3.1 Variable Definitions
Variable Value
Newspaper 1) The New York
Times
2) Le Monde










Frame used 1) Conflict
2) Attribution of
Responsibility
3) Economic
Consequences
4) Morality
5) Human Interest










Source 1) Elite
eliteness 2) Non-elite


Nominal definition
1) A daily newspaper
based out of New York
City, NY, USA
2) A daily newspaper
based out of Paris,
France







Frames that emphasize:
1) conflict between
groups to grab readers'
attention.
2) who or what is
responsible for the
news event.
3) the economic
consequences of the
news event.
4) a moral aspect of the
news event.
5) a personal angle of
the news event.


1) An person or
document providing
information for a story
who is well-known and
respected in society as
an expert in some area
by readers.
2) A person or
document providing
information for a story
that may not be well-
known by readers.


Operational definition
Articles derived from
the databases of
Lexis/Nexis for the time
period 9/12/01 to
9/21/01 specifying
1)The New York Times
using the search terms
"terrorism" and
"attacks".
2) Le Monde using the
search terms "attentat"
and "attaque".
Frames that
emphasized* see coding
manual, Appendix A.:
1) conflict between
groups involved in
events related to the
attacks.
2) who or what was
responsible for the
attacks.
3) the economic after
effects of the attacks.
4) a moral aspect of the
attacks and attackers.
5) a personal story
related to the attacks.
1) Sources such as rulers
of countries, presidents
of companies, those
considered experts in a
given field.
2) Sources that are
considered "common"
such as people standing
around on a street after
an event has taken
place.









Table 3.1 Continued:
Variable Value
Source in 1) Domestic
relation to Government
event 2) Foreign
Government
3) NGO
4) Law
Enforcement
5) Expert
6) Business Owner
7) Witness
8) Victim
9) Victim's relative
10) Non-expert


Nominal definition
Person or document:
1) Of the national
government in the
papers' home country.
2) Of the national
government from a
country other than that
of the papers'.
3) From a non-
governmental
organization
4) From the police or
fire department.
5) From a person
considered by the
newspapers' readers to
be an expert in the
topic that they are
being quoted about.
6) Who owns a
business.
7) Who witnessed the
event.
8) Who was a victim of
the event.
9) Who is related to
one of the victims of
the event.
10) Typical "man on
the street."


Operational definition
1) Someone such as the
president of the country.
2) Same as #1 except
from another country's
government.
3) Someone from a
group such as the PLO.
4) Someone from a law
enforcement agency.
5) Someone such as an
architectural engineer.
6) Someone such as the
owner of a restaurant.
7) Someone who was an
eye-witness to one of
the attacks.
8) Someone who was
victimized in some way
from the attacks.
9) A relative of someone
who was victimized by
the attacks.
10) An ordinary person
who had no real
involvement with the
attacks in any way,
shape, or form.











The conflict frame "emphasizes conflict between individuals, groups, or

institutions as a means of capturing audience interest" (p. 95). An example of the conflict

frame used in an article would be a story about how Muslim-Americans were targets of

prejudice in New York City after the attacks.

The human-interest frame emphasizes the human side of a story in an "effort to

personalize the news ... in order to retain audience interest" (p. 96). A personal story of

one particular family's ways of coping with a family member's death in the attacks would

be an example of a human interest-framed article.

The economic consequences frame puts the issue in terms of the future economic

consequences the event will have on groups and/or individuals. An example of an

economic consequence-framed article would be an article about how the attacks were

going to affect the stock market when it re-opened.

The morality frame "puts the event ... in the context of religious tenets or moral

prescriptions" (p. 96). An article about the tension between the Muslim faith and

American society would be an example of a morality-framed article.

Finally, the attribution of responsibility tells the story in terms of who or what

was responsible for the issue. An article about figuring out who or what was responsible

for the attacks would be coded into the attribution of responsibility category.

Each article was placed in one and only one of these five frames in the coding

process. In the event that more than one frame was used in the article, the first frame used

was the one coded. As noted earlier, since newspaper readership research indicates that









only a small percent of audiences read past the first five paragraphs (Bush, 1966), coding

the first frame used by the article author is an appropriate course to take.

These five categories have aided media researchers in the process of test and re-

test research. Replication studies allow the results of one study to be retested by another

researcher. This repetition helps bolster the validity and reliability of each study. The

presence of similar previous research can aid each researcher in his or her own personal

research area. Since media professionals and researchers alike have agreed that there is

no objective reality (Shoemaker and Reese 1996), the acknowledgement of these five

frames has been able to further media research. In other words, since these five frames

have been used in previous research, the present study has a good foundation on which to

build.

The framing data were used to test hypotheses one through five. Each of the

frames works differently in the two newspapers because of cultural differences between

the countries. For example, the American press attempts to be objective in reporting

news, so the morality frame is harder to get into a news story in the United States. The

French press often discusses subjective topics; therefore, a morality frame should appear

quite often within the pages of a French newspaper.

Sources

The next variable to be analyzed in the study was sources. Journalists use sources

to gather facts. Herman and Chomsky (1998) argue that there is a symbiotic relationship

between the media and powerful sources of information. They write that government and

corporate sources are used because they're recognizable, and therefore credible, since

they're of high status and prestige.









In this study, both human and organizational sources were coded, quoted or

paraphrased. And both opinion and factual pieces of information given by sources were

considered.

According to Herman and Chomsky's (1988) third filter, all government officials

and business people are considered elite sources. The elite sources considered in this

study were: government officials international and national; international organization

officials; other elite newspapers; presidents of companies; engineers; authors and/or

people considered experts in certain areas of study; and police. These groups or

individuals were considered elite in the present study because they were either directly

involved in the aftermath of the attacks, or they are perceived by the public as extremely

knowledgeable on the topic for which they are used as a source. For example, the police

were directly involved in the clean-up of the attacks, and engineers are considered

extremely knowledgeable on the topic of building construction by the public.

Those considered not elite were sources considered to be the typical "man on the

street" sources. Examples would be people who witnessed the attacks from the streets of

New York, employees of institutions housed inside the World Trade Center who may

have lost their job as a result, or attendees at a memorial service.

After the initial elite versus non-elite coding was done for the newspapers,

another round of coding was done with more specific types of sources in order to get

more detailed results. The values being looked for were called sources in relation to

event. The ten different categories were: sources from domestic government officials,

foreign government officials, NGOs, witnesses, victims, victim's relatives, law

enforcement, experts, non-experts, and business owners. It was only after the initial









coding of sources that these ten groups were noticed as those being used as sources

throughout the coverage in The New York Times and Le Monde.

Gans (1979) defines sources as the people reporters obtain news from by

interview or observation. Gans argues that while sources theoretically come from all

walks of life, they are often the elite and powerful who shape society, and "... their

recruitment and their access to journalists reflect the hierarchies of nation and society"

(119).

Sources were coded to test hypotheses six. Only the first source quoted or

paraphrased was coded for the purposes of this study. Research has shown that readers

only read the first five paragraphs of most articles; therefore, the coding of additional

sources in each story was foregone.

Analysis

The statistics of data analysis were used to ensure that the results presented could

be trusted and used in further research. After the coding was finished, z-scores were run

on the data to find out the difference of proportions between newspapers from frames

used and sources in relation to event. The z-scores indicated whether or not the sample

results may be generalized to the whole population of articles, or whether any differences

may be attributed to random chance. A Mann-Whitney U test was run on the five frames

and source in relation to event to test for significance in their use in the two newspapers.

This test was run to show whether the two newspapers used frames in a significantly

different way overall. After it had been established that the newspapers did or did not

differ in the use of frames overall and source in relation to event overall, the z-scores for

the individual frames used and individual source in relation to event used were calculated









to show the significance of the differences between the two newspapers. A .05 level of

significance will be used for statistical tests.

Reliability

For content analysis studies to be considered reliable, there are many things that

have to happen. It's important to make sure the statistics presented are both reliable and

valid. Babbie (2001) states that reliable statistics will show that the researcher's

"technique, applied repeatedly, yields the same results each time" (p. 140). The data

obtained must be consistent from one coder to the next. Each coder must code the text in

the same way.

Weber (1985) suggests three types of reliability that are pertinent to content

analysis: stability, reproducibility, and accuracy. "Stability refers to the extent to which

the results of content classification are invariant over time" (p. 17). Stability can be

assessed by having the same coder code the same content more than once. But stability is

the weakest form of reliability because only one person is coding. Reproducibility, often

called intercoder reliability, refers to the extent to which the same text, coded by different

coders, produces the same results. High intercoder reliability is a minimum standard for

content analysis (as opposed to stability) because it measures the consistency of shared

understandings or meanings. Accuracy is the strongest form of reliability and refers to the

extent to which the classification of text corresponds to a standard. However, researchers

seldom use accuracy as a measure of reliability because standard codings are rarely

established for texts.

For the purposes of this study, high intercoder reliability was strived for. It was

achieved by having another graduate student at the University of Florida code all the

articles along with the researcher. In order to procure accurate results in this process, the









second coder for Le Monde (after the researcher) was bilingual in French and English,

and the second coder for The New York Times was a graduate student in the College of

Journalism and Communications. As Riffe (1998) puts it in discussing reproducibility,

"Reliability in content analysis is defined as agreement among coders about categorizing

content" (p. 104). Therefore, the results of the different coders were checked for

agreement. Riffe suggested that a random sample of the population of coding logs be

tested for the level of agreement between the two coders. However, for the present study,

a thorough analysis of each article coded was done to assess the level of reliability in the

study. A minimum level of agreement of 80 percent was set for reliability. Since the use

of these five frames in content analysis is relatively new, this relatively low value was

established.

Validity

As Budd et al (1967) suggests, there isn't much literature on validity in content

analysis. Riffe (1998) writes that" ... the social science notion of validity relates more

rigorously to procedures for obtaining information so that appropriate inferences and

interpretations may be made" (p. 135). Riffe believes that content analysis has the

potential to have very high external validity. Problems with internal validity lie in the fact

that content analysis can only show patterns. Content analysis cannot find the cause of

these patterns, per se. Weber (1985) adds that the procedure used must generate a

variable that is valid to the extent that it "measures or represents what the investigator

intends to measure" (p. 12).

Since ... scientific validation of research is necessary before that research can

have any broader meaning or importance ... (Riffe 1998, p. 145), the present study

seeks to have validity. In the present study, the research of Semetko and Valkenburg






42


(2000) has set a valid precedent for the use of variables measured. This previous research

enhances the measurement of validity of the present study. Riffe also says that the

external validity of research can be increased if the content being studied is important.

The present study explores content that is believed to be highly important, and the results

will help future researchers and the newspaper industry in making news judgments in the

future.














CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS

The present study looked at the differences in reporting of the attacks of

September 11 in the newspapers The New York Times and Le Monde, employing framing

theory. Content analysis was done to compare differences in sources used and frames

used in these newspapers' articles on the attacks.

Brief Overview

After all the coding of articles was complete, the data were entered into an SPSS

computer program file. From there, difference of proportions tests were run on the data.

Each hypothesis was tested and conclusions were made regarding the content of both

newspapers.

Overall data were gathered from the coding sheets. The data were put into three

different spreadsheets: one for The New York Times, one for Le Monde, and one for the

two newspapers combined.

More articles were printed on September 13 in Le Monde than any other day in

the ten-day period of observation. (See Table 4.1.) The sample from The New York Times

drew twenty articles from September 13 and 16 more than any of the other eight days in

the period. Therefore September 13 had the most articles overall in the present study than

any other day in the ten-day period under observation. There were no articles coded for

Le Monde on September 12. While two articles did appear on the search of Lexis/Nexis,

those two articles were not about the attacks. A hard copy of the newspaper was used to

double check that no articles were printed on September 12.










Table 4.1 Number of articles each day
Date The New York Times Percent Le Monde Percent
12 14 8.1 0 0
13 20 11.6 30 17.1
14 19 11.0 26 14.9
15 14 8.1 15 8.6
16 20 11.6 0 0
17 16 9.3 28 16.0
18 19 11.0 16 9.1
19 16 9.3 19 10.9
20 16 9.3 17 9.7
21 18 10.5 24 13.7
Total 172 99.8* 175 100.0
*percent differs from 100 due to rounding

The frame used most often overall was the conflict frame. (See Table 4.2.) Of the

347 articles coded, 109 of them were framed in terms of conflict; 49 of those came from

Le Monde and 60 came from The New York Times. The frame used least often overall

was the attribution of responsibility frame. Only 34 of the 347 articles used this frame.


Table 4.2 Frame usage
Frame The New York
Times
1 Attribution of 11
Responsibility
2 Economic 30
Consequences
3 Morality 19
4 Conflict 60
5 Human Interest 52
Total 172


Percent Le Monde

6.4 23

17.4 42

11.0 29
34.9 49
30.2 32
99.0* 175
*percent differs from


Percent

13.1

24.0

16.6
28.0
18.0
99.7*
100 due to rounding


Both newspaper used elite sources the majority of the time. (See Table 4.3) Both

newspapers also had articles with no sources at all. Le Monde had 85.1 percent of the

articles with elite sources, while The New York Times had 68.8 percent of theirs.









Table 4.3 Source Eliteness
Source The New York Times Percent Le Monde Percent
Elite 118 68.6 149 85.1
Non- 40 23.3 16 9.1
elite
none 14 8.1 10 5.7
Total 172 100.0 175 99.9*
*percent differs from 100 due to rounding

The plurality of the sources in both newspapers were from governmental sources,

whether domestic or foreign. (See Table 4.4.) Most of The New York Times government

sources were domestic, while most of Le Monde's were foreign. Le Monde only had one

article sourced by a victim or a victim's relative.

Table 4.4 Source in relation to event
Source The New York Percent Le Monde Percent
Times
1 Domestic 43 25.0 10 5.7
government
2 Foreign Government 10 5.8 52 29.7
3 NGO 18 10.5 33 18.9
4 Witness 5 2.9 2 1.1
5 Victim 8 4.7 1 0.6
6 Victim's relative 6 3.5 1 0.6
7 Law Enforcement 5 2.9 1 0.6
8 Expert 30 17.4 46 26.3
9 Non-expert 19 11.0 13 7.4
10 Business Owner 14 8.1 6 3.4
None 14 8.1 10 5.7
Total 172 99.9* 175 100.0
*percent differs from 100 due to rounding

Results of Application of Method

The method chosen for the present study was content analysis. The content

analysis was done on a sample of newspaper articles from The New York Times and a

census of articles from Le Monde for the 10-day time period of September 12 through

September 21 that related directly to the attacks of September 11, 2001.









The initial search for articles in both newspapers, while successful in some

regards, led the researcher to refine the search methods. This refinement of search terms

on the Lexis/Nexis database resulted in a wider scope of articles from both newspapers

from which to code. There were a few unusual circumstances run into even after the

refinement of search terms was done.

The New York Times sample set included 18 sports articles. They were used in the

present study because the research design included all articles that directly related to the

attacks and their effects. These sports articles' topics ranged from how the athletes were

dealing with the attacks to funds being spent to increase security at ballparks. This is

noteworthy because Le Monde does not have a sports section in the paper; therefore,

there were no comparable stories coded in Le Monde.

A similar dilemma encountered was that Le Monde does not have editorials

written by the editors of the paper, as is found in U.S. newspapers. The journalists of the

newspaper offer opinions and editorial comments throughout what The New York Times

would categorize as hard news stories. This didn't pose too much of a true dilemma,

though, because the present study did include editorials from The New York Times in the

articles coded. The only resulting problem was that some of the articles in Le Monde did

not have any sources. However, this was somewhat counterbalanced by editorials from

The New York Times with no sources being included.

Another result of the use of the 10-day period was that there were no articles for

Le Monde on September 16. The newspaper does not print on Sundays; therefore, there

were no articles in the Lexis/Nexis database for that day.









Nature of Sample

The articles coded for Le Monde came from a search on Lexis/Nexis using the

search terms "attentat" and "11 septembre". From that list, articles were discarded that

did not directly relate to the attacks of September 11; that left 176 articles from the initial

242 found. For The New York Times, systematic random sampling was done to get a

sample of 176 articles. The researcher flipped a coin to decide which article from the

Lexis/Nexis search of The New York Times that fell within the first skip interval would be

the first article to be coded. The second item from the list was selected.

Of the 176 Le Monde articles initially chosen to be coded, one had to be discarded

for not directly relating to the research study. It was about the Israel/Palestinian conflict

and not the attacks in New York or Washington. Four New York Times articles had to be

discarded as well, resulting in a total of 175 Le Monde articles and 172 The New York

Times articles being coded. These four discarded articles were tables of contents lists for

the day's edition of the newspaper. All articles were then printed out in their entirety

from the Lexis/Nexis database in order to be coded.

Of the 172 The New York Times articles coded, fourteen had no sources. Nine of

those 14 were editorials. Sports articles accounted for four of the fourteen, and one was

what the Times called a "Notebook," consisting of first-hand reports from its reporters.

All but one of the ten Le Monde articles with no sources were essays written by Le

Monde reporters. The one that was not, was a simple description of the sequence of

events that took place during the attacks.

Reliability Analysis

Two second coders were used to test the reliability of the coding for the two

newspapers. Once the researcher coded all the articles for both newspapers, a second









coder was chosen to code the same set of articles. Two different people were chosen

because the amount of articles needing to be coded was large and one set of articles was

written in French, so finding a person who was able to read and understand French was

difficult to come by. Both second coders were graduate students at the University of

Florida. The second coder for Le Monde was a native French speaker who was a graduate

student in Anthropology, while the second coder for The New York Times was a graduate

student in Journalism.

The results of analysis of the second coders' coding logs showed a 82 percent

agreement of frames used between coders for The New York Times and an 83 percent

agreement of frames used between coders for Le Monde. The reliability level was

considered satisfactory. There was 87 percent agreement for eliteness of source and

source used in relation to event between coders for The New York Times, and 98 percent

agreement for eliteness of source between coders for Le Monde. The second coder for Le

Monde did not code for source in relation to event as that variable was added after the

fact.

Descriptive Analysis and Hypotheses Results

After all the data were entered into SPSS, a Mann-Whitney U test was run to see

if there was any statistical significance in the overall use of frames and source in relation

to event by each newspaper. The test for frame used resulted in a significance of .000.

The test for source in relation to even resulted in a significance of .822. And the test for

eliteness of source resulted in a significance of .015. After these tests of significance were

run, tests of the individual variables were done to see if there was significance there. Z-

scores were used to test the significance of difference for each variable.









The z-scores for frame used were computed in order to test the hypotheses stated

in Chapter 2. The z-score for the attribution of responsibility frame was -3.68. The

negative result means that H1 was not supported. There were, contrary to the hypothesis,

more articles in Le Monde framed by using attribution of responsibility than there were in

The New York Times. To be more precise, there were 23 articles (13.1 percent) framed

using attribution of responsibility in Le Monde and only 11 (6.4) in The New York Times.

The difference in the use of the human-interest frame resulted in a z-score of 3.33.

The probability of this difference occurring because of chance is .00; therefore H2 was

supported by the data; The New York Times did use the human-interest frame

significantly more than Le Monde used it. There were 52 (30.2 percent) articles in The

New York Times using the human-interest frame and only 31 (17.7 percent) in Le Monde.

The test of difference for H3 ended up with a z-score of 1.33. Hypothesis three

stated Le Monde would use the morality frame significantly more than The New York

Times would use it. With a z-score of 1.33, the probability of H3 being true based merely

on chance is .09, which is larger than .05; therefore, H3 was not be supported by this

data. Although there were only nineteen morality-framed articles in The New York Times

and 29 in Le Monde, the probability of this difference occurring by chance is high enough

to be unable to conclude the results weren't due to random chance.

The z-score for frame two, economic consequences, was 2.33. H4 stated that Le

Monde would use the economic consequences frame significantly more than The New

York Times would use it. The probability of H4 being true based only on chance is .01.

Using .05 as the cutoff point for significance, H4 was supported by the data. There were









41 (23.4 percent) articles framed in terms of economic consequences of the attacks in Le

Monde, and there were 30 (17.4 percent) articles in The New York Times.

Finally, the use of the conflict frame in the two newspapers resulted in a z-score

of 1.89. H5 stated that The New York Times would use the conflict frame more than Le

Monde. The probability of this occurring only by chance is .03, which is smaller than .05;

therefore, H5 was supported by the data. There were 49 (28 percent) conflict-framed

articles in Le Monde and 60 (34.9 percent) in The New York Times.

The difference in use of governmental officials by the two newspapers resulted in

a z-score of 3.17. The probability of this difference occurring merely due to chance is .00;

therefore H6a was supported. Le Monde had 95 articles, 54.3 percent, sourced by

governmental sources, and the Times had 71 articles, 41.3 percent, sourced by

governmental sources. The difference in use of elite and non-elite sources by the two

newspapers resulted in a z-score of 4.29, which meant the probability of this difference

being due solely to chance was .00, or very unlikely. Therefore, H6b was supported by

the data. Le Monde had 149 articles sourced by elite sources (85.1 percent), and The New

York Times had 118 articles sourced by elite sources (68.6 percent).














CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

After all the data were gathered and analyzed, they supported some, but not all, of

the hypotheses. More research needs to be done in a more detailed study to truly

understand the implications of the data results.

Results of Application of Method

The method of content analysis was a successful method to use for this study.

Analyzing the content of Le Monde and The New York Times using framing as the basis

of study worked well in the present study.

In the present study an even more specific theory of framing was used than the

traditional theory that the media frame issues in the news. The research of Semetko and

Valkenburg (2000) was the basis for using the five frame categories employed in the

coding of articles. These five categories worked fairly well in terms of categorizing the

American newspaper articles, but they were difficult to apply in some of the French

articles because some of the French articles often included more than one of the five

frames or used a frame not within the scope of the five given to choose from. For

example, an article on the French government's launching of a security plan was coded

into the "conflict" frame, but it could have also been thought of as being framed in terms

of economic consequences of the launching of the new plan. Although all the coders were

instructed to code the first frame used within the article, sometimes it was obvious that

more than one frame was going to be used within the article; therefore, it was difficult to

decide which one to enter on the coding sheet.









Additionally, some of The New York Times articles could have been coded into

more than one of the five frames given to choose from. For example, an article on the

baseball players not playing for a week was coded as being framed in terms of

"morality," but the article also discussed aspects of the economic consequences this week

off was having on the baseball industry. It was obvious from the beginning that the article

was going to discuss both aspects, but "morality" was chosen as the frame used because

that was the aspect taken on first in the article.

The Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) research was used in an attempt to make the

coding of the articles more valid, consistent, and reliable. The pre-existing frames of

Semetko and Valkenburg were extremely useful for this research.

The Lexis/Nexis computer database was also extremely useful. The program is

accessible and free to use for students at the University of Florida; therefore, it was also a

very cost-effective method of actual data gathering. Since the whole of the articles was

available online for free, the researcher did not have to pay for copies of each article from

microfiche. The ability to narrow down searches on a day-by-day basis in the program

was also very helpful. This narrow searching ability saved a great deal of time.

The decision to only code the beginning of each article was helpful in terms of

consumption of time. If the coders had been required to read each article the whole way

through, the actual coding of 347 articles would have been extremely time consuming.

Additionally, having two different second coders for the each newspaper saved time and

money. Had one person been chosen to second code both newspapers, the cost and time

element would have been much higher since one person would have had to code 374

articles as opposed to just 172 or 175. The second coder for The New York Times coded









the articles for free, and to have one person code 347 articles would have taken more

time.

Using a ten-day period of study was a successful way to do content analysis in

terms of use of frames. Having a set time period based on actual events being studied was

both helpful in terms of making a decision on when to stop looking for articles relating to

the event and in terms of time consumption. If the time period had been much longer,

there would have been many more articles to code, and those additional articles may have

produced different results because they were published after President Bush made his

speech about being either with the United States or against the United States.

However, there really ended up being only eight days used in the analysis of Le

Monde for two reasons. No articles from September 12 garnered hits that were used with

the search terms used in Lexis/Nexis. Two articles from the 12th did appear in the results

of the search, but they did not relate to the attacks of September 11 in the United States.

One was about a trial of nationalists in France, and the other was about the attack on the

Taliban opposition leader Ahmed Shah Massoud. The second reason only eight days

worth of articles was used in the coding of Le Monde is that the newspaper does not

publish on Sundays. Therefore, there were no Le Monde articles coded for September 16.

Descriptive Analysis Discussion

The Mann-Whitney U test run on the use of frames in each newspaper resulted in

a finding of .000. Therefore, it can be stated that each newspaper used frames

significantly differently in the time period under investigation. Since the papers did, in

fact, use the frames differently, the validity of the research is supported. From this

finding, the validity of the researcher testing the difference in use of each frame on a

frame-by-frame basis was established. In other words, the hypotheses' suggestions of









differences between the two newspapers are warranted and should be tested. The Mann-

Whitney U test run on eliteness of sources resulted in a finding of .015, while the test on

source used in relation to event garnered a result of .822. Therefore, it can be said that the

two newspapers did use elite sources significantly differently, but they did not use source

in relation to event differently.

Hypothesis one, which stated there would be more articles framed using

attribution of responsibility in The New York Times, was not supported by the data. A

possible reason for Le Monde having more articles framed through attribution of

responsibility could be because the reporters at Le Monde thought they knew who was

responsible because they are experts in international subjects. Since many of Le Monde's

reporters have doctorates in given subjects, they often report on a topic using themselves

as authority figures on the topic. This could have been the case in this instance. Perhaps

many reporters at Le Monde felt they knew who was responsible, while reporters at The

New York Times felt they couldn't place any attribution of responsibility on any one

person or group until later in the investigations into the attacks. A day-by-day analysis of

the use of the attribution of responsibility frame shows that The New York Times only

used that frame five times in the first five days of reporting, while Le Monde used that

frame 10 times in the same amount of time.

Finding more articles framed by human interest in The New York Times than Le

Monde (H2) was no surprise. Because the attacks took place in the same city of the

newspaper's publication, the newspaper's reporters had easy access to people directly

affected by the attacks in some manner. It was much harder for Le Monde to get reporter

access to victims or first-hand witnesses of the attacks simply because there were fewer

Le Monde reporters in the whole of the United States.









Similarly, it was no surprise that there were more morality-framed articles in Le

Monde (H3). The newspaper is known for its opinion-laded pieces. Journalists in France

are often taught to include issues of morality in their articles as a way to keep the culture

of France vigorous, not trampled upon by other cultures. In contrast to that, American

journalists are taught to be objective, not including their own opinions or issues of

morality in their articles. However, the significance of the difference in the amount of

morality-framed articles between the two newspapers was not enough to support the

hypothesis. The difference in number could be due to The New York Times' reporters

feeling somewhat more emotionally attached to their articles on the attacks since the

attacks happened in New York. Perhaps there were more morality-framed articles in The

New York Times than there would have normally been if the attacks had happened in

another city. There is no real way of knowing the answer to this speculation, though.

The reason for there being more articles framed in terms of the economic

consequences in Le Monde than in The New York Times (H4) was a simple one of time.

Both newspapers would be expected to have articles framed in these terms, but because

other stories were more pressing, The New York Times simply had to hold off on some of

those articles until later after the attacks. Therefore, the articles would not be in the 10-

day time period used in the present study. Had the study included a larger time frame for

the analysis, the amount of articles framed in terms of economic consequences may have

been more equally matched between the two newspapers.

The game of "catch up" being played by The New York Times seems to be one

explanation for why they had more articles framed by conflict than in Le Monde (H5).

Because their readers did not know as much as Le Monde's readers about those

responsible for the attacks, the Times had to spend more time describing the actual









conflict between the United States and the followers of Ossama bin Laden. Therefore, it

was only natural that there be more articles in The New York Times framed in these terms

than in Le Monde.

That Le Monde had more articles sourced by elites than The New York Times did

is not a surprise either (H6a). The elite nature ofLe Monde could be an explanation for

this finding. It is to be expected that such an elite newspaper would use a higher

percentage of elite sources than most newspapers around the world. They have to use

these elite sources to keep up their elite nature. Additionally, The New York Times had

more articles that didn't necessarily call for elite sourcing. For example, The New York

Times had more human interest-framed articles than Le Monde, and those type of articles

do not need to be sourced by engineers or presidents of companies.

Finally, the fact that Le Monde used more elite and more governmental sources

than The New York Times was expected as well (H6b). The elite nature of Le Monde

could well be one explanation for this finding. As stated in Chapter Two, Le Monde

prides itself on being a paper of analyzation by elite writers. Additionally, the nature of

the actual articles in Le Monde called for more elite sources than those in The New York

Times. For example, Le Monde had more articles framed in terms of the economic

consequences of the attacks. Those types of articles called for sourcing from people such

as financial experts and governmental sources such as officials of the Federal Reserve.

Post-hoc analysis

In the post-test analysis of frames used in Le Monde and The New York Times,

some qualitative items were examined. Throughout the coding process, both coders for

each newspaper took notes about what they were finding. After the coding was complete,

a thorough scanning of those notes revealed some consistent items worth discussion.









It seemed Le Monde printed many articles framed in way that could have been

called "security" and many with frames that could have been called "cultural analysis."

For example, on September 13 an article was printed discussing the tightened airport and

national security in several different countries. This article didn't really fit in to any of the

five frames given to choose from. It was put in the "economic consequences" frame, but

it really didn't seem to be written with economics as the main topic for discussion. It was

framed more in terms of making sure the readers knew that the airports in Europe were

safe.

Similarly, The New York Times had articles that were simply descriptions of the

attacks. They were just minute-by-minute descriptions of what happened on September

11. There was no discussion of who was involved or why what was happening happened.

That article was coded into the "conflict" frame, but it really needed to be coded as

"description" since there was really no framing going on at all in any of the senses for

which categories were available.

Additional analysis also was done on the results that did not relate directly to the

hypotheses. Analysis was done for each frame used in each newspaper after the

immediacy of the attacks was over. In other words, which newspapers used each frame

more during the eight-day period of September 14 through September 21? Would the

results of the hypotheses testing be the same for the data after September 13?

There were among the articles originally analyzed, 145 articles printed in Le

Monde during this time frame and 138 in The New York Times. Using the same

hypotheses as those for the ten-day period as a whole, z-scores were calculated for each

frame used in the eight-day period after September 13.









The difference in use of the attribution of responsibility frame (H1) garnered a

negative z-score as it did in the testing of original hypotheses. Therefore, it seems as

though The New York Times did not use the attribution of responsibility frame

significantly more than Le Monde after the immediacy of the attacks was over. The

economic consequences frame had a z-score of 2.35, which was similar to the z-score for

the 10-day period. Hence, it can be said that Le Monde used the economic consequences

frame more than The New York Times did even after the immediacy of the attacks was

over.

The z-score for the use of the morality frame after September 13 was 2.59.

Therefore, the probability of this occurring not due to random chance is .00, or less than 5

percent. This was not the case for the whole 10-day period. In the data for the ten-day

period, the z-score for the use of morality frame was not large enough to be able to say

the results were due to anything other than pure chance. However, after September 13,

the use of the morality frame by Le Monde was significantly different from the use of it

by The New York Times, so the hypothesis would have been supported after the 13th.

This finding could be so because perhaps Le Monde did not feel comfortable reporting on

the attacks in morality terms until after more information was discovered concerning who

was responsible for them.

The conflict frame's use in the two newspapers resulted in a z-score of 2.05. This

means that the probability of the differences being more than a matter of chance is at .02,

which is less than 5 percent. The New York Times used the conflict frame significantly

more than Le Monde used it.

The difference in use of the human-interest frame between the two newspapers

after September 13 resulted in a z-score of 3.25, which means the probability of this









difference being due to chance is .00, or very unlikely. The New York Times used the

human-interest frame significantly more than Le Monde did during this eight-day period.

This result was similar to that of the whole ten-day period of observation.

The same tests were run for the data found during only the first two days of the

study (September 12-13) to see how the hypotheses held up during the days immediately

following the attacks. There were 34 articles printed in The New York Times during this

two-day period and 30 printed in Le Monde.

The difference in use of the attribution of responsibility frame (H1) garnered a

negative z-score, which meant that H1 was also not supported during these first two days

of reporting on the event.

The z-score for the difference in use of the human interest frame (H2) between the

two newspapers during this two-day period was .24, which meant the probability of this

occurring from pure chance was .40. Therefore, H2 was not supported for the days

immediately following the attacks, although it was supported during the whole ten-day

period and during the eight days after the immediacy of the attacks was over.

The difference in use of the morality frame in the two newspapers garnered a z-

score of .30. This meant the chances of this difference being because of anything other

than chance was .38; therefore, H3 was not supported during the first two days after the

attacks. A negative z-score resulted from the use of the economic consequences and

conflict frames in the two newspapers; therefore, H4 and H5 were not supported.

When the hypotheses were tested for the two days immediately following the

attacks (September 12-13), none of them were supported. The difference in usage of all

five frames was not statistically different between the two newspapers. This sheds light









on the idea that perhaps when a major international crisis occurs, the major media around

the world turn to a universal form of reporting.

The difference in use of governmental sources in the two newspapers garnered a

z-score of .32, which meant the probability of this being due to anything other than

chance was .37. Therefore H6a was not supported by the data gathered immediately

following the attacks. The z-score for the difference in use of elite versus non-elite

sources in the two newspapers was 1.14; therefore, the probability of the difference being

due to anything but chance was only .08, and H6b was not supported for the two-day

period immediately following the attacks.

In the end, only H1 and H3 were not supported by the data for the entire ten-day

period. These two hypotheses dealt with the use of the attribution of responsibility frame

and morality frame respectively. H1 stated that The New York Times would have more

articles framed in terms of attribution of responsibility, and H3 stated that Le Monde

would have more articles framed in morality terms than the Times. When the data were

examined for the eight-day period following the immediacy of the attacks, however, H3

was supported. Both hypotheses dealing with the use of sources in each newspaper for

the entire period of study were supported. Le Monde used both more elite sources and

more governmental sources.

Summary of Hypotheses

Number of Cases

NYT LM

After first search 242 939

After discarding 175 172

Eight-day study 138 145









Two-day study 34 30

Mann-Whitney U test probabilities

Frame used: .000

Source in relation to event: .822

Eliteness of source: .015

The hypotheses are summarized below.






H1) The attribution of responsibility frame will be used more in The New York

Times.

10-day : z = -3.68; X not supported

8-day : z = -; X not supported

2-day : z = -: X not supported






H2) The human-interest frame will also be used more frequently in The New

York Times.

10-day : z = 3.33; probability = .00; supported

8-day: z = 3.25; probability = .00; supported

2-day : z = .24; probability = .40; X not supported






H3) The morality frame will be used more often in Le Monde.

10-day : z = 1.33; probability = .09; X not supported









8-day : z = 2.59: probability = .00; Supported

2-day : z = .3: probability .38: X not supported





H4) The economic consequences frame will also be used more often in Le

Monde.

10-day : z = 2.33 : probability = .01: Supported

8-day : z = 2.35 : probability = .00 : Supported

2-day : z = : X not supported





H5) The New York Times will have more articles devoted to the conflict frame.

10-day : z = 1.89 : probability = .03: Supported

8-day : z = 2.05 : probability = .02: Supported

2-day : z = : X not supported





H6a) Le Monde will have a higher number of articles sourced by governmental

officials, whether French, American, or international officials.

10-day : z = 3.17 : probability = .00 : Supported

8-day = z = 2.15 : probability = .01: Supported

2-day : z = .32: probability = .37: X not supported






63




H6b) Le Monde will have a higher number or articles sourced by elites than

The New York Times.

10-day: z = 4.29: probability = .00 : Supported

8-day : z = 4.37 : probability = .00 : Supported

2-day : z = 1.14 : probability = .08 : not supported














CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION

The content analysis of framing used in The New York Times and Le Monde

garnered results expected and results not expected. Overall, the hypotheses generated

from the literature were supported. The study was successful in that it lends itself to much

future research and can help the newspaper industry to see how they have reacted to crisis

situations in the past in order to figure out how to react in the future. By looking at the

present study, the newspaper industry can see what happened after September 11, and the

industry can decide whether it would like to do the same thing again or try something

new.

Summary

The present study was a content analysis of The New York Times and Le Monde

for the ten-day period of September 12 through September 21, 2001. The analysis used

framing theory as the basis of study. More specifically, the study looked at the five media

frames defined by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) in the articles in the ten-day period.

The topic of the attacks of September 11 was chosen because it was a recent event

that garnered massive media attention. It was obvious that there was going to be a large

number of newspaper articles to analyze on the topic. Additionally, previous research on

framing has been done using one topic to analyze in different newspapers as a means of

comparison (e.g., Entman, and Semetko and Valkenburg). This previous research helped

create the foundations of the present study and also helped make the results more









generalizable in that there could be more of an objective comparison between the two

newspapers than if the researcher had come up with frame categories by herself.

The articles used for coding in the present study were found using the computer

database of Lexis/Nexis. The search terms "attack" and "terrorism" were used when

searching in The New York Times and "attaque" and "11 septembre" for Le Monde. The

time frame of September 12 to September 21 was used when running the search, and the

search resulted in 938 hits in The New York Times and 242 hits for Le Monde. Although

the articles coded from Le Monde were a census of articles found on the Lexis/Nexis

database, there is no way of really knowing if the set was a true and accurate census of all

articles printed in the newspaper on the attacks during that time period.

After reading the headlines found in the search of both newspapers, 846 The New

York Times articles remained, and 176 Le Monde articles remained. Examples of items

discarded from the initial articles found in the search included things such as photo essays

in The New York Times and articles in Le Monde discussing movies having the word

"attaque" in the title.

During the coding process, one article was discarded from the Le Monde set of

articles. While the article did mention the attacks of September 11, it was not about the

attacks directly. It was an article about the Israel/Palestine conflict going on in Israel.

Four articles had to be discarded from the set of articles being coded for The New York

Times. The four articles were excluded because they were not actually articles; they were

lists of headlines that were played on the front page of the Times as a way of letting

readers know what was inside.









When the researcher finished the first set of coding, the articles were given over

to second coders, who were both graduate students at the University of Florida. Once the

second coders completed their coding, reliability was found to be more than 80 percent

between second coders and the researcher. After entering the data from the coding sheets

into the computer program SPSS, difference of proportions tests were done on the

variables of frame used, eliteness of sources, and source used in relation to event.

Six hypotheses were tested. The hypothesis stating that The New York Times

would have more articles framed in terms of attribution of responsibility (H1) and the

hypothesis stating Le Monde would have more articles framed in terms of morality (H3)

were not supported by the data. There are several possible explanations as to why the H1

was not supported; perhaps the most poignant of all is that this was an extreme crisis

situation. Perhaps under normal reporting conditions, the first hypothesis would have

been supported. However, H3 was supported when the data were looked at after

September 13. A possible reason why H3 was not supported in the ten-day period could

be that since the attacks did occur in New York, perhaps the reporters and editors felt

more comfortable framing their articles in terms of morality issues than they would under

normal circumstances.

In the analysis done for the first two days of reporting, the tests of significance of

differences resulted in different scores from that of the whole ten and eight-day periods of

analysis. The first hypothesis was not supported in any of the three sets of time. However,

H2, which stated that The New York Times would have more articles using the human-

interest frame, was not supported by the data from the first two days of analysis. This was

contrary to the other two sets of time analyzed. It can be speculated this is because during









those first two days, The New York Times did not want to frame articles in terms of

human interest because it was too busy reporting on the who, what, when, where, and

why of what had happened.

It's also interesting to note that the use of the morality frame was not significantly

different between the two newspapers during the first two days of analysis or the whole

ten-day period of study, yet it was significant for the eight days after the immediacy of

the attacks was over. Perhaps the first two days after the attacks was too soon for Le

Monde to include frames of morality in the reporting.

The differences between the two newspapers' use of the economic consequences

and conflict frames were not significant during the two-day time period either. Perhaps

these two days resulted in similar uses of these frames because the event was so huge and

indeed a crisis situation, therefore, both newspapers were more concerned with reporting

than with how they were reporting.

Conclusions

The study is of importance for two main reasons. First, it adds to the body of

knowledge in journalism research regarding framing. The results and conclusions drawn

from the present study can help future framing researchers do better research.

While the theory of framing has been studied for decades, the amount of literature

on media framing across national borders is limited. Furthermore, the amount of literature

on media framing across national borders during an international crisis situation is even

more limited. Therefore, the topic of the present study warrants further investigation.

Because most of the hypotheses were supported, it can be broadly stated that

previous analyses of French and American newspaper reporting styles are an accurate

representation of the reality in these countries. The literature was supported in the present









study since each hypothesis was based on at least one aspect of the literature. The results

of the present study help to support the suggestion that the literature used should and

could be used again by future researchers.

The literature on the two newspapers was somewhat limited, however. There was

little printed material comparing the two newspapers directly after the 1970s, it seemed.

But, the literature that was found seemed to give an accurate picture of what the two

newspapers are still like today.

The five media frames used to analyze the articles in the present study were useful

in most respects; however, they were also limiting in other respects. They were limiting

because there were sometimes articles that did not fit into any of the five categories from

which to choose. This result leads the researcher to suggest ideas for future research on

the subject.

The second reason the present research is of importance is because it can help

communication researchers in their future analysis of the coverage and framing used in

crisis reporting. The attacks of September 11 created an international crisis in terms of

national security. The reporting that resulted needs to be analyzed. As Chomsky (1998)

argues, the media in democracies are highly important in terms of shaping what the

country as a whole thinks and thinks about. The present study had found that these two

elite newspapers seem to have reported similarly in the two days immediately following

the attacks, but they drifted back toward their traditional roles of news informer for the

Times and analyzer for Le Monde. It seems the newspapers did not follow Chomsky's

traditional mold in those first two days, but they did, perhaps, go back to channeling the

thoughts and attitudes of their readers.









After this crisis, it is important to look at what the elite press was saying and,

more importantly, how they were framing what they were saying. If researchers continue

to study this subject, then future media professionals will know what has already been

done if such a crisis should ever arise again. Then, they can make a decision as to

whether or not to do the same thing that was done the previous times around. The present

study found that the two newspapers seemed to remain true to the cultures of their

countrymen. The New York Times frames articles in terms of human interest and conflict

more than Le Monde does, but Le Monde frames its articles in terms of economic

consequences and uses significantly more elite sources than The New York Times does.

Editors at these two newspapers can now look at these results and decide whether they

want to continue this pattern of reporting.

Additionally, the results of the present study can be looked at with regard to what

the U.S. government was actually doing as a means of comparison between what the

media was reporting about the attacks and how the government was responding to the

attacks. For example, The New York Times seemingly made it clear that the United States

did not know for sure who was responsible for the attacks, yet the federal government

continued to discuss the response as if it were black and white issue.

Limitations

While the present study was overall successful, several limitations were

encountered along that way. The first limitation came from the computer database. There

is no way, short of conducting a separate census of the paper copies of the newspapers,

that the researcher could be positive that the search terms entered would result in a true

census of articles printed on the topic of the attacks of September 11. The researcher

could only use the best search terms available when searching for the articles to be coded.









Had time and money not been an issue, the research could have literally looked at every

day's physical edition of The New York Times and Le Monde printed in the 10-day time

period to ensure a more accurate selection of articles to be coded. However, time and

money were limitations in the present study, so the computer database was used.

Another limitation of the present study was language. While the researcher is

conversational in the French language, she is not totally bilingual. This was a limitation

because there could have been words used that were inferred to mean one thing by the

researcher, when in fact, they were intended by the author to mean something else. The

use of a bilingual second coder helped to double check the researcher's initial coding and

showed that the researcher had been successful. Since the reliability results were similar

for both newspapers, it can be inferred that the researcher's readings of the Le Monde

articles were fairly true to the actual meanings of the articles.

Time was the final limitation of the study. If there had been more time, the

researcher would have liked to use the data gathered in this round of coding to do a new

set of content analyses on the same articles but not using the five media frames. The

researcher would have picked new frames of her own choosing to use in the coding that

were based on this initial research.

Additionally, if there had been more time, the researcher would have liked to have

done better scanning of the headlines in order to prevent articles being included in the set

to be coded that did not belong there. This would have prevented the one Le Monde

article and four The New York Times articles from having to be discarded after the fact.









Future Research

While the categorization of media frames into five distinct frames was very useful

in the present study, after the coding was complete, qualitative analysis implies some new

frames that could be used in future research.

Future research could be done using a selection of media frames to do coding

analysis, but researchers could use different frames than the present study used. The

results from the present study suggest that reporting of a crisis situation includes

additional media frames to the five defined by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000). For

example, many articles were framed in terms of safety or security issues to readers. This

would be a good frame category to include in future research. Both newspapers had

articles framed in ways that would make the readers feel secure in their respective

countries. There were articles about heightened security measures at airports, ballparks,

public parks, and other places where large numbers of people pass through each day. It

seemed like the idea of making readers feel safe was an important one to both

newspapers.

Additionally, a number of articles were simply descriptions of the events that

happened, especially in the immediate days following the attacks. It seems that the

newspapers wanted to offer their readers a simply play-by-play of what had happened.

Since both newspapers printed this type of article, perhaps a new frame called

"descriptive" could be added to future research. Perhaps the concept of framing is too

much of an American concept, and that could be why the five frames used in the present

study weren't perfect matches for all the articles. Since the analysis was being done on

articles written about an international event, the frame definitions were a bit limited.

However, the Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) research was done on media in the









Netherlands, so the five frames defined by Semetko and Valkenburg do have some basis

for use with Western media systems.

Similarly, future research could be done on the same topic without using pre-

assigned frames. The researcher could come up with definitions of the types of frames

used in each article after reading a number of articles and coming up with broad general

frame categories used.

Future research could also replicate the present study as a way to refine the

research. In other words, this same study could be done but done a little differently. For

example, the present study included sports articles found in The New York Times even

though there are no sports articles in Le Monde. Another researcher could do the same

analysis, but they could simply code sports articles for separate analysis in their study.

Another type of refined replication of this study could be done by comparing the

articles found on the Lexis/Nexis database with a careful study of the actual printed

copies of the two newspapers. Additionally, the researcher could go back and compare

the results of the first frame used (as was the purpose of the present study) to the second

frame used in articles where there was more than one frame used. Similarly, the

researcher could compare the frames usage found in the present study to the use of

frames in the headlines of the articles analyzed since readers often only look at headlines

when reading a newspaper.

Finally, a similar study could be done by using several non-American second

coders. These second coders could code the newspapers from their home countries and

then also code newspapers from a different country. The discussions that could come









from this could help the research decide whether or not the frame definitions were too

"Americanized."

Implications

The newspaper industries in both the United States and France can use the present

study to make decisions about their routines. The New York Times and Le Monde can now

see a generalized view of how it reported on the attacks of September 11. Both

newspapers can now make better decisions as to whether they want to frame articles on

international crisis situations the same way they did during this time period.

Additionally, society can look at this study to see how the two newspapers

reported the events. By looking at the data in the study, members of both societies can see

how the two newspapers differed in the reporting of the event, and individuals can make

a more informed decision as to from which newspaper they would like to get their news.

Overall, the present study is useful to both the newspaper industry and society as

a whole because it gives both groups an objective, general picture of how the events of

September 11 were reported. This result is important because, as has been previously

stated, the media had a great deal of power in shaping public opinion. The more the

public knows about how the media have been working, perhaps the more informed

decisions they can make.














APPENDIX A
CODING PROTOCOL

I. Project Description

The attacks of September 11, 2001 were unprecedented and created great

challenges for the press around the world. The press systems in countries all across the

globe were facing a challenge they had never faced before.

The attacks came at a time of relative peace for the United States. The media of

the country had been scaling back coverage of international news for the past two

decades. As a result, the press in the United States had to play "catch up" for audiences.

There were huge amounts of space devoted to coverage of the attacks in almost every

paper in the country. They were used to deal with everything from background

information on the attackers to the day-to-day information on the victims.

The role the news media play in today's society is of great importance. The way

the press portray events has a large impact on the way society thinks about that event.

Traditional communications researchers have used the term agenda setting to describe

this phenomenon. This agenda-setting research has lead into the concept of framing.

While the two ideas are similar, framing looks more specifically at how the media is

reporting the news.

The way different newspapers framed the attacks of September 11 demands

research since the way society views the event and ensuing events related to the attacks

can impact society's view on things such as an impending war.









II. Sample

The articles to be coded will be chosen differently for The New York Times and Le

Monde. All the articles coded will come from the issues published during the period of

September 12 to September 21. This time frame was chosen because it includes the

immediate response of the two papers and follows through until President Bush's speech

stating that the world was either "with us or against us."

A census of the articles appearing in Le Monde will be coded. The census equaled

176 articles. Subsequently, systematic sampling of the census of articles found (equaling

850) will be used to code 176 articles from The New York Times. The articles for both

newspapers were obtained using the databases of Lexis/Nexis. The search terms used

were similar but not identical because of obvious inconsistent language translation

between English and French.

All stories will be analyzed with the exception of letters to the editor, photo

essays, graphics, and simple lists of victims. These types of stories will be excluded

because they do not lie in within the structure of traditional frame analysis.

III. Length to be coded

Examine only the beginning of the article. The amount to be read will vary from

article to article. Simply read until you have enough information to code for all the

variables. Typically, the information being coded for will be within the first five

paragraphs. It may take longer for some articles, though.

IV. Coding Log

Keep notes on the coding sheets of items that you feel may be of interest to the

researcher. This will help others understand how and why you are making the coding

decisions you are making. Each entry should include the date, newspaper name, headline









(with English translation), number of words, frame used, and type of source used. Jot

down any themes you see appearing. Also, jot down on the coding sheet any problems or

confusion you had in any of the coding. For example, if you think one article could be

coded in to two different frames, pick one frame and make note of the second frame you

think should also be considered. This will help the researcher flush out problems. Type

up a detailed list of notes and overall description in an organized manner as well so the

researcher will have a better idea at the ideas you may have had while coding.

V. Filling in the coding sheets

Fill out one sheet per article. Analyze all of the stories given to you.

1. Article Number: For each coding sheet, a sequential integer should be entered in

the blank to the right of the page. Start with the number "1" for the first article coded,

continue with "2", and so forth.



2. Newspaper: Write the appropriate number of the newspaper being coded on the

line at the right of the page. Write "1" for The New York Times and "2" for Le Monde.



3. Date: Enter the date of the article being coded on the line to the right of the page

in a month/day format.



4. Number of words: Enter the number of words in the article given by Lexis/Nexis

on the line at the right of the page.



5. Coder: Enter the appropriate number for who you are. Enter "1" for Allison

Aiken and "2" for the second coder.











6. Frame used: Enter the appropriate number on the line at the right for the type of

frame used in the article. The frames are:

1) Attribution of Responsibility: If the article is framed with reference to who or

what was responsible for the attacks of September 11, enter a "1" on the line at the right.

2) Economic Consequences: If the article is concerned with the economic

consequences of the attacks of September 11, enter a "2" on the line at the right.

3) Morality: If the article is put in terms of religious tenets or moral ideals, enter a

"3" on the line at the right.

4) Conflict: If the article is written in terms of conflict between individuals or

groups to get the reader's attention, enter a "4" on the line at the right.

5) Human Interest: If the article focuses on some personal aspect of the attacks,

enter a "5" on the line at the right.



7. Sources: The source is the document or person providing information for the

article. Articles often have more than one source. You will just be coding the first source

you come to. You will be coding for two different categories of sources: the sources

eliteness and the type of source in relation to the event.

Elite sources are those well-known and well-respected documents or people used in

articles. Examples would be Colin Powell, police officers working on the scene of the

attacks, foreign leaders, other well-respected news agencies (ie, The Associated Press), or

leaders of international organizations such as Koffi Anan. Non-elite sources are those

often termed "man on the street." Examples of non-elite sources would be people









attending a candlelight vigil for the victims, people who were walking on the street when

the attacks happened, individuals who have lost their jobs as a result of the attacks, or

individuals who have opinions on the attacks but are not well-known to society at large.

Enter a "1" for all elite sources found and a "2" for those non-elite sources found.

8. There 10 types of sources in relation to the event. They are: domestic

government, foreign government, NGOs, witness to the attacks, victims of the attacks,

victim's relative, law enforcement, expert, non-expert or "man on the street," and

business owners. Enter the corresponding number on the line to the right of source on the

coding sheet:

1) Domestic government refers to sourcing by any member of any government

agency, including mayors, aides, and other governmental type institution.

2) Foreign government refers to the same, only coming from any non-U.S.

government source.

3) NGOs will include any organized group not a part of the federal government.

For example, charities or church organizations would be categorized in this group.

4) Witness, 5) victim, and 6) victim relative refer to witness of, victims of, and

relatives of victims of the attacks.

7) Law enforcement includes both fire and police forces.

8) Experts are those people whose profession it is to know an extensive amount

about some topic. Examples of experts might be terrorism or financial experts

interviewed for their opinion after the attacks.

9) The non-expert would be just any everyday person interviewed for their thoughts

or opinions on the topic.






79


10) Business owners are those sources whom own businesses and have been

interviewed for their thoughts and opinions on the attacks regarding their business.



9. Headline: Write the headline on the lines provided. Write as much of the

headline as is needed in order to get a good idea of what the article is about. ForLe

Monde headlines, write a rough English translation below the French version.










Coverage of the September 11 attacks in

The New York Times and Le Monde

vl. Article Number ID

v2. Newspaper NP
1) The New York Times
2) Le Monde

v3. Date
DATE
v4. Number of Words WORDS

v5. Coder CODER
1) Allison Aiken
2) #2

v6. Frame used FRAME
1) Attribution of Responsibility
2) Economic Consequences
3) Morality
4) Conflict
5) Human Interest

v7. Sources SOURCE
1) Elite
2) Non-elite

v8. Source in relation to event EVTSOU
1) Domestic Government
2) Foreign Government
3) NGO
4) Witness
5) Victim
6) Victim reality
7) Law Enforcement
8) Expert
9) Non-expert
10) Business Owner


v9. Headline















APPENDIX B
DATA

Table B.1 The New York Times
Item Date Frame Eliteness Source
1 12 3 2 9
2 12 5 2 5
3 12 4 1 1
4 12 3 2 9
5 12 4 1 1
6 12 4 1 8
7 12 4 1 1
8 12 4 1 1
9 12 1 1 1
10 12 1 1 2
11 12 5 1 3
12 12 4 1 2
13 12 2 1 8
14 12 2 1 8
15 13 5 1 4
16 13 5 2 10
17 13 5 2 4
18 13 3 2 5
19 13 1 1 8
20 13 4 1 1
21 13 4 1 1
22 13 4 1 1
23 13 2 1 10
24 13 5 2 6
25 13 2 1 1
26 13 5 1 7
27 13 5 2 3
28 13 4 0 0
29 13 3 1 3
30 13 5 2 6
31 13 5 1 3
32 13 2 1 8
33 13 3 2 9
34 13 4 1 2
35 14 2 1 3









Table B.1 Continued:
Item Date Frame Eliteness Source
36 14 4 1 7
38 14 2 1 3
39 14 4 1 1
40 14 3 1 3
41 14 3 2 9
42 14 4 1 7
43 14 3 2 6
44 14 4 1 4
45 14 4 1 1
46 14 2 1 1
47 14 3 1 5
48 14 5 1 1
49 14 3 1 10
50 14 4 1 1
51 14 4 0 0
52 14 4 1 10
53 14 2 1 8
54 14 2 2 8
55 15 2 1 8
56 15 4 1 10
57 15 4 1 1
58 15 5 2 1
59 15 4 1 1
60 15 5 2 1
61 15 3 0 0
62 15 1 1 2
63 15 2 1 2
64 15 5 1 8
65 15 4 2 5
66 15 4 1 8
67 15 2 1 8
68 15 5 1 10
69 16 5 1 8
70 16 5 2 6
71 16 5 2 6
73 16 1 1 1
74 16 5 1 1
75 16 4 1 1
76 16 4 1 1
77 16 4 1 2
78 16 4 2 9
79 16 4 1 8









Table B.1 Continued:
Item Date Frame Eliteness Source
80 16 5 0 0
81 16 4 0 0
82 16 2 1 8
83 16 5 1 8
84 16 4 1 8
85 16 2 1 8
86 16 5 1 1
87 16 3 1 1
88 16 4 1 3
89 16 2 1 8
90 17 1 1 8
91 17 1 2 9
92 17 4 1 10
93 17 4 1 1
94 17 5 2 5
95 17 5 2 4
96 17 2 1 5
97 17 1 1 2
98 17 5 2 6
99 17 3 2 3
100 17 4 1 2
101 17 2 1 8
102 17 4 1 1
103 17 5 1 8
104 17 5 1 10
105 17 4 0 0
106 18 4 0 0
107 18 4 1 1
108 18 4 1 8
109 18 2 2 5
110 18 2 2 8
111 18 2 2 5
112 18 5 1 1
113 18 4 1 1
114 18 5 2 9
115 18 4 0 0
116 18 4 1 1
117 18 5 0 0
118 18 5 2 9
119 18 2 1 10
120 18 1 2 9
121 18 5 0 0









Table B.1 Continued:
Item Date Frame
122 18 2
123 18 1
124 18 5
125 19 2
126 19 4
127 19 2
128 19 4
129 19 2
130 19 5
131 19 4
132 19 5
133 19 5
134 19 5
135 19 5
136 19 4
137 19 4
138 19 5
139 19 2
140 19 5
141 20 4
142 20 3
143 20 5
144 20 5
145 20 5
146 20 3
147 20 3
148 20 5
149 20 5
150 20 4
151 20 4
152 20 3
154 20 5
155 20 4
156 20 5
157 20 5
158 21 4
159 21 2
160 21 4
161 21 4
163 21 1
164 21 4
165 21 5


Eliteness Source
1 10
1 8
1 8
1 10
1 1
1 3
1 2
1 1
2 9
1 1
2 9
2 9
1 8
2 9
0 0
1 3
0 0
1 10
1 3
1 1
1 10
2 9
1 3
1 7
1 3
1 2
1 10
1 8
1 1
1 1
1 3
1 9
1 1
2 9
2 4
1 1
1 1
2 9
1 7
1 1
1 1
2 9










Table B.1 Continued:
Item Date Frame
166 21 5
167 21 4
168 21 5
169 21 4
170 21 2
171 21 4
172 21 3
173 21 4
174 21 3
175 21 5
176 21 2

Table B.2 LeMonde
Item Date Frame
1 13 4
2 13 4
3 13 4
4 13 1
5 13 4
6 13 4
7 13 3
8 13 3
9 13 3
10 13 3
11 13 5
12 13 5
13 13 5
14 13 5
15 13 1
16 13 1
17 13 5
18 13 2
19 13 4
20 13 4
21 13 4
22 13 4
23 13 5
24 13 5
25 13 5
26 13 2
27 13 2
28 13 2


Eliteness Source
0 0
2 9
1 1
1 1
1 8
1 3
1 3
1 8
0 0
1 8
1 3


Eliteness Source
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 7
1 1
1 8
2 9
1 2
1 1
1 3
2 9
1 10
1 8
2 5
1 2
1 8
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
2 6
0 0
1 8
1 8
1 8
1 10
1 2
1 2









Table B.2 Continued:
Item Date Frame Eliteness Source
29 13 4 1 2
30 13 3 0 0
31 14 4 1 8
32 14 1 1 8
33 14 1 1 2
34 14 5 1 8
35 14 2 1 8
36 14 2 1 8
37 14 2 1 8
38 14 2 1 3
39 14 2 1 2
40 14 3 2 9
41 14 4 1 2
42 14 3 1 3
43 14 5 1 8
44 14 2 1 8
45 14 4 1 10
46 14 4 1 8
47 14 1 1 8
48 14 5 1 8
49 14 5 1 8
50 14 1 1 2
51 14 4 1 1
52 14 3 0 0
53 14 4 1 3
54 14 3 0 0
55 14 4 1 2
56 14 1 1 3
57 15 1 1 2
58 15 3 2 9
59 15 5 1 3
60 15 2 2 9
61 15 4 1 3
62 15 1 1 2
63 15 4 1 2
64 15 3 1 1
65 15 3 1 8
66 15 3 2 9
67 15 4 1 8
68 15 2 1 9
69 15 2 1 8
70 15 3 1 10









Table B.2 Continued:
Item Date Frame
71 15 2
72 17 5
73 17 2
74 17 5
75 17 2
76 17 2
77 17 2
78 17 2
79 17 2
80 17 3
81 17 3
82 17 3
83 17 4
84 17 1
85 17 1
86 17 4
87 17 4
88 17 4
89 17 4
90 17 5
91 17 4
92 17 5
93 17 4
94 17 4
95 17 4
96 17 4
97 17 5
98 17 1
99 17 2
100 18 2
101 18 3
102 18 4
103 18 1
104 18 1
105 18 4
106 18 3
107 18 4
108 18 3
109 18 4
110 18 4
111 18 2
112 18 2


Eliteness
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


Source
1
8
8
3
0
8
3
8
3
2
0
8
8
2
3
2
2
2
3
4
2
3
3
0
8
8
3
0
3
3
8
2
2
8
2
2
8
8
8
3
8
3









Table B.2 Continued:
Item Date Frame
113 18 3
114 18 5
115 18 5
116 19 2
117 19 2
118 19 3
119 19 5
120 19 3
121 19 4
122 19 5
123 19 1
124 19 2
125 19 2
126 19 3
127 19 2
128 19 2
129 19 2
130 19 4
131 19 3
132 19 4
133 19 1
134 19 1
135 20 2
136 20 1
137 20 5
138 20 2
139 20 4
140 20 1
141 20 5
142 20 2
143 20 2
144 20 4
145 20 4
146 20 4
147 20 4
148 20 4
149 20 2
150 20 5
151 20 5
152 21 5
153 21 1
154 21 3


Eliteness Source
1 8
0 0
1 2
2 9
1 3
1 3
2 4
1 3
1 2
2 9
1 2
1 2
1 1
1 3
1 3
1 10
1 8
1 8
1 8
1 3
1 2
1 3
1 2
1 8
2 9
1 1
1 2
1 8
2 9
1 8
1 2
1 2
1 1
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 10
2 9
0 0
1 3
1 3
1 2









Table B.2 Continued:
Item Date Frame Eliteness Source
155 21 4 1 3
156 21 4 1 2
157 21 1 2 9
158 21 1 1 2
159 21 2 1 2
160 21 2 1 2
161 21 2 1 8
162 21 4 1 1
163 21 5 1 1
164 21 4 1 2
165 21 3 1 2
166 21 5 1 3
167 21 5 1 8
168 21 2 1 2
169 21 4 1 2
170 21 3 1 8
171 21 5 1 2
172 21 2 1 8
173 21 3 1 3
174 21 2 1 3
175 21 5 1 3
















LIST OF REFERENCES

Akhavan-Majid, R. and J. Ramaprasad. (2000). Framing Beijing: Dominant Ideological
Influences on the American Press Coverage of the Fourth UN Conference on
Women and the NGO Forum. Gazette, 1, 45-59.

Americans Open to Dissenting Views on the War on Terrorism. (2001, October 14).
Retrieved August 28, 2002 from http://people-press.org/reports/print.php3?PageID=22.

Babbie, E. (2001). The Practice of Social Research. 9th Ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
Publishing.

Baskette, F., J. Sissors, and B. Brooks. (Eds). (1997). The Art ofEditing. 6th Ed. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.

Budd, R., R. Thorp, and L. Donohew. (1967). Content Analysis of Communications. New
York: The Macmillan Company.

Bush, C. (Ed.). (1966). "When and Why Does the Reader Stop Reading?" pp. 76-78 of
News Research for Better Newspapers. Vol. 1. New York, NY: American
Newspaper Publishers Association Foundation.

Chang, T. and J. Lee. (1992). Factors Affecting Gatekeepers' Selection of Foreign News:
A National Survey of Newspaper Editors. Journalism Quarterly, 3, 554-561.

Chomsky, N. (1989). Necessary Illusions. South End Press: Boston.

Cohen, B. (1963). The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.

Cunningham, B. (2001, November/December). Global Blinders. Columbia Journalism
Review. 4, 110-111.

Entman, R. (1991). Framing U.S. Coverage of International News: Contrasts in
Narratives of the KAL and Iran Air Incidents. Journal of Communication, 4 p. 6-
27.

Entman, R. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of
Communication, 4, 51-58.

Flash Eurobarometer 114: Crise Internationale. Released by EOS Gallup December 2001.

Gamson, W. (1992). Talking Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.


90






91


Gamson, W. and A. Modigliani. (1987). The Changing Culture of Affirmative Action. In
R.G. Braungart and M.M. Braungart (Eds), Research in Political Sociology. 33,
137-177. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Gans, H. (1979). Deciding What's News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly
News, and Time. New York: Pantheon Books.

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization ofExperience. New
York: Harper & Row.

Harrigan, J. (1993). The Editorial Eye. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Herman, E. and Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of
the Mass Media. New York; Pantheon Books.

James, C. (2001, November 9). British Take Blunter Approach to Reporting War. New
York Times. Retrieved on January 3, 2003, from http://www.nytimes.com.

Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1984). Choice, Values, and Frames. American
Psychologist, 39, 341-350.

Kerlinger, F. (1964). Foundations ofBehavioral Research. New York: Rinehart and
Winston, Inc.

Kohut, A. (2002, January/February). A Worried Public Tunes In: The Press .\/Ne.\ in a
DarkMoment. cjr, 5, 54-55.

Kinder,D. and L.M. Sanders. (1990). Mimicking Political Debate With Survey Questions:
The Case of White Opinion on Affirmative Action for Blacks. Social Cognition, 8,
73-103.

Mencher, M. (2000). News Reporting and Writing. 8th Ed. Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill.

Merrill, J. (1968). The Elite Press: Great Newspapers of the World. New York: Pitman
Pub. Corp.

Navasky, V. (2002). "Foreword" in Journalism After September 11. Zelizer, B. and S.
Allan (Eds). (xiii-xviii). New York: Routledge.

Noris, P. (1995). The Restless Search: Network News Framing of the Post-Cold War
World. Political Communication, 12, 357-370.

Parks, M. (2002, January/February) Foreign News: What's next? cjr. 5, 52-57.

Pool, I. (1970). The Presitge Press: A Comparative Study of Political Symbols.
Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press.

Riffe, D. (1998). Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content Analysis in
Research. Mahwah, N.J.:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.









Salinger, P. (1982). Le Monde: De Gaulle's Only Legitimate Heir. In Rice, M. and J.A.
Cooney (Eds) Reporting U.S. -European Relations: Four Nations, Four
Newspapers. 82-113. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.

Scheufele, D.(1999). Framing as a Theory of Media Effects. Journal of Communication,
1, 103-122.

Schramm, W. (1959). One Day in the World's Press: Fourteen Great Newspapers on a
Day of Crisis. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press.

Semetko, H. and Valkenburg, P. (2000). Framing European Politics: A Content Analysis
of Press and Television News. Journal of Communicaiton, ISSUE, 93-109.

Shoemaker P. and S. Resse. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of Influences of
Mass Media Content. (2nd ed.) New York: Longman.

Silverman, M. (1999). Facing Postmodernity: Contemporary French Thought on Culture
and Society. London: Routledge.

Singer, J. (2001). The Metro Wide Web: Changes in Newspapers' Gatekeeping Role
Online. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 1, 66.

Tillier, A. (2001, October 22). Le Monde Sets New Course. The Daily Deal. Retrieved
November 23, 2002 from http://www.thedeal.com.

Tuchman, G. (1978). Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. New York:
Free Press.

Weber, R.P. (1985). Basic Content Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Zeiler, B. and Allan, S. (2002). Introduction: When Trauma Shapes the News. In
Journalism After September 11. Zelizer, B. and S. Allan (Eds). 1-23. New York:
Routledge.