Citation
ANOTHER COLLISION: HOW MAINSTREAM CHINESE AND AMERICAN NEWSPAPERS FRAMED THE SINO-US SPY PLANE COLLISION

Material Information

Title:
ANOTHER COLLISION: HOW MAINSTREAM CHINESE AND AMERICAN NEWSPAPERS FRAMED THE SINO-US SPY PLANE COLLISION
Copyright Date:
2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Journalism ( jstor )
Mass communication ( jstor )
Mass media ( jstor )
Media use ( jstor )
News content ( jstor )
News media ( jstor )
Newspapers ( jstor )
Public opinion ( jstor )
Reporting ( jstor )
State espionage ( jstor )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright the author. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Embargo Date:
8/8/2002
Resource Identifier:
51589152 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

ANOTHER COLLISION: HOW MAINSTREAM CHINESE AND AMERICAN NEWSPAPERS FRAMED THE SINO-US SPY PLANE COLLISION By XU WU 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 COMMUNICATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2002

PAGE 2

Copyright 2002 by Xu Wu

PAGE 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The following research would not have been possible without the knowledge, encouragement and support of the following people. First and foremost, I would like to thank Dr. Mary Ann Ferguson, my committee chair and mentor, for her gentle inspiration, professional expertise and thoughtful guidance throughout the research. Her generosity to me, both personal and academic, could be traced back to the first week when I began my graduate study in a totally strange country. I would like to thank Dr. Leonard Paul Tipton, for his theoretical guidance, and Dr. Marilyn S. Roberts, for her enthusiastic interest in Chinese culture and continuous encouragements which give me greater confidence in accomplishing this study. I would like to express my gratitude to four coders, Phillip M. Whisler, Andrew Ragsdale, Liang Sun and Penghua Zhu, for their unselfish assistance and responsible work. Finally, I would like to dedicate this thesis to my parents, for their unconditional support; and to my wife, for her love and every miracle she has brought into my life. iii

PAGE 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iii LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................vii LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................viii ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE..........................................................................................4 Framing: New Agenda in Media Effect Research..........................................................4 Framing and Agenda-Setting..........................................................................................8 How to Frame vs. How to Study Frame.......................................................................11 Comparative Study of Framing.....................................................................................15 The Cold War Theme.............................................................................................16 Tiananmen Square Movement...............................................................................19 Three Dimensions of Framing......................................................................................20 Visual Framing Dimension....................................................................................21 Contextual Framing Dimension.............................................................................22 Operational Framing Dimension............................................................................23 Media Systems..............................................................................................................26 Media Theories......................................................................................................26 Media System in China and U.S............................................................................28 3 HYPOTHESES..............................................................................................................31 The Collision.................................................................................................................32 Four newspapers...........................................................................................................33 The New York Times and People’s Daily ..............................................................34 USA Today and Beijing Youth Daily .....................................................................35 Hypotheses....................................................................................................................36 Hypothesis 1...........................................................................................................36 Hypothesis 2...........................................................................................................37 Hypothesis 3...........................................................................................................39 iv

PAGE 5

4 METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................41 Time Span.....................................................................................................................41 Unit of Analysis............................................................................................................41 Coding Guidance..........................................................................................................41 Visual Framing Index.............................................................................................41 Page and prominence.......................................................................................42 Word count.......................................................................................................42 Picture and graph.............................................................................................43 Juxtaposition....................................................................................................43 Contextual Framing Items......................................................................................43 Nature of event.................................................................................................43 Responsibility..................................................................................................44 Result assessment.............................................................................................44 Generalization..................................................................................................44 News sources...................................................................................................45 Mis-translation.................................................................................................45 Operational Framing Structure...............................................................................45 Control group...................................................................................................45 Event covered by two sides..............................................................................46 Coder and Pretest..........................................................................................................46 5 FINDINGS.....................................................................................................................47 Visual Framing Dimension...........................................................................................47 Hypothesis 1...........................................................................................................48 Juxtaposition..........................................................................................................51 Contextual Framing Dimension....................................................................................52 Hypothesis 2...........................................................................................................54 Mis-translation.......................................................................................................60 First, the so-called “cowardly” letter to President Bush..................................61 Second, the double-“very sorry” letter to Chinese Foreign Minister Tang.....61 Operational Framing Dimension...................................................................................61 Major Omissions in Two Chinese Newspapers.....................................................62 Major Delays in Chinese Newspapers...................................................................63 Major Omissions or Downplayings in Two American Newspapers......................63 6 DISCUSSION................................................................................................................65 Visual Framing Dimension...........................................................................................65 Contextual Framing Dimension....................................................................................66 Operational Framing Dimension...................................................................................67 Summary.......................................................................................................................68 v

PAGE 6

APPENDIX A THREE DIMENSIONS OF FRAMING STUDIES.....................................................71 B CODING SHEET SAMPLE.........................................................................................77 LIST OF REFERENCES...................................................................................................80 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH............................................................................................85 vi

PAGE 7

LIST OF TABLES Table page 2-1. Three dimensions of media framing...........................................................................24 2-2. Basic facts of four newspapers..................................................................................33 5-1. Visual framing index..................................................................................................50 5-2. One-way ANOVA for two contextual framing attitudes...........................................54 5-3. Homogeneous subsets toward China.........................................................................55 5-4. Homogeneous subsets toward USA..........................................................................55 5-5. Event delayed by Chinese newspapers......................................................................63 A-1. Three dimensions of framing studies.........................................................................72 vii

PAGE 8

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 5-1. Visual framing index lines for four newspapers........................................................48 5-2. Use of photos and graphs by newspapers..................................................................51 5-3. Overall contextual attitude framing on China...........................................................53 5-4. Overall contextual attitude framing on USA.............................................................53 5-5. Responsibility framing toward China........................................................................56 5-6. Responsibility framing toward USA.........................................................................56 5-7. Proportion of news/editorials by newspapers............................................................57 5-8. Mean of news source from Chinese government......................................................58 5-9. Mean of news source from US government..............................................................58 5-10. Mean of news source from Chinese public.............................................................59 5-11. Mean of news source from international community..............................................60 viii

PAGE 9

Abstract of 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 Communication ANOTHER COLLISION: HOW MAINSTREAM CHINESE AND AMERICAN NEWSPAPERS FRAMED THE SINO-US SPY PLANE COLLISION By Xu Wu August 2002 Chair: Dr. Mary Ann Ferguson Department: Mass Communication Research This research studied the framing function from three distinct dimensions: visual framing, contextual framing and operational framing along with their different techniques and functions. A comparative case study was conducted to demonstrate the applicability and integrity of the three-dimension framing categorization, especially in the print media. All the news stories regarding the China-US spy plane standoff from April 1 st , 2001 to April 30 th , 2001 in four newspapers, the New York Times and the USA Today from the United States, the People’s Daily and the Beijing Youth Daily from China (a total of 340 stories) were content analyzed and coded. As to the contextual framing questions, 87.6% consistency for the two Chinese coders and 85.5% consistency for the two American coders were achieved. This research found that by adopting similar visual framing strategies, mainstream Chinese and American media depicted the spy plane collision in a similar time-series ix

PAGE 10

slope. Those index curves reach to the peak and bottom at a relatively similar time schedule. As to contextual framing category, each mainstream newspaper tended to depict its own country as morally superior, whereas the other was portrayed as the wrongdoer. With regard to the degree of such an inclination, the Chinese media outscored their American counterparts. Meanwhile, although both sides relied on their own government sources as their prime news sources, the Chinese newspapers were less likely to quote sources from the other side than were the American newspapers. Regarding the operational framing strategy, both sides deliberately ignored or withheld some unfavorable evidence, and in so doing changed the natural time order of some key elements of the news coverage. As to the extent and degree of such maneuvers, Chinese newspapers more frequently withheld certain unfavorable messages than US newspapers. x

PAGE 11

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION It was April 1 st , 2001 in the South China Sea. The unprecedented collision between a Chinese fighter jet and a US spy plane triggered a month-long political and diplomatic standoff between two countries. Both parties paid a price for their mutual misperceptions and misjudgments during an intense process of blame game and linguistic diplomacy. One month later, the once-heated debates and patriotic zeal on both sides faded away, leaving only a heroic story with two different versions, but more important, a news frame in people’s memory. From the very beginning of the incident, the mass media on both sides, taking advantage of the lack of direct communication between two governments, played a major role as vital catalysts, active participants and sometimes designers of public diplomacy. Whether serving as government watchdog, or the ruling party’s mouthpiece, the mass media show their influential power in current international conflict and foreign politics. Viewed separately, the mass media on both sides seemed to be describing two different occurrences. Perhaps the Chinese pilot misjudged the distance, perhaps the American pilot rocked his wings, or perhaps air turbulence caused the collision. However, what really happened that morning paled in comparison to crucial questions such as in what frame the journalists view it, in what frame the editors understand it, and finally in what frame the audience interprets it. All in all, the media frame matters. Framing, as a newly developed paradigm in mass communication research, has been overshadowed by agenda-setting theory since its emergence (McCombs, 1997 & 1

PAGE 12

2 2001; Ghanem, 1997). Its ambiguous self-identification in communication theoretical system is due largely to its multi-disciplinary conceptual confusion and methodological difficulties, which in return obstruct the research (Entman, 1993; Pan & Kosicki, 1993; Scheufele, 1999 & 2000). To simplify and clarify this concept (and most important, to establish a manageable and testable logical construct), it is necessary to reposition framing function and value in media research, and also to allow meaningful attempts to reorganize the existing communication paradigms. After reviewing the relevant literature, the researcher was convinced of the invaluable potential of framing theory and its under-evaluated significance. To facilitate the research on print media (especially newspapers), the framing functions were categorized into three dimensions: visual framing, contextual framing and operational framing, and the previous studies were examined in the light of these three categories. A universal theory by definition must apply to various circumstances, various cultures and various societies. Framing, as a mass communication paradigm that was first raised by American scholars and widely examined in American media practices, has an apparent “made-in-USA” label (Entman, 1991 & 1993; Gitlin, 1980; Goffman, 1974; Rachlin, 1988; Scheufele, 1999 & 2000; Tuchman, 1972). An important question is whether this theory is applicable to a media system with a different cultural background, historical heritage and political system? Framing research focuses on the professional techniques that influence people’s minds in a controversial situation. Nothing is controversial than a dramatically unfolded and dramatically wrapped-up international conflict between two politically and ideologically different countries.

PAGE 13

3 The collision in the mid-air between China-US fighter jets eventually made this collision-in-the-media comparative study possible.

PAGE 14

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Upon reviewing 25 years of fruitful development of agenda-setting research in the marketplace of ideas, McCombs & Shaw (1993) describe this hallmark research enterprise as “a common umbrella” that covers and integrates a number of research traditions and new research venues. The concept of framing, borrowed from sociology and social psychology, is one of the newest and most disputed paradigms. “Employing the concept of framing to talk about the rich variety of attribute agendas will contribute to the integration of communication research”(McCombs & Shaw, 1993, p. 65). Nonetheless, communication researchers still have much work to do in order to clarify and integrate the empirical and theoretical definitions of the “framing effect”. (Entman, 1993; Pan & Kosicki, 1993; Scheufele, 1999 & 2000). Framing: New Agenda in Media Effect Research The concept of the frame and the framing effect was originally raised by Erving Goffman (1974) as a sociological paradigm. According to Goffman, people in a society need a system of “primary framework” to “locate, perceive, identify, and label a seemingly infinite number of concrete occurrences defined in its limits” (1974, p. 21). In brief, these inherent frame devices help people simplify, classify, evaluate, and filter the information coming into their minds in a timely, easy and consistent manner. Gitlin (1980) further combines Walter Lippmann’s (1922/1965) “searchlight” metaphor with Goffman’s “framework” concept (1980) in his path-breaking case study – The whole world is watching. Thoroughly scrutinizing CBS and the New York Times’ coverage of 4

PAGE 15

5 the New Left liberal movement in the 1960s-70s, Gitlin outlines a definition of framing function especially applying to the mass media, “Media frames are persistent patterns of cognition, interpretation, and presentation, of selection, emphasis, and exclusion, by which symbol-handlers routinely organize discourse, whether verbal or visual. Framing enables journalists to process large amounts of information quickly and routinely: to recognize it as information, to assign it to cognitive categories, and to package it for efficient relay to their audiences”(p. 7). The interdisciplinary nature of mass communication research has been demonstrated during the conceptualization process of framing. Two major theoretical approaches have been classified (Pan & Kosicki, 1993; Scheufele, 2000). First, the sociological approach, which combines several academic fields, including journalism, political science and sociology, pays more attention to the visible outcomes in the process of information production and information dissemination. For example, Entman (1991) describes a frame as “characteristics of the news text. . . .By providing, repeating, and thereby reinforcing words and visual images that reference some ideas but not others”(p. 7). Gamson (1987) explicates this concept as a “central organizing idea or story line that provides meaning” (p. 143) to the events the media depict. Iyengar (1993) in his Gulf crisis research, defines a frame as “public’s attributions of responsibility for issues and events”(P. 369). In other words, news discourses intentionally or unintentionally compose messages that can lead the audience to think about the origin of a problem or “treatment responsibility” (p. 379). Pan & Kosicki (1993) focus on the framing function of “conceptualizing news texts into empirically operationalizable dimensions” that “both

PAGE 16

6 indicate the advocacy of certain ideas and provide devices to encourage certain kinds of audience processing of the texts” (pp. 55-56). The second approach, mainly based on psychological theories, treats a frame as an invisible information process through which individuals, or information receivers decode and interpret the incoming information and finally build up judgments or a reference system (Kahneman, 1982; Kahneman & Tversky, 1984). These two schools of thought together construct a complete stimulus-response circle, where mass media, or reporters/editors act as information producers and mass audiences as information consumers. Journalists, by using visual, contextual or operational techniques, through interviewing, writing, filming or editing, encode natural or social events into news items, which are inherently loaded with the communicators’ subjective judgments and subconscious stereotypes. On the other end, the mass public, through reading newspapers, watching network news or listening to the radio, decode those factual and judgmental messages, based on a given social or ideological background. Thus, different research angles and academic questions about framing effects have brought about a rather “fractured paradigmwith pieces here and there but no comprehensive statement to guide research” (Entman, 1993, p. 51). In order to clarify and emphasize the significance of the framing effect from a mass communication point of view, Entman (1993) raises his “explicit common” understandings of this concept: “To 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

PAGE 17

7 described” (p. 52). Entman actually sums up four major functions (problem definitions, cause explanations, moral evaluations, and remedies recommendations) for media framing devices. Here, the reaction of the audience and the interaction between information providers and information receivers, which account for the major basis of psychological framing research, have been taken as granted. Thus, news framing, as an inherent phenomenon, exists independently in the news discourses, regardless of the cognitive reaction or feedback from the audience. Likewise, Pan & Kosicki (1993) also specify the framing function from the perspective of journalistic routine and profession conventions. According to them, framing “may be studied as a strategy of constructing and processing news discourse or as a characteristic of the discourse itself” (p. 57). To clarify the multi-disciplinary, multi-stage conceptualization approaches, Scheufele (1999, 2000) develops a process model of framing, which identifies three distinct framing stages: framing building, framing setting and individual-level consequences of framing. In between these three stages, there are media frames and audience frames functioning respectively. Such a comprehensive model (Scheufele, 2000, p. 307) explicates future framing research in two directions. First, media frame and audience frame can be studied as both independent and dependent variables. The interaction between media outcome and audience reaction has been classified as framing setting, rather than framing itself. To study media framing, the correlation between media report and public opinion, or the traditional Pavlovian stimulus-response research pattern, is a practically preferred but a theoretically unnecessary step. Second, the separation of these two different frame stages (media frame versus audience frame) facilitate and enable communication researchers to thoroughly examine the media frame effect through

PAGE 18

8 in-depth case study. Therefore, answering the principal questions, such as what framing techniques have been generally used in different media vehicles, or which framing devices have been applied in particular news event coverage, can help us analyze the framing effect from a journalistic point of view. Framing and Agenda-Setting The confusions around the appropriate conceptualization of framing also exist in its relationship with agenda-setting theory. For example, McCombs (2001) suggests that compared to the agenda-setting effect which discloses the transfer of issue salience from the mass media’s depiction of the outside world to the audience’s mind, framing refers to the “transmission of attribute salience”. The attributes include “those characteristics and properties that fill out the picture of each object” (p. 121). Therefore, he treats the frame effect as a natural extension of the traditional agenda-setting approach, or “second level agenda-setting,” or “attribute agenda-setting,” which can be studied under the agenda-setting common umbrella. (See also McCombs, 1997; Ghanem, 1997). This theoretical integration attempt faces more and more opposition from communication scholars. Scheufele (2000) argues that agenda-setting differs from framing in terms of its assumptions and premise. He notes that, “framing influence how audiences think about issues, not by making aspects of the issue more salient, but by invoking interpretive schemas that influence the interpretation of incoming information”(p. 309). Thus, to combine framing into agenda-setting discipline is not only incorrect, but also “counterproductive”(p. 298). Similarly, Kosicki (1993) believes that agenda-setting is “the subtle, highly contingent effect”, which explores “only one type of model for studying media effects on public opinion in the context of public issues” (p. 100). Most of the agenda-setting

PAGE 19

9 researches examine primarily “what topics made it onto the public agenda,” thus, “strips away almost everything worth knowing about how the media cover an issue and leaves only the shell of the topic” (p. 117). In contrast, a framing hypothesis focuses on “how the issue is framed and discussed, and the consequences of such framing”(pp. 117-118). Therefore, framing is not a simple extension of agenda-setting, but a new arena removed from agenda-setting, or perhaps a new paradigm which ultimately will supplant it. To clearly understand the interactive position and theoretical significance of agenda-setting and framing respectively, we go back to the particular time when these two hypotheses were first raised. The agenda-setting hypothesis (McCombs & Shaw, 1972) derived from cognitive psychology (Neisser, 1967) and directly challenged the then-dominant belief about a mass media limited-effects model (Klapper, 1960), and vividly crystallized Bernard Cohen’s (1963) far-reaching notion of “telling people what to think” versus “telling its readers what to think about” (p. 13). This historical shift from examining an audience’s attitude-change to examining issue salience in an audience’s mind marked the methodological withdrawal from detailed content analysis to a more abstract, but statistically testable issue rank-order comparison between media and audiences. As a result, “more than 350 agenda-setting publications”(Dearing & Rogers, 1996, p. 98) after the Chapel Hill study treated tens of thousands of literally and structurally different news discourses as a long list of issue-topic counts in their researches. A 5000-word senior leader statement has the same statistical significance as a 200-word news brief, should they happen to share the same topic. Such an oversimplified research method neglects the quality of each news item, let alone the nature of differences among issues, and holds only the quantity of topic responsible.

PAGE 20

10 There are two apparent consequences of this approach. First is the extravagant prosperity in agenda-setting theory building. Communication research replaced the complicated news analysis and intangible public opinion study with a manageable comparative study, which only concerns two top-ten lists (“most covered issue in news media ” versus “most important problem in public poll”). Second, such a research direction underestimates, if not totally disregards, the tremendous influences of the communication practitioners in their distinct and often personal ways of wording, interviewing, and reporting certain topic. Ironically, agenda-setting theory rejects the minimum effect model of mass media, but unintentionally establishes a “minimum” effect model for mass media communicators. The resurgence of framing study arguably represents not the extension of agenda-setting, but the return to the methodology supplanted by agenda-setting scholars 30 years ago. As McCombs (1993) has argued, Bernard Cohen’s classic summation of agenda-setting should be “turned inside out”(p. 65). He further revises it as follow, “the media not only tell us what to think about, but also how to think about it, and consequently, what to think”(p. 65). In fact, agenda-setting, as a historical bridge linking the mass media and public opinion for the first time, has accomplished its task of demonstrating the correlation between “media think about” and “audience think about”. But, “Agendas, no matter how broadly defined, are not enough” (Kosicki, 1993, p. 18). The core questions regarding “how to think about” and finally “what to think” may find answers in the pursuit of framing research.

PAGE 21

11 How to Frame vs. How to Study Frame Due to their different ways and characteristics in disseminating news, television networks, newspapers, radio and even the newcomer – cyber-media -have developed a variety of framing techniques in their unique way of news reporting. Numerous academic researches have explored and analyzed the framing functions in different media types. For example, while examining television network’s coverage of some political issues, Shanto Iyengar (1987) classifies the frame function in television news stories as either episodic or thematic. He further clarifies that “episodic framing depicts concrete events that illustrate issues, while thematic framing presents collective or general evidence. Visually, episodic reports make ‘good pictures’, while thematic reports feature ‘talking heads’”(p. 14; see also Iyengar &Simon, 1983). The next section sums up and categorizes the framing techniques, or the framing mechanisms, especially applied by the mainstream print media. The first systematic research about framing techniques would be Harold Lasswell’s classic work on propaganda (1927). Based on World War I experiences, Lasswell defined propaganda as “the control of opinion by significant symbols, or, to speak more concretely and less accurately, by stories, rumors, reports, pictures and other forms of social communication”(p. 9). Lee & Lee (1939) identifies seven common devices of propaganda – name calling, glittering generality, transfer, testimonial, plain folds, card stacking and band wagon. All the above skills of speaking or writing involve choosing or not choosing certain symbolic words, or organizing words into a particular order, to eventually shape and affect the recipient’s mind. Although after 60 years we may no longer recall these devices in their original names, those tactics are still used and show

PAGE 22

12 their effects in present media practices (Pan & Kosicki, 1993; Lee & Yan, 1995; Kim, 2000). Some early media objectivity and media bias studies also touched upon framing techniques in the print media (Coffey, 1975; Fedler, Meeske &Hall, 1979; Fedler, Smith & Meeske, 1983; Merrill, 1965). John Merrill examines the “techniques of subjectivity” (p. 563) used by Time magazine in creating and reinforcing the stereotyped image of three presidents, Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy. To differentiate those “loaded words and expressions”(p. 564), he posits six bias categories: attribution bias, adjective bias, adverbial bias, contextual bias, outright opinion, and photographic bias. Those bias are noted either as positive (favorable) or as negative (unfavorable). The findings indicate the Time-stereotyped images of each president are, respectively “Truman: A bouncy man, sarcastic and shallow.” “Eisenhower: A smiling, warm-hearted, sincere leader.” “Kennedy: A president who was wealthy but generous in charity.” (pp. 567-568) Two following studies conducted in 1979 and 1983 found no big change in Time and Newsweek’s stereotyped coverage of other political leaders. After replicating Merrill’s six bias categories, Fedler et al. (1979) conclude that “Time continues to weave facts into semi-fictionalized language patterns that are designed to lead the readers’ thinking” (p. 359). In fact, Merrill and other researchers apply their researches to a general semantic theory (Merrill called it “semantic tricks” [1965, p. 565]), which “tells us about encoding, the translating of purpose, intention, or meaning into symbols or codes” (Severin & Tankard, 1997, p. 91). The conflict between static, limited language and virtually unlimited, dynamic reality forces media practitioners to impose their

PAGE 23

13 subjective judgments into the assumption-selecting process, as a way to transfer the outside reality into readers’ minds. In assessing the political objectivity in newspaper news reporting, Philip Coffey (1975) pursued this issue from a more technical perspective. He applied two quantitative measurements to examine the coverage of political news. One is the “Budd attention score,” which is based on a series of newspaper layout parameters: news story headings, page position, position in newspaper edition and length of story; the other is the “Stemple headline classification,” which allotted corresponding points to the five-scale headlines: streamer, spread head, two-column head, major one-column head and minor one-column head. The underlying logic of such a weighting is obvious and simple: “a story on page one draws more attention from readers than one on an inside page, and a spread or streamer is more arresting than a single-column heading” (p. 551). In brief, it reflects the intra-relationship of news items on an issue-they compete for more salience in a limited space market. Although Coffey finds actually no apparent bias in those news items he analyzed, his practical measurements remind media researchers that those visual elements in newspaper edition (headings, page positions, length and number of stories, etc.) play a latent role in influencing people’s first impression and importance judgments. In a series of analytical explorations on the media framing effect, Gaye Tuchman defines organizational schema as “strategic ritual”(1972, p. 660), or “professionalism and decisions flowing from professionalism”(1978, p. 2). According to Tuchman, media staff have built up many professional tactics or routine procedures to cope with outside pressures, such as deadlines, libel suits, and anticipated reprimands from superiors. After

PAGE 24

14 observing a daily metropolitan newspaper, Tuchman discovers four tactics that newsmen adopted to present “objective stories”. Presentation of conflicting possibilities; Presentation of supporting evidence; Judicious use of quotation marks, Structuring information in an appropriate sequence. The journalists also categorize news into different timeliness or newsworthiness groups, such as hard news, soft news, spot news, developing news and continuing news. The “typifications of kinds of news draw upon the way occurrences happen, not upon what is happening” (1978, p. 46). Here, Tuchman uses such concepts as “strategy” and “ritual” to emphasize that all these well-developed “conventions of news storytelling” (1978, p. 105) are consciously invented, and widely applied. “Just as quotation marks theoretically establish a distance between the reporter and a story and signal that the materials enclosed may be problematic”(Tuchman, 1972, p. 671). In his often-quoted case study on CBS News and the New York Times’ coverage of the New Left social movement, Todd Gitlin (1980) conceptualizes “frame” from a mass communication practitioner’s perspective. “Frames are principles of selection, emphasis, and presentation composed of little tactic theories about what exists, what happens, and what matters” (p. 6). But, what are these “principles” or “patterns” of cognition, interpretation and selection, or what are those framing mechanisms applied in media practice? To explore these questions, Gitlin locates the central themes and tones of the relevant news coverage, and then reaches “behind them to grasp the media’s central –usually unspoken – assumptions about the political world and about political opposition in particular” (p. 13). The devices Gitlin lists include trivialization, polarization, emphasis on internal dissension, marginalization, disparagement by numbers and

PAGE 25

15 disparagement of the movement’s effectiveness. For example, “the Times piece deprecated the size and significance of the march (the photo, the reference to ‘the principal occupant of the White House’); marginalized it by identifying it with youthful deviance (‘a handful of adults’, ‘a number of their elders’, ‘beards and blue jeans’); trivialized it by failing to cover the call, the picket signs, or the speeches; and polarized it to its ostensible right-wing equivalent by choosing a wire-service photo that likened Left to Right” (p. 58). To scrutinize the framing devices, Gitlin conducts a story-by-story qualitative content analysis. Besides those contextual accounts which set up the tone, theme and questions, he also takes into account some journalistic routine techniques, such as the column inches of news articles, the size and color of adjacent photographs, the size and caption of headlines, the position of the article and the juxtaposition arrangement. In fact, this carefully designed layout acts as a colorful packaging paper, decorating silently but effectively the content it serves. Comparative Study of Framing Most of the early framing literature focused mainly on United States’ domestic issues, either about a particular social movement, or about certain political figures. Although most of the issues studied contained a considerable amount of controversial components or value conflict, none of these cases involves distinct black-or-white moral evaluations or friend-versus-foe stances. Framing study, from its theoretical origin, is concerned about how some ideological beliefs, value judgments or subjective opinions are transferred from one group of people in a certain society to another group of people, by the mass media through their particular ways of reporting. There is nothing more value-loaded or ideological-driven than an international conflict between two politically or culturally opposite countries. Social identification theory tells us that people identify

PAGE 26

16 themselves with certain social strata whose members share a common social identification (Turner, 1982). Thus, we are not only who we are, but also who we are not. In times of crisis, people tend to identify their group membership “based on cognitive response (‘who am I?’), rather than on emotional response (‘Do I like these people?’)”(Severin & Tankard, 1997, p. 224). For example, while reporting a wild fire, American correspondents will naturally regard themselves as a reporter or journalist; whereas while covering an international conflict between United States and other countries, these same reporters will instinctively identify themselves as an American --whether they admit it or not. The Cold War Theme The Cold War theme dominated international politics after the end of World War II. Among all the important international issues that occurred in the second half of the 20 th century, most have been portrayed as a confrontation between two ideologically clear-cut “camps.” Value-loaded news stories enable framing researchers to compare this paradigm from a comparative approach. Such an approach has at least two merits. First, the comparative technique puts a particular issue in front of a large historical and political background that goes “beyond the explanations or rationalizations of the participants, placing the interpretation within a larger context than gatekeeper models or isolated case studies allow” (Herman, 1985, p. 138). Second, it provides a cross-check function, which allows researchers to double check the criteria of news selection and the process of news coverage in the same media system regarding different issues, or between different media systems on the same issue. As a result, we can try to clarify which proportion of the framing technique is due to the nation’s distinct political, cultural or social characteristics and which proportion is the result of the general mass media function as a whole.

PAGE 27

17 Herman (1985) conducted two comparative studies to demonstrate his “propaganda framework” hypothesis, based on democratic theory. The cases he examines are two pairs of similar events – the atrocity in Communist-controlled Cambodia with the strife in the U.S. ally East Timor, and the elections in El Salvador, a U.S. client state with Nicaragua, a country disliked by the U.S. government. According to his propaganda framework, the U.S. mass media should have treated these two similar events differently, depending upon their political implications for the U.S. national interests. Therefore, he argues “only a subset of issues or facts is made available to the general population.and views that deviate from an established view are confined to the fringes of the media and do not reach the bulk of the population” (p. 135). As a result, the favored state scored more points against enemy country on those politically correct issues -even if a fact has been shown to be the opposite. Conversely, those contradicting events that occurred in a friendly country will be deemphasized or marginalized. In the two cases compared, selective use of criteria and different stances in lines with a national political agenda are widespread and apparent in the American media news coverage. Allan Rachlin (1988) used “KAL 007” incident, which had been widely depicted in the Western media as an evil empire (the Soviet Union) deliberately and cold-bloodedly shooting down an “innocent” Korean passenger flight that strayed into its air space, to demonstrate his “hegemonic assumptions” about the U.S mass media. By looking upon the news discourse within the American mass media, and then comparing those to the reports from Canada’s media and Cuba’s media, Rachlin discloses some technical framing “filters”, which “shape our understanding of the world by placing blinders on us that permit only a very narrow vision” (p. 37), and consequently, establish and reinforce

PAGE 28

18 what he named as “hegemonic reality.” These frames or themes of media presentation include: determine the nature of ambiguous breaking news on the basis of preconceived value judgments instead of factuality; promote only supportive evidence while withholding the opposite and persist its frames regardless of the contradictory evidence (“noted but ignored and never considered,” [p. 43]); stimulate and exaggerate one-sided sentiments; adopt slanted moral standard, always implying the best intentions for one side and the worst for the other, and accept and quote government-supplied information or misinformation without serious questioning. On July 3 rd 1988, a U.S. Navy ship, the Vincennes, shot down an Iran Air Flight 655, killing its 290 passengers and crew. This military wrongdoing by the U.S., given its stunning similarity in political significance, magnitude of world coverage and complicated responsibility and moral charges to the KAL 007 incident, provided an opportunity for framing researchers to continue Rachlin’s comparative approach. Because “news frames are constructed from and embodied in the keywords, metaphors, concepts, symbols, and visual images emphasized in a news narrative”(Entman, 1991, p. 7), the news discourses in the Time, Newsweek magazine, CBS Evening News and articles from the New York Times and Washington Post are compared and decoded. Five framing traits of media texts are found and analyzed by Entman: 1. The size of the coverage: “magnifying or shrinking elements of the depicted reality”(p. 9) to manipulate a news event’s political importance. 2. The “consistent use of words and images that portrayed responsibility for the reported action” (p. 11), which answers the question of “who did it”. (i.e. Soviet: “murder in the air”; versus U.S.: “tragedy of technology”). 3. The “contrasting ways that victims were identified encodes and exemplified the difference in discursive domains”(p. 15). For example, referring to the victims in these two incidents, the news media use emotion-aroused phrases, such as

PAGE 29

19 stories of personal poignancy” to one group versus those emotion-free plain descriptive words, such as “those who died” to the other. 4. The “discursive domain also inhered in the choice of labels for the incidents, which tended to place them in categories that conventionally either, elicit or omit moral evaluation” (p. 18). For example, the U.S. media described the KAL incident most frequently as an “attack,” a word with strong implication of intentional responsibility, whereas the Iran Air incident was a “tragedy,” which dilutes the intentional hostility. 5. Generalizing from the attacks to the nature of the two political systems, the media built up a moralizing framing, which indicates that the “essentially evil” Soviet Union, “a national gospel for secrecy and suspicion”(p. 20) had committed the “ruthless crime;” whereas the Iran Air was shot down only because of the misjudgment of an individual, Captain Rogers of the US Navy Vincennes. Through those narrative techniques, two analogous incidents have been depicted as a cold-blooded moral outrage versus an understandable technical problem. The researchers also observed that the public opinion and political outcomes, either as a result of those framings or as an underlying reason of such framing, resonated soundly to the dominant framing of the news coverage (Rachlin,1988; Entman, 1991). Tiananmen Square Movement Another historical event, which has provoked considerable attention among communication researchers, is China’s 1989 Tiananmen pro-democracy movement (Kobland, et al. 1992; Lee & Yan, 1995; Kim, 2000). Due to its dramatic development, the sensitive atmosphere in the last stage of the Cold War backdrop, and the unforgettable visual and ideological conflicts throughout the entire process, the mass media’s comprehensive coverage displayed in full-scale the framing functions and those underlying national interests. For example, Lee & Yan (1995) hypothesize that the U.S. media and Japanese media would have applied different contextual themes in their news reports, in accordance with different national interests toward China. For instance, viewing China as an ideological adversary, American media would highlight the student

PAGE 30

20 protestors’ ideological aspirations, attribute more quotes to students, and describe the nature of the movement as slanted favorably toward students. In contrast, since Japan’s paramount concern about China was the economic relationship, its media would adopt a neutral manner as to those ideological ideas, legitimacy status of the movement participants as well as the nature of the movement. After studying the contexts, themes and sources of the news discourses released by two major news agencies, AP (U.S.) and Kyodo (Japan), the researchers found significant evidence to support their hypotheses (p. 12). Similarly, Kim’s (2000) Kwangju protest and Tiananmen movement comparative study reveals the crucial role of national interest in the implementation of framing techniques. The author examines two elements in the news context published by the New York Times and the Washington Post: the type and direction of news sources (official or demonstrators and positive or negative), and the three aspects of symbolic terms (demands of demonstrators, movement nature and final suppression). The findings are impressive, “U.S. elite newspapers used news sources and symbolic terms in a diametrical manner to report the two events. The events were reported in a manner that coincided with the U.S. government definitions”(p. 22). Three Dimensions of Framing The literature reviews above summarize chronologically, though far from exhaustively, communication researchers’ approaches to those key questions with regard to “how to frame” and “how to study frames.” Three common research characteristics can be summarized. First, framing studies rely heavily on the case study, especially the comparative study. As Gitlin (1980) has argued, “The proportion of a given frame that emanates from each of these sources varied from story to story; that is why stories have

PAGE 31

21 to be scrutinized one by one, as concretely as possible, before we can begin to compose general theories” (pp. 28-29). Common sense suggests that universality is contained in particularity. After comparing American media and Cuban media’s coverage of the KAL incident, Rachlin (1988) also notes, “while the principles guiding the journalism of the United States and Cuba are quite different, the journalistic products share same similar characteristics”(p. 92). Such a comparative case study approach enables researchers to sustain a relatively objective standpoint while analyzing a disputed issue. Second, in contrast to agenda-setting research, which concentrates on the quantity of news coverage and its relationship to public opinion, framing research pays more attention to the content, or the quality of the news discourse. The complexity and ambiguity of human language, the influence of the human sub-conscious on the information processing stage, and the sophisticated nature of political events enhances the difficulties as well as the necessity of framing research. Third, although strong framing effects have been disclosed or found in most of the literature discussed above, few, if any, are located and discovered through a common route. This “all roads lead to Rome” phenomenon reflects, on the one hand, the complexity of framing study; on the other hand, this academic discipline is still in its developing stage. Many academic criteria still need to be established. The following three dimensions of framing functions should be clarified prior to any framing study of print media. Visual Framing Dimension The visual framing devices in print media, especially newspapers, include all those elements presented to the readers when they first open a newspaper or a magazine. As to a particular news item, the page position of this article, its position in an edition, the size

PAGE 32

22 of the headings, the length of the story, the size, color and content of the photographs attached, and even its juxtaposition with neighboring articles could and may arouse some intuitive impressions and judgments among readers about the story. This is why many believe editors are so important and influential. Reporters provide the bricks and water, and editors design and build the building. The relative salience of an article may represent the assigned position in a hierarchic arena where the sizing and position matter. A streamer with a sensational-appealing photo on the first page imposes an irrefutable resonance among readers as to the importance of the event, or more precisely, the editors’ judgment about the issue’s importance. As Tuchman (1978) has argued, “Taken by itself, a fact has no meaningIt is the imposition of a frame of other ordered facts that enables recognition of facticity and attribution of meaning” (p. 88). Contextual Framing Dimension News is written in language, and language is made up of letters, numbers and words. Due to its static and limited nature, language can not always fulfill its task when we want to express certain feeling or depict the dynamic and unlimited social reality. The inherent meaning of certain words transfers, transforms and transfuses from every object it describes. That process makes symbolic codes themselves bear judgmental and emotional meanings. Thus, the choosing of words, or the process of writing a news item, is a subjective activity. For example, how should we define the nature of an event? How should we attribute a source? How should we name the involved parties? And how should we generalize the event’s influence? All these questions involve the selection of words, the translation of meaning and judgments, and consequently the interpretation and cognition of the event. For example, Pan & Kosicki (1993) classify four categories of framing devices in news discourse: Syntactical structures (i.e. the inverted pyramid

PAGE 33

23 format), Script structures (five Ws and one H in news writing), Thematic structures (the hypothesis-testing features), and the Rhetorical structures (metaphors, exemplars, catchphrases, depictions, etc.). “For example, news reports use designators such as ‘sources’ or ‘the Administration’ to give indications of the authoritativeness of an action or a statement. By using ‘Iraqi dictator’, a news report places Saddam Hussein in the same category with Hitler, Noriega, Stalin, and other generally hated man in American culture” (p. 62). Contrasted to the visual devices, which mainly imply the relative importance of an event, the contextual framing devices contribute to the cognitive judgments among readers. Such an effect has been summarized by Entman (1993) into four major functions: to define the nature of the event, to interpret the responsibility, to evaluate the moral basis of participants, and to recommend the final solution. Operational Framing Dimension Every news event has its own developing sequence, logical time order, and well-connected components. Such an organized structure reflects the internal linkage and essential logic of the particular issue. To deliberately ignore, deemphasize, or even withhold some key elements or evidence in certain news reporting, or to intentionally change the original sequence and time order of the event, will not only hurt the completeness of the issue being covered, but also directly affect readers’ ability to make a logical and appropriate interpretation. Just as in a murder trial, the key witness may intentionally conceal some important evidence or change the time order of the crime, so that the jury and the judge can not come to a proper conclusion. In fact, framing strategy takes advantage of the sophistication of social events, utilizing the space-limitation and deadline restrictions in print media as a professional excuse to curtail the complicated

PAGE 34

24 story into an established stereotype. The power of this framing strategy is that you may never find the truth unless the media change their mind. Actually, both contextual framing devices and operational framing devices are the skills of selection. The difference between these two often-confused functions lies in that the former is about the selection of words, and the latter is about the selection of the evidence or time order. (See Table 2-1). Table 2-1. Three dimensions of media framing Dimension Visual Contextual Operational Factors Space/position/picture Language/symbol/image Evidence/sequence Function Intuitive Cognitive Logical Influence Political importance Meaning and judgments Rationale and interpretation Devices 1. Position: page position, position in newspaper edition; juxtaposition. 2. Sizing: length of story (column inches); size of headline(streamer, spread head, etc.) 3. Photo: content, position, sizing, color, reference. 1. Word choosing: (name calling, positive versus negative description, moral judgment, responsibility attribution, etc.) 2. Source choosing: quotation inclination and discrimination; 3. Translation choosing: (esp. in foreign news reporting) 1. Evidence selection bias. 2. Time sequence change. Direct controller Editors Reporter/Editor Editor/ External pressure. Based on the definition of the three dimensions of framing strategy above, the researcher reframes the techniques and findings of those previous framing literatures into a new categorized table (see Appendix-A). As the table shows, the contextual framing

PAGE 35

25 strategy is the most frequently studied area in print media research. Most researchers treat it as the first and foremost unit of analysis. However, the less statistical-oriented and more personal-judgment driven methodology of contextual framing study does not exclude the researchers’ own framed subjectivity, thus to some extent undermining the external validity of the findings. Understandably, the operational framing approach is the least touched area. Not only because it is the most covert techniques of all the framing technique family, but also because it is difficult to establish an objective time-event schedule to justify the final findings. Similarly, although many framing studies take the visual effect into consideration, there is no consensus as to how to measure the actual influence of these visible mechanisms, and what are the applicable criteria to compare this effect among different media vehicles. Nonetheless, the combination of these three approaches enables us to get closer to the core of this unsettled paradigm, and makes framing research more like a statistically concrete science rather than an ideological-bound illustration. Hence, what is framing? --the “strategic ritual” (Tuchman, 1972), the “propaganda framework” (Herman, 1985), or the “hegemonic reality” (Rachlin, 1988)? Harold D. Lasswell, a political scientist, once outlined a five-part question as a universal criterion for communication research inquiry: Who says what to whom via which channels and with what effect? (1948). To answer these five questions accordingly in the process of media framing conceptualization, the following definition should be formed: Media framing (especially print media) refers to visual, contextual and operational tactics media communicators use to make up or cover up certain facts or opinions in their news report, as a way to serve certain interest groups or social values.

PAGE 36

26 Media Systems “Where do news frame come from?” (Gitlin, 1980, p. 249). To answer this question, Shoemaker & Reese (1991) set up a five-level hierarchy of influence: individual, media routines, organizational, extra-media and ideological level. In their bull’s-eye like hierarchy model, the individual level is located in the center of the multi-faced circle, and the ideological influence occupies the outer layer. The logic of this structure lies in that each layer plays a distinct role in the final gate-keeping function, and each inner layer is to some extent influenced or shaped by the outer layer power. (See also Shoemaker, 1991). As Rachlin (1988) put it, “Actually, the media resemble more than reflect. Media resemble the social reality of which they are part. Media institutions are part of what they report” (p. 28). For example, when we conduct some comparative research between two countries with different political systems, ideological beliefs and cultural backgrounds, all the inner-layer forces in this hierarchy will be overshadowed by the social and media system differences. Media Theories Till now, most of the media theories have categorized China’s media system and the U.S.’s media system into different, if not opposite, groups. One well-known classification of the press systems divides all the systems into four groups: authoritarian, libertarian, social responsibility, and Soviet-totalitarian (Siebert, Peterson, & Schramm, 1956). Through analytical observations, the authors come up with this normative theory based on the ideological distinction. According to this definition, the U.S. media system, as the representative of “Social Responsibility” in the 20 th century, acts in a socially responsible manner, to inform, entertain and sell its information products to the public. The media are regarded to be controlled by community opinion, consumer action, and

PAGE 37

27 professional ethics. In contrast, the Soviet-totalitarian media system, including China’s media system, is state-owned and closely controlled by surveillance and economic or political action of government. The chief purpose of this system is to “contribute to the success and continuance of the Soviet socialist system, and especially to the dictatorship of the party” (p. 7). Although this theory was first raised in the peak of the Cold War period, and the Soviet Union no longer exists, the ideological criteria and some of its descriptions are not totally forgotten. In times of international conflict, such an “us-versus-them” classification still may be seen and heard in many circumstances. In Altschull’s (1995) three “movements of the symphony of the press” (p. 419), United States and China are categorized into a market theme (or First World/ Western model) and communitarian theme (or Second World/ Eastern model), respectively. According to his definition, “In the market image, the press is seen as operating outside the control of government, as a watchdog or even as a kind of adversary of the government. In the communitarian image, the press is the creature of the government (or the party) endorsing its actions and seeking to persuade its readers and viewers to the same kind of endorsement” (p. 426). Although all these two systems believe they observe the true ideal of free expression in practice, they follow different policies, execute different strategies, provide different products, identify different media role perceptions, and finally perceive the other model to be deviant (See also Zhu, Weaver, et al. 1997). The underlying reason here is that the mass media are the “agents of power”—those who control the economic, political and social power in any system. Altschull says, “To expect that the mass media will make a dramatic U-turn and scoff at the wishes of the paymasters is to engage in the wildest kind of Utopian fantasies” (1984, p. 299). Parenti

PAGE 38

28 (1993) has summarized this situation into one short sentence, “Freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one” (p. 26). Media System in China and U.S. As Altschull has noticed, “Differences have always existed inside countries as well as between them” (1995, p. 423). The commercialization trend in China’s press system in the past decade has substantially changed the traditional landscape in media system. At present, though private-owned media are not publicly allowed, many of them actually are operated and financed by private investment. Moreover, more than 10 media groups are now listed on China’s stock market and the total number of stockholders in China has surpassed 60 million. On the other side, in recent years, the accelerating trend of ownership concentration in the U.S. media industry has triggered enormous discussions about its potential influences on freedom of press and hence the survival of democracy (McChesney, 1999; Bagdikan, 2000). In China, the Communist party has lowered its ideological tone in propaganda campaigns since adoption of the reform and opening-up to the outside world policy some 20 years ago. The well-known “one country, two systems” idea first raised by Deng, Xiaoping, has to some extent been applied in media system reforms. Today, the whole media industry separates more and more into two politically and economically distinct sections. The first section, composed of leading party newspapers and news journals, still adheres to the classic Marxist-Leninist media doctrine. The personnel of the newspaper, the finance and operation, the publishing and circulation, and even the arrangement of some important article, are still firmly controlled by the party organs as in the state-owned enterprises. The second section, which has blossomed explosively in the past five years, includes all those new-born market-oriented metro newspapers, fashion magazines

PAGE 39

29 and quasi-commercial television networks. All these new media now compete in an overly fierce information market in China. In order to survive, to develop, and to establish a reputable brand, the journalists spin themselves on an extremely sensitive edge – on one side is the market competition, where more and more new rivals rush in; on the other side is the political “black-hole” zone, where the party has the final and unchallengeable power. The foreign policy of China or international affairs that involve China is one of the “forbidden cities.” For example, only Xinhua News Agency is guaranteed the privilege to report sensitive international affairs, such as China’s major foreign policies, diplomatic activities, and government press conferences. As a result, the audience can only hear one well-coordinated voice from the central government. It may be that such a phenomenon takes deep root from the 3,000-year Confucian culture of value tradition, as well as strong nationalistic patriotism. As the typical model of a collectivism civilization, Chinese culture, as a whole, instinctively treasures harmony, authority and integrity over the individual and diversity, while facing the outside world. In the United States, the power of the Fourth Estate is built upon the strong belief of the free marketplace of various ideas. “Understanding and vision are sharpened on the whetstone of unfetted debate” (Rachlin, 1988, p. 2). However, many researchers believe that the free marketplace ideal is too good to be realistic. According to sociologist Herbert J. Gans (1979), all news media, whichever system they may belong, promote well-established enduring values. In the United States, for example, those enduring values include ethnocentrism, altruistic democracy, responsible capitalism, small-town pastoralism, and individualism, etc. The mainstream news media may approach the event from different angles, raise different questions, come up with different conclusions, but

PAGE 40

30 none of them will challenge the fundamental values or assumptions in the particular system, such as the individualistic social value, capitalistic economic system and representative democracy. Unless the foreign policy was apparent to be wrong (such as the Vietnam War), the U.S. mass media will, by their nature, stand side by side with the government (See also Bennett, 1990; Strobel, 1996). “Press and government both accept unquestioningly the same givens. They share the same fundamental political assumptions. They share a common hegemonic ideology or world view”(Rachlin, 1988, p. 130). Gitlin (1980) also notices that, “when reporters make decisions about what to cover and how, rarely do they deliberate about ideological assumptions or political consequences. Simply by doing their jobs, journalists tend to serve the political and economic elite definitions of reality” (p. 12). As a result, news people start from where they are, and finally reach to where they are expected to be. Therefore, Tuchman (1978) concludes that “through its routine practices and the claims of news professionals to arbitrate knowledge and to present factual accounts, news legitimates the status quo” (p. 14).

PAGE 41

CHAPTER 3 HYPOTHESES The purpose of this study is to compare and scrutinize the framing functions and techniques adopted by Chinese mainstream media and American mainstream media, during their coverage of the collision between Chinese fighter plane and the U.S. spy plane in South China Sea. China and the U.S. are two important powers in the world’s political and economic stage and heavy-weight adversaries by almost every standard. Culturally, they both are the core and the standard-bearers in their distinct civilizations –East versus West, Collectivism versus Individualism, and Confucianism versus Protestant. Economically, they are the leading powers– developing versus developed, most populous country versus most prosperous country. Politically, they represent two competing ideological super-institutions and political systems – elite-authoritarian versus representative democracy, Chinese-style socialism versus American corporate capitalism. When these two forces collide head-on in a sensitive time, on a sensitive territory, around a sensitive issue, it is likely that the mainstream mass media on both sides will execute all those framing strategies and mechanisms to protect the status quo. Whether the mouthpiece of the party, or the watchdog of the government, with regard to the framing effects, both media systems would be expected to reach in a similar manner, but in different directions in their news reporting. 31

PAGE 42

32 The Collision On April 1 st 2001, a US Navy EP-3 spy plane (alleged to be the “treasure-trove of intelligence equipment”) was eavesdropping on China at the South China Sea on a routine operation. Two Chinese F-8 fighters took off, chasing and monitoring the plane. At 9:07 A.M., the US plane collided with one of the fighters, the fighter crashed, and its pilot was missing and presumed dead. The collision occurred 70 miles off the Chinese island of Hainan in international airspace, but within China’s 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone. The damaged spy-plane then entered Chinese airspace without approval and made an emergency landing at a Chinese military airbase also without permission. Both sides blamed the other side. According to the Chinese foreign minister spokesman, “The US plane suddenly veered at a wide angle towards the Chinese planes, rammed and damaged a Chinese jet fighter”(Xinhua News, April 4 th , 2001, para. 2&6). The US Pacific Command Dennis C. Blair portrayed a different scenario, “Chinese fighters intercepted the aircraft, and one of them bumped into the wing of the EP-3 aircraft”(US Pacific Command, April 1 st , 2001, para. 2). China held the 24 US crewmembers for investigation and demanded that US government apologize. The Bush administration firmly refused to apologize, and claimed the stranded surveillance plane “had sovereign immunity.” An unexpected mid-air collision had turned into a serious diplomatic standoff. For both governments, the air crash could not have come at a worse time. President Bush’s new foreign policy regarded China as a “strategic competitor” instead of a more friendly “strategic partner,” and the Pentagon upgraded the Pacific area to the most likely theatre of future conflict, which casts China as the principal adversary. Moreover, Washington was planning to sell advanced anti-missile equipment to Taiwan, a renegade province

PAGE 43

33 regarded by China, and the sale was expected within three weeks. On the other side, the growing hostile gestures from the only world superpower rekindled the Chinese people and their leaders’ memory of the 1999 bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. ** Finally, the diplomatic stalemate was unlocked through a strategically ambiguous double “very sorry” letter. Both sides claimed victory on the final solution. An intense crisis largely aroused by misunderstanding and miscommunication was eventually solved through deliberate misunderstanding and miscommunication. During the whole process, the mass media on both sides framed this event in a politically different, but journalistically similar manner. Four newspapers To properly reflect the major characteristics of framing function on both sides, two distinct national newspapers are selected from each country, respectively. These four newspapers (Table 2-2) can be categorized into two cross-country comparable groups: political-elite orientation and commercial-public orientation. Table 2-2. Basic facts of four newspapers Country U S A China Name New York Times USA Today People’s Daily Beijing Youth Daily Circulation 1,109,371* 2,241,677* 1,800,000 500,000 Headquarter New York McLean, VI Beijing Beijing First Year of Publication 1851 1982 1948 1949 Owner New York Times Co. Gannett Company, Inc. Chinese Communist Party’s Central Committee Beijing Communist Youth League * Data from AP news (2001, Oct.), Circulation of the nation’s 40 biggest papers. Retrieved at www.ap.org/pages/indnews/ ** Few Chinese people, if any, believe the most technically sophisticated CIA could use an old map to locate its target, especially since it was the ONLY target submitted by the CIA during the entire Yugoslavia bombing campaign.

PAGE 44

34 The New York Times and People’s Daily – Standard Bearer and Agenda-Setter. The New York Times is generally recognized as the most respected newspaper in the U.S., and is probably the most frequently studied newspaper among media researchers. The underlying reasons are due to not only its strictly-observed principle set by Adolph S. Ochs in 1896 –“To give the news impartially without fear or favor regardless of any party, sect or interest involved.”--, but also its significant influence on policy-decision makers, world leaders and other news media. “The New York Times is one gateway for an issue onto the national media agenda” (Dearing, 1996, p. 33), because “The New York Times news service conveys the next day’s front-page stories to thousands of other newspapers, broadcasting stations, and other media institutions late each day, thus influencing the next morning’s headlines and news priorities” (Dearing, 1996, p. 32). Danielian and Reese (1989) refer to this function as inter-media agenda-setting. Harrison E. Salisbury eulogizes the New York Times like this, “When the Times spoke, the chancelleries of Europe listened and the Kremlin took notice. Most presidents of the United States looked at page one of the New York Times even before their morning coffee” (1980, p. 8). Though not sustaining its power through professional reputation, China’s People’s Daily possesses a parallel position in international affairs generally, and in China’s domestic politics particularly. As the only official organ of the Communist Party Central Committee, People’s Daily has played an irreplaceable role in almost every China’s historical turning point in the second half of the twentieth century. Although titled as “People’s” daily, its principal readers are party members in all levels of governmental departments and state-owned enterprises. Its approximate two million circulations result mainly from mandatory subscriptions in public money, though shrinking steadily due to

PAGE 45

35 the competition from other market-oriented newspapers. Nonetheless, it still holds paramount power in interpreting major policies and settling the tone for lower-level party media. In the case of major international conflict or policy adjustment, People’s Daily routinely releases its editorial in advance to party-controlled newspapers and television stations, requiring them to reprint or rebroadcast the article in an assigned similar outlet. USA Today and Beijing Youth Daily -Market-Oriented Grass-Root Newspapers. USA Today, though a 30-year short history compared to its century-long counterparts, assures its value and success through its unique identification and marketing strategy. It takes advantage of new technologies, such as satellite transmission, color printing, as well as its innovations in the newspaper industry in the television age, USA Today has established itself as the first truly national newspaper in the United States. The paper adopts shortened news items, vivid color, striking graphics, even TV-set like newsstands, to suit the taste of the mass public who live in a fast-food fast paced cultural environment. Unlike elite newspapers, which regard themselves as policy makers, USA Today covers the news from a public-oriented entertainment angle. The latest circulation data show that USA Today in 2001 was No. 1 in the U.S., with an average daily circulation of 2,241,677 copies, more than twice as many as that of the New York Times (AP News, 2001, Oct.). Beijing Youth Daily is the best analogue for USA Today in present China. As the official organ of Beijing Communist Youth League, Beijing Youth Daily carved out a market niche by skillfully and successfully balancing between the propaganda party line and the commercial bottom line (Zhao, 1998, pp. 141-150). Unlike official mouthpieces which passively rely on the propaganda leading department for financial subsidies and editing guidance, the paper covers dull and dry political news events from a personal

PAGE 46

36 angle, applies visual appealing techniques (large and sensational headlines, huge photos, stylish and innovative edition makeup), relies on street sales for most of its circulation, and finances itself with tremendous advertising revenue. Moreover, one of its most distinct characteristics is its tireless effort to investigate domestic controversial stories and to raise an independent point of view on international affairs, which in return bring not only many troubles from the propaganda officials, but an overwhelming support among readers. For example, according to a readers’ survey conducted in 1995( Yu, 1995), the overall approval rating for Beijing Youth Daily is 84%, far exceeding the general approval ratings of 61% for major national newspapers. Hypotheses Corresponding to the three dimensions clarified previously, the following three hypotheses have been established. Hypothesis 1 For the Bush administration, this diplomatic standoff with his newly defined “strategic competitor” provided a crucial test to his widely-doubted ability and experience in handling foreign affairs. The result of Bush’s debut in international stage could shape the domestic public opinion and world view after the election controversy. For China’s part, even before this tragic incident, the Chinese people and its leaders had already felt the hostile rhetoric from the newly-elected Bush, and painfully refreshed and reinforced their memories about the embassy bombing in Yugoslavia two years ago. Moreover, such a direct military conflict between two nuclear powers has never occurred since the end of the Cold War.

PAGE 47

37 From a political importance perspective, the mainstream media on both sides should focus on one location during that time span – Hainan Island. All four newspapers would have come up to a similar judgment regarding the political importance of every step of this event. As a result, the visual framing strategy utilized by the four newspapers would reflect this tendency. H1a: by adopting similar visual framing strategies, Chinese and American mainstream media will depict this event in a similar slope. Each curve will reach peaks and bottoms in a relatively similar time schedule. According to media systems theories, Chinese media are the passive organs of the ruling party, whereas the American media determine their reporting allocation according to market selection rather than administration pressure. On the other hand, political-oriented newspapers are more sensitive to the international conflict issues than the market-oriented newspapers, regardless of the political systems in which they operate. Although the market-oriented newspapers will focus on this leading story during the whole process, the magnitude and degree of their coverage will be lower than those of the political-oriented newspapers. As a result, we can assume that H1b: The overall visual framing effects of Beijing Youth Daily and USA Today (market-oriented newspapers) will be lower than the effects of People’s Daily and the New York Times (political-oriented newspapers), respectively. Hypothesis 2 Contextual framing works through deliberately choosing opinion-loaded words or authoritative sources to define responsibility and moral basis. For example, how to name an event (accident or incident)? How to identify the involved action (spy mission or reconnaissance routine)? How to treat the actors in the event (spy, detainee, hero or Top

PAGE 48

38 gun)? And where they search for the facts (own government or the other side)? The answers to all these questions build up not only piles of news discourses, but also the judgmental frames for the readers. One contextual tool that has been widely manipulated in international events by both sides is language translations and mistranslations. Due to the language barrier between the Chinese and American people, the audience on each side can only hear the other party’s voice through media’s translations, which by no means, may be immune to contextual framing. Given the sensitive time, sensitive location and sensitive nature of this collision, both parties would have adopted all kinds of contextual framing techniques to occupy the moral high ground, and accuse the other side of wrongdoing. Since the foreign policy report in China is strictly controlled by the Communist Party, the news event portrayed by the Chinese media would be more homogenous and one-sided. H2a: by adopting similar contextual framing techniques, both mainstream newspapers tend to depict their own side as morally superior, whereas the other party as the wrongdoer. As to the degree of such an inclination, the Chinese media will outscore the American counterparts in this area. Furthermore, because of the strict control of information gathering and disseminating in China, the researcher assumes that Chinese newspapers would only publicize the official version of the event released by the government. As to the relevant foreign policy and result assessment, there would be only one interpretation and evaluation in Chinese newspapers. In contrast, American newspapers would be more likely to quote the sources from both sides, though not objective either.

PAGE 49

39 H2b: Although both sides rely on their own government sources as their prime news sources, the Chinese newspapers are less likely to quote sources from the other side than are the American newspapers. Hypothesis 3 The blocking of the free flow of information, though weakened by the Internet expansion in recent years, has still been carefully and successfully executed in international news coverage, either under the pressure from the government directly, or by the influences from certain interest groups. Such an intentional omission creates either a time lag or an information lag in people’s reasoning. As a result, the audience’s logical judgment may be distorted to a preferred direction. To frame this sensitive international standoff into a certain stereotype, and to support this frame with persuasive evidence, the mass media on both sides would emphasize some favorable elements and downplay or neglect those negative evidence or developments. Similarly, the time order published by the mass media would be different from the actual time order of the event. H3a: Both sides will deliberately ignore or withhold some unfavorable evidence and change the actual time order of some key elements during their news coverage. Since the Chinese media face more direct pressure from the government and the ruling party to serve the established foreign policy, it would be common for them to curtail or distort the existing truth. As to the American side, the fierce competitions in the information market reduce the possibility of completely withholding certain fact. However, to downplay one side’s argument whereas to highlight the other side’s statement was the most frequently utilized tactic.

PAGE 50

40 H3b: With regard to the extent and degree of such a maneuver, Chinese newspapers are more frequently to withhold certain unfavorable message than that of the US newspapers.

PAGE 51

CHAPTER 4 METHODOLOGY Time Span From April 1 st. 2001 to April 30 th 2001, the Sino-US spy plane crisis went through all important diplomatic phases. On April 12 th , all the 24 crew members were allowed to leave Hainan Island where they had spent 11 days in custody. On April 18 th , the two parties sat along the table in Beijing to negotiate such issues as responsibility, compensation and the detained plane. On April 25 th , President Bush made a harsh remark that the US would do whatever it takes to defend Taiwan. April 30 th , China finally allowed US technicians to inspect the destroyed reconnaissance plane in Lingshui airport. Unit of Analysis All the hardcopies of two Chinese newspapers during that 30-day period were collected and arranged in time order. The microfilm versions of the two American newspapers were examined and the relevant articles were photocopied. All the reports and pictures regarding the collision issue, including news, editorials, features, photos, graphs and public opinion polls were selected and coded. Coding Guidance Visual Framing Index To facilitate the comparison, a visual framing index quantifies the importance of various visual framing techniques. For example, all the articles regarding this event were coded into five layout categories, the leading article on the front page (on the upper-left corner), article on the upper-half page on the front page, article on the lower-half page on 41

PAGE 52

42 the front page, article on the upper-half page on the inside page, and article on the lower-half page on the inside page. All these five categories were allotted different importance points. Similarly, the size of the picture and the length of the article (word count) were also taken into consideration. Finally, all these figures were added up together to form a visual framing index for each day each paper. Thus, four visual framing curves were obtained and examined. Page and prominence The reason of only recording the number of the article and its position on the upper or lower half page is due to the huge difference in the total page volume among the four newspapers studied. For example, the regular total page per day for the New York Times is around 72, People’s Daily is 12 to 24, Beijing Youth Daily 36 to 64. However, except for business section, sports section and advertising space, the total hard news page for the New York Times and USA Today is around 12 pages on a regular day. Similarly, People’s Daily and Beijing Youth Daily generally spend eight to12 pages in hard news and editorials. Word count Overall, there is no big difference in the number of the words between Chinese and English languages when they translate from one to another.* To facilitate the word count task and guarantee the accuracy of the result, the Lexis-Nexis website was searched to attain the exact word result for each article studied in the two English newspapers. _________________________________________________________________ * In commercial English-Chinese translation service, the word-count difference between these two languages is relatively small.

PAGE 53

43 Similarly, Beijing Youth Daily and People’s Daily both provide in their websites the searchable on-line versions of their past five-year reports as well as the exact word count for each article. Picture and graph All the relevant pictures and graphs were also counted and coded into two size categories: small picture and large picture. Any picture larger than the area of two-standard columns multiplying by two-inches (an area a little larger than a typical business card) was coded as large picture, and the smaller one as small picture. Juxtaposition Although this item is not included in the final visual index, this skill is still very popular in Chinese newspaper’s layout design. The researcher recorded all the page designs where the positioning or content of the neighboring picture or article had a noticeable implication on the interpretation of the article examined. Contextual Framing Items Nature of event In the first paragraph of the article, the coder located the word or phrase which described the nature of the event covered (“emergency landing” or “violation of international law”, “international airspace” or “the exclusive economic zone”, “hostile spying mission” or “routine military conduct”). The word or phrase, according to its inherent meaning and descriptive direction, was categorized into three attitude categories: positive, neutral and negative for each party, respectively. For example, in an article published on April 5 th , 2001 via Xinhua News Agency, the first paragraph reads, “The US spy plane that caused the clash of a Chinese military plane in the coastal area off South China’s Hainan Province grossly violated international

PAGE 54

44 law” (para.1). The above paragraph apparently depicted the US side as negative from the Chinese viewpoint. In contrast, one USA Today article described the incident in its first paragraph like this, “It’s too early to know whether China’s failure to release a US spy plane and its 24 –member crew results from clumsiness or intentional brinkmanship” (April 3, 2001, pg. 12A). This time, the Chinese side was negatively portrayed. Responsibility In the whole article, the responsibility accusation, if any, was categorized into three attitude categories for each side. If in the article, the responsibility claims from both sides were equally cited, the article was regarded as neutral in this matter. Result assessment In the whole article, those arguments with regard to foreign policy analysis, consequence evaluation, bilateral relationship, international reaction will also be categorized as positive, neutral and negative toward each side. For example, after the release of those 24 crew members, Chinese newspapers unanimously reported that the Chinese government actually won this international standoff by forcing the Bush administration to retreat from its initial harsh stance. Such a portrait was coded as positive toward China. Similarly, when American newspapers evaluated the safely return of the crew member as a diplomatic victory, the news was coded as positive toward U.S. Generalization In the whole article, those arguments which generalize to broader issues, such as political systems, ideology difference, moral basis, tradition, were categorized as positive, neutral and negative. For example, the phrases such as “Communist dictatorship” or “authoritarian regime” about the Chinese government were coded as negative toward China; similarly, the phrases such as “hegemonic politics” or

PAGE 55

45 “hypercritic policy” about the U.S. government were treated as negative toward United States. News sources All news sources quoted in the news item were classified into seven groups: Chinese official, Chinese non-governmental, other media sources in China, international sources, American official (including Congress members), American non-governmental (scholars and public) and American media. Mis-translation Some crucial translations or quotations from the other side in the news items were cross-checked with the original phrases and the particular language environment. The implication and findings were reported in the post hoc section. Operational Framing Structure Control group In order to establish an objective time-sequence of the event as a reference, the researcher introduced two English-version newspapers – The Strait Times of Singapore and the Guardian of the United Kingdom-as the control newspapers. The major reports during this 30-day time span in these two newspapers were carefully scanned and then compared to the coverage of those four newspapers studied. The events or evidence selected must satisfy two basic requirements. First, they have been publicly reported by both of the two control newspapers and at least one of the two studied newspapers as major stories; second, they possess some logical significance that the neglect of its existence or intentional delay of its publicity will definitely alter the causal interpretation and problem definition among the audience.

PAGE 56

46 Event covered by two sides The first time of the key event / evidence being publicized by the two sides were recorded and compared with the timing of the control newspapers. After eliminating the regular media operational procedure (such as news transmission, editing and printing), the time lag between the news occurred and the news reported was calculated. Coder and Pretest Four graduate students (two Chinese students and two American students) from the University of Florida were invited to code the contextual part of the questions (Question 7 to Question 10, Appendix B) on their own country’s newspapers, respectively. Since the contextual framing is about the technique of choosing words, it is reasonable to assume that the native speaker would have better understanding in differentiating the delicate implication of contingent expressions. All the coders were trained as to the coding discipline and requirements. Each coder worked independently during his coding process. A pretest was carried out to examine the workability of the coding sheet and the reliability of the coding result. Unless both coders came up with a same judgment unanimously, the result was not input into the database. Those incompatible results were discussed among the two coders and the researcher. If the results still could not be decided after this step, the results were coded as neutral.

PAGE 57

CHAPTER 5 FINDINGS From April 1 st 2001 to April 30 th 2001, a total of 340 news items about the spy-plane collision was published by the four newspapers (People’s Daily, 120; Beijing Youth Daily, 48; USA Today, 63; and New York Times, 109). All 340 articles were coded with these three-dimension framing questions. As to the contextual framing questions, 87.6% consistency for the two Chinese coders and 85.5% consistency for the two American coders were achieved through using Holsti’s (1969) reliability formula. All the results were input into SPSS data analysis software and the major findings were listed below. Visual Framing Dimension In order to construct a visual framing measure for each newspaper, all the three visual framing components (page position, word count and picture attached) were recorded into numerical points to denote their unique importance. First, the leading article on the front page was given five visual framing index (VFI) points; the article on the upper half page of the front page three VFI points. By the same token, the other three page positions were allotted two and one point, respectively. Second, the number of word count for each news item was divided by 1000, and the result was recorded as the corresponding VFI points. Third, each small picture was allotted 0.5 VFI points and each large picture was allotted one VFI point. The reason for dividing the word count by 1000 and allotting one VFI point to the large picture lies that the space of 1000 words is approximately equal to a standard large picture. So, the final formula for visual framing index is 47

PAGE 58

48 VFI = Page Position Points + Word Count / 1000 + Picture Point * No. of Picture For example, for the leading article on the front page, with 1500 words, one large photo and one small picture attached, the final VFI will be VFI = 5 + 1500 / 1000 + (1 * 1 + 1 * 0.5) = 8. Finally, all the VFI values were added together for each day each newspaper, to yield four comparable visual framing lines (See Figure 5-1). The normalized z-score indexes were also computed, yielding a strong correlation with the VFI results above: Rsq. = 0.97. Time span (April 1, 2001-April 30, 2001)2927252321191715131197531 Visual Framing Index50403020100 People's DailyBeijing Youth Daily USA Today New York Times Figure 5-1. Visual framing index lines for four newspapers Hypothesis 1 H1a: by adopting similar visual framing strategies, Chinese and American mainstream media will depict this event in a similar slope. Each curve will reach peaks and bottoms in a relatively similar time schedule.

PAGE 59

49 From the chart above, we can observe two evident high VFI points (first on April 4 th or April 5 th , and the second on April 12 th ) for each of the four newspapers (except for Beijing Youth Daily at the second high point). The first high point corresponds to the first wave of intense coverage of the collision which was formally disclosed on April 2 nd by American government and on April 3 rd by Chinese government. On April 12 th , 2001 the 24 crew members who had been detained in Hainan Island for 11 days boarded an American airplane and headed home, after a carefully worded unapologetic apology letter was formally accepted by the Chinese government. At that day, the event reached its natural peak. We can easily figure out this tendency in the reporting practice by the four newspapers with regard to their nearly identical visual framing treatment. The continuous intense coverage of the four newspapers sharply decreased to a near-zero level around April 16 th 2001. That decline marks the temporary quiet stage of this heated event. From April 22 nd to April 25 th , the VFI lines of two Chinese newspapers fluctuate again in contrast to their American counterparts. By tracking the VFI lines of the spy-plane collision coverage, the research can conclude visually, though far from perfection, that all these newspapers covered this widely-noticed event, following a similar visual framing strategy and in a similar manner. Thus, the hypothesis is largely supported. H1b: The overall visual framing effects of Beijing Youth Daily and USA Today (market-oriented newspapers) will be lower than the effects of People’s Daily and the New York Times (political-oriented newspapers), respectively.

PAGE 60

50 From Table 5-1, it is apparent that during the 29-day period, People’s Daily had higher VFI score than did Beijing Youth Daily for 19 days, and the New York Times scored higher points than USA Today for 21 days. Table 5-1. Visual framing index Date (April, 2001) VFI for People’s Daily VFI for Beijing Youth Daily VFI for USA Today VFI for New York Times 2 2. 5 3.9 12.1 14.6 3 4.9 4.9 19.6 25.2 4 21.9 22.8 23.4 37.6 5 25.2 25.9 17.2 27.0 6 28.7 6.1 11.1 18.4 7 21.1 17.1 .0 17.8 8 20.3 10.0 .0 19.5 9 21.0 8.9 11.6 23.3 10 11.1 6.0 4.5 21.3 11 16.1 6.0 12.6 19.8 12 31.9 11.2 40.5 43.4 13 19.2 2.3 14.9 28.2 14 15.4 4.4 .0 25.5 15 .0 9.7 .0 24.8 16 7.2 .0 9.8 4.4 17 8.9 .0 .0 4.6 18 9.4 3.4 3.5 7.0 19 6.0 7.6 9.4 7.3 20 9.2 14.0 6.6 4.1 21 11.7 6.6 .0 .0 22 1.7 .0 .0 13.8 23 13.9 8.0 .0 .0 24 2.8 .0 7.6 4.4 25 15.0 10.3 2.7 2.8 26 2.1 .0 2.4 .0 27 4.2 9.6 3.9 4.7 28 2.4 10.2 .0 2.8 29 .0 .0 .0 7.3 30 1.2 2.3 3.4 3.1 Mean. 11.5 7.3 7.5 14.2 S.D. 9.1 6.5 9.2 11.9 Total 334.7 211.2 216.6 412.7 The average VFI point for People’s Daily (11.5, S.D. =9.1) is 4.2 points higher than that of Beijing Youth Daily (7.3, S.D.=6.5); and the New York Times’ average VFI

PAGE 61

51 (14.2, S.D.=11.9) is 6.7 points higher than that of USA Today (7.5, S.D.=9.2). All the weekend (Saturday & Sunday) editions of USA Today during this one month period did not touch upon this issue at all. Another interesting comparison is the different treatment of pictures or graphs in the four newspapers’ news reporting (See Figure 5-2). USA Today has the largest percentage of pictures attached to news in its coverage, whereas People’s Daily has the smallest percentage of picture reporting. Merely eight of its 120 news items about the spy plane collision carried a photo. (Chi-square=70.00, df=3, p <0.001)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyPercentage1009080706050403020100 Picture & Graphs.with pictureno picture 476048753405293 Figure 5-2. Use of photos and graphs by newspapers Juxtaposition A total of 18 juxtaposition phenomena have been found in those 340 news stories, 9 times for each side. Most of the juxtapositions in the US newspapers are photo-related juxtapositions. For example, while reporting the “Knotty Task of Beijing Talks on Plane”

PAGE 62

52 (New York Times, A 12, April14 th , 2001), the New York Times’ editor decorated the context with a picture “Outcry Among China Scholars,” which featured some exiled Chinese scholars protesting the Chinese government at a news conference. Such an arrangement implied that the Chinese government did not comply with international standards in their dealing with outside world. Similarly, Chinese newspaper, especially People’s Daily, routinely assigned reports related to the US government to a hard-to-find corner, accompanying it with a harshly-worded editorial. Contextual Framing Dimension To facilitate the overall comparison of contextual framing, all four questions, with regard to positive or negative descriptions of the nature of the event, responsibility, result assessment and generalization were coded as +1 for a positive answer, 0 for a neutral answer and -1 for a negative answer. Eight scores (four answers for each side) of each article were then added together to get two contextual framing results toward China and U.S., respectively. The final mean results for all four newspapers are illustrated in Figure 5-3, Figure 5-4 and the One-Way ANOVA table (Table 5-2) below.

PAGE 63

53 (TSS=292.04, df=3, sig.<.001)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyMean of Attitude toward China4.03.02.01.00.0-1.0-2.0-3.0-4.0 -1.0-1.01.3.6 Figure 5-3. Overall contextual attitude framing on China (TSS=446.45, df=3, sig.<0.001)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyMean of Attitude toward USA4.03.02.01.00.0-1.0-2.0-3.0-4.0 -1.6-2.3 Figure 5-4. Overall contextual attitude framing on USA

PAGE 64

54 Table 5-2. One-way ANOVA for two contextual framing attitudes ANOVA 292.038 3 97.346 86.928 .001 376.268 336 1.120 668.306 339 446.447 3 148.816 99.665 .001 501.703 336 1.493 948.150 339 Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Attitude toward China (fourquestions 7,8,9,10combined) Attitude toward USA (fourquestions 7,8,9,10combined) Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Hypothesis 2 H2a: by adopting similar contextual framing techniques, both mainstream newspapers tend to depict their own side as morally superior, whereas the other party as the wrongdoer. As to the degree of such an inclination, the Chinese media will outscore the American counterparts in this area. It is visually evident and statistically significant that both two parties framed themselves as positive and the other party as negative in this issue. In the overall contextual framing, People’s Daily and Beijing Youth Daily score an average of positive +0.55 and +1.33 on China, respectively, whereas the New York Times and USA Today both score around -1.0, one point below the neutral line. Similarly, as to the average contextual framing figure on the United States, People’s Daily scores more than two points below zero, which means in every People’s Daily’s article, at least two of the four contextual framing items have been coded as negative. In the same category, Beijing Youth Daily scores -1.6 points, slightly less than that of People’s Daily, but still well below the neutral line. As to the New York Times and USA Today, they are both in the positive territory, though not as prominent as their counterparts. It is apparent that the two Chinese newspapers are more likely to portray the Chinese side as positive, and the US

PAGE 65

55 side as negative. Thus, the Hypothesis two has been significantly supported in this research. (See Table 5-3 & Table 5-4 below, respectively.) Table 5-3. Homogeneous subsets toward China TEXTCHIN Attitude toward China (four questions7,8,9,10 combined) Scheffea,b 109 -1.03 63 -.98 120 .55 48 1.33 .996 1.000 1.000 Newspaper 4 New York Times 3 USA Today 1 People's Daily 2 Beijing Youth Daily Sig. N 1 2 3 Subset for alpha = .05 Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 73.782.a. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of thegroup sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed.b. Table 5-4. Homogeneous subsets toward USA TEXTUSA Attitude toward USA (four questions 7,8,9,10combined) Scheffea,b 120 -2.28 48 -1.58 109 5.50E-02 63 .33 1.000 1.000 .591 Newspaper 1 People's Daily 2 Beijing Youth Daily 4 New York Times 3 USA Today Sig. N 1 2 3 Subset for alpha = .05 Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 73.782.a. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of thegroup sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed.b. When the responsibility question was analyzed independently, the similar framing tendency could be found also (See Figure 5-5 & Figure 5-6 below).

PAGE 66

56 (TSS=16.53, df=3, sig.<0.001)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyMean of Responsibility1.0.8.5.30.0-.3-.5-.8-1.0 -.2.5 Figure 5-5. Responsibility framing toward China (TSS=46.42, df=3, sig.<0.001)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyMean of Attitude Figure1.0.8.5.30.0-.3-.5-.8-1.0 -.6-.8 Figure 5-6. Responsibility framing toward USA

PAGE 67

57 The two American newspapers have larger proportion of editorials in their total coverage than Chinese newspapers’. (See Figure 5-7). Overall, nearly 30 percent of American newspapers’ reports are some sort of non-news materials, such as columnist editorials, background introduction, etc. In contrast, only 16 percent of People’s Daily’s news discourses are non-news editorials, and eight percent for Beijing Youth Daily. (Chi-square=12.31, df=3, p <0.007)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's Daily1009080706050403020100 newseditorial 727192842829816 Figure 5-7. Proportion of news/editorials by newspapers H2b, Although both sides rely on their own government sources as their prime news sources, the Chinese newspapers are less likely to quote sources from the other side than are the American newspapers. All the direct and indirect quotations in the news context were coded into seven news sources: Chinese government, Chinese public or scholar, Chinese media, US government (Congress), US public or scholar, US media and international community. The final results are consistent with the hypothesis. (See Figure 5-8 & Figure 5-9)

PAGE 68

58 (TSS=3.84, df=3, sig.<.08)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyAverage Count2.52.01.51.0.50.0 .4.5.8.5 Figure 5-8. Mean of news source from Chinese government (TSS=287.74, df=3, sig.<0.001)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyAverage Count2.52.01.51.0.50.0 1.72.3.1 Figure 5-9. Mean of news source from US government

PAGE 69

59 For example, Beijing Youth Daily quoted Chinese government source an average of 0.8 times in its news article, whereas only 0.1 times the US government source. Similarly, USA Today attributed its reports to the US government source an average of 2.3 times, whereas to the Chinese government 0.5 times. As to the frequency comparison, American newspapers paid more attention to the other government’s voice than did the Chinese newspapers. Another interesting finding is about the quotation frequency from the Chinese public or scholars. (See Figure 5-10). (TSS=55.93, df=3, sig.<0.001)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyAverage Count2.52.01.51.0.50.0 .7.2.51.3 Figure 5-10. Mean of news source from Chinese public The New York Times quoted Chinese public or scholar sources an average of 0.7 times per article, a figure even higher than that of the Beijing Youth Daily, and three times higher than that of the USA Today.

PAGE 70

60 Most interestingly, the People’s Daily quoted international media or world reaction four times more than did the USA Today or the New York Times. (See Figure 5-11). (TSS=25.72, df=3, sig.<0.03)New York TimesUSA TodayBeijing Youth DailyPeople's DailyAverage Numbers2.52.01.51.0.50.0 .2.2.3.8 Figure 5-11. Mean of news source from international community From April 5 th 2001, People’s Daily opened a new column titled as “World Reaction to Spy-Plane Collision”, and published supportive reactions from international media or world leaders, most of whom are Third World leaders. This daily column extended to the end of the April, 2001. Mis-translation Two major mis-translations had been widely and deliberately reported by newspapers on both sides.

PAGE 71

61 First, the so-called “cowardly” letter to President Bush On April 6 th 2001, the wife of the missing Chinese pilot, Ruan Guoqin, wrote a moving letter to President Bush. The letter, which contains lots of emotional words, was treated prominently by the news media on both sides, but with a different concentration. American media, except the brief introduction of the letter, highlighted only one word in that letter: “cowardly,” while the woman talked about President Bush’s refusal to voice an apology. That translation, though widely reported and frequently repeated, is a middle-school level mistranslation. The original Chinese phrase used by the woman was “Lin Xi”, which means “be sparing with”. As a result of this misuse, a humble, passionate letter from a heartbroken woman turned into an aggressive and rude insult. Second, the double-“very sorry” letter to Chinese Foreign Minister Tang On April 11 th 2001, the heated deadlock was finally resolved by a carefully worded English letter which contained linguistic ambiguity and diplomatic intelligence. In the Chinese version, “very sorry” was eventually translated as “Shenbiao Qianyi” by the press, which means to express profound and deep regret, an expression that is emotionally more apologetic than “Yihan” (regret) or “Baoqian” (sorry), but politically less formal or rigid than “Daoqian” (apologize). The shades of meaning among various expressions not only provide diplomats with space to hammer down their “face saving” public diplomacy, but also enable the mass media to create “framed” misunderstandings and opportunities. Operational Framing Dimension H3a: Both sides will deliberately ignore or withhold some unfavorable evidence and change the actual time order of some key elements during their news coverage.

PAGE 72

62 H3b: With regard to the extent and degree of such a maneuver, Chinese newspapers will more frequently withhold certain unfavorable messages than the US newspapers. The following events or evidences which were postponed or ignored by the four newspapers satisfy two basic requirements. First, both of the two newspapers on one side failed to cover the issue during the whole one-month period, or failed to report it in a timely manner, whereas the other side’s newspapers and the control group newspapers had reported it widely and promptly. Second, the absence of the event or evidence had a direct influence on readers’ proper understanding about the ongoing incident and the evaluation of its consequences. Major Omissions in Two Chinese Newspapers The following facts were major omissions in Chinese newspapers. President Bush’s initial (April 2 nd & April 3 rd ) harsh public statements which undercut Chinese President Jiang’s effort to solve the conflict secretly and, most importantly to maintain face both before the outside world and its own people. Mr. Bush “demands” Jiang that “Our priorities are the prompt and safe return of the crew and the return of the aircraft without further damaging or tampering” (Sanger, the New York Times, April 3, 2001, Section A, page 1). The commander of the US forces in the Pacific, Dennis Blair, in a press conference held on April 2 nd , 2001 accused the Chinese pilot of playing “bumper cars in the air”. (Rosenthal & Sanger, the New York Times, April 2, 2001, Section A, page1). Such irresponsible remarks, which for the first time disclosed this collision to the public, hardened Chinese leaders’ stance in the whole standoff. US military offered to help shortly after it learned that the pilot was missing, but China turned down the offer. (Sanger, the New York Times, April 3, 2001, Section A, page 1). President Bush sent a condolence letter to Ruan Guoqin, the wife of the missing pilot, in reply to a grief-filled letter from her. (Perlez, the New York Times, April 9, 2001, Section A, page 10). The two-“very sorry” letter was not translated and publicized in full by the Chinese media. (See People’s Daily, April 12, 2001, page 1).

PAGE 73

63 On April 13, 2001 “the Pentagon released a videotape of a close encounter between a Chinese fighter jet and an American spy plane that it said underscored a pattern of aggressive and reckless flying by China’s Air Force in recent months.” “Mr. Rumsfeld bluntly blamed the recklessness of the Chinese pilot for the accident.” (the New York Times, April 14, 2001, Section A, page 6). Major Delays in Chinese Newspapers Table 5-5. Event delayed by Chinese newspapers Event being delayed in reporting First reported by China’s media Time lag On April 4, Secretary of State Colin Powell expressed “regret” for the loss of Chinese pilot in the collision. April 6 th 1 On April 8, Powell admitted that the US plane had intruded Chinese airspace without permission and expressed sorrow for the missing pilot. April 11 th 2 On April 4, Powell sent a letter to Chinese Foreign Minister Tang, expressing “regret” for the loss of Chinese pilot, and conveying President Bush’s condolence and prayer to the pilot’s family. April 8 th 3 From April 12 to April 17, President Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Pentagon officials repeatedly denied the responsibility for the collision after the American crew members returned home safely. April 19 th At least 3 days. (Note: The time lag listed above has been adjusted by 12-hour time difference between Beijing and Washington, and the necessary transmission and printing time for newspapers is also taken into consideration.) From these apparent operational framing strategies, it is evident that the Chinese government, through its direct control of news release, withheld or deliberately neglected unfavorable evidence or new developments. Major Omissions or Downplayings in Two American Newspapers In those 172 articles in two American newspapers regarding this mid-air collision, all emphasized that the collision occurred in international airspace, except one article which briefly quoted Chinese Foreign Minister Spokesman’s remark about the concept of -mile Exclusive Economic Zone”. According to the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea and general international law, foreign aircraft enjoy the freedom of overflight above another nation’s exclusive economic zone, but such freedom is by no means unrestricted. The convention stipulates at

PAGE 74

64 the same time that foreign planes, while enjoying the freedom of overflight over an exclusive economic zone of another country, “shall have due regard to the rights and duties of the coastal state and shall comply with the provisions of this convention and other rules of international law in so far as they are not incompatible with this part.” The plane “can not infringe upon the national security and peaceful order of the coastal state, and any act ignoring the above rights of the coastal country will abuse the freedom of overflight.” (Li, Qin, People’s Daily, April 16, 2001, page 4, para.3). Neglecting this principle international convention, the American media instead repeatedly stated that territorial waters and airspace extend only 12 miles from land and accused China of claiming a territory that was larger than international standard. “US has designated an Air Defense Identification Zone in the airspace over its coastal waters, and the sphere of the zone is much wider than that of the exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles,” a range which has been abided by most countries in the world. “The US demands that any foreign planes in the Air Defense Identification Zone should fly according to the US stipulated course, and should obey the procedures the US has prescribed.” (Li, Qin, People’s Daily, April 16, 2001, page 4, para.5). There was no report in the US media about the US’s own claim of an identification zone which was widely highlighted by Chinese and world media. Since the world reaction (including most US allies in Europe) to the US government’s stance and performance in this spy-plane collision was far from positive, there were few reports regarding the public opinion and reactions worldwide in the two newspapers studied. However, due to the strong belief of a free information market among media practitioners in the United States, American newspapers seldom withhold their fresh materials for later use. Instead, chasing a scoop is the competitive nature of this information industry. There is no obvious delay in any of the key stories or new developments in the two American newspapers.

PAGE 75

CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION Visual Framing Dimension The four visual framing index lines in Figure 5-1 illustrate a similar tendency in these four newspapers of implementing those visual framing tactics. Some inconsistent points in the four curves may have reflected the influence of some intervening factors. For example, the two-day delay of the first high point on China’s side reveals the direct government intervention in news release and the Communist Party’s initial policy. The relative low point for Beijing Youth Daily on April 12, 2001 could be explained as its disappointment at the final diplomatic solution, rather than its lack of news sensitivity. The intense coverage of this issue in Chinese newspapers from April 22 nd to April 25 th , may have been the result of, on the one hand, the US’s decision to sell Taiwan advanced weapons, a policy strongly opposed by Chinese government; and on the other hand, the return of Chinese President Jiang Zemin from his 15-day trip to Latin America nations. Another round of propaganda campaign was rekindled by the new development and with Jiang’s presence. The apparent difference in visual framing between politically oriented newspapers and the commercially oriented newspapers supports the argument that different political orientations and market positioning affect the media’s judgment on the political importance of certain event. A photo or graph plays an important role in visual framing, and its use may represent, to a larger extent, the self-identification of the newspaper. For example, the 65

PAGE 76

66 fact that only seven percent of People’s Daily’s news reporting was attached to a photo may marks its orthodoxy, sometimes dull appearance of a self-respect party organ. Likewise, the high proportion of photo reporting in USA Today may indicate its pursuit of a consumer market. Contextual Framing Dimension The context of the news items constructed a self-serving framework for the audience. Interestingly, immediate public opinion polls echoed such a frame. In a Gallup poll conducted between April 6 th and April 8 th 2001, 68 percent of 1,025 adult respondents thought the US “is not at fault” in the mid-air collision. In the ABC News / Washington Post poll conducted on April 5 th , 2001 only five percent of 505 adult respondents thought this incident was mainly “the United States fault”, whereas 25 percent thought it was China’s fault. Similarly, in a CBS News poll conducted between April 4 th and April 5 th 2001, 58 percent of 660 adult respondents thought the US spy plane was “in the right” (Pollingreport.com, 2001). On the other hand, in a Chinese public opinion poll held by a famous website (www.sina.com), more than 95 percent of over 10,000 Chinese respondents thought the US plane should bear the full responsibility. Considering the larger magnitude of value-loaded contextual framing in Chinese newspapers reporting and their relatively low proportion of editorial space, the researcher came up with the following conclusions. First, there is no clear-cut distinction between news reports and editorial articles in Chinese news reporting practice. Some of the news articles contain a remarkable proportion of content which should be, by definition, rewritten as editorial rather than as news itself. Second, the editorial articles in American newspapers are more balanced and relatively objective than China’s. Both pro

PAGE 77

67 government opinions and anti-government viewpoints get a chance to be published on the Ed-Op page. As to the news sources category, the New York Times quoted eight times the postings from some popular Chinese websites. This is a far-reaching and journalistically professional move, as the chat rooms in Chinese websites and their approximate 30 million frequent users are becoming the hotbed of unofficial, but mainstream public opinion. Although People’s Daily beat its counterparts in the category of international news sources, the criterion of news selection was far from unquestionable, since it treated Saddam Hussein’s anti-American speech splashily, and sometimes even quoted the “letter to the editor” from American newspapers as the newspapers’ own point of view. Operational Framing Dimension Apparently, Chinese newspapers, either in terms of extent or in terms of magnitude, beat their counterparts in the operational framing category. If we treat the truth as the zero point, the stories on Chinese newspapers are far away from the zero point, though American-style depictions are not perfect either. Chinese newspapers intentionally withheld some key evidence in their news coverage. For example, at the beginning, by not telling its people the initial harsh statements of President Bush and Commander Blair, the Chinese government forced itself in an embarrassing corner to face the mounting public anger inside and increased pressure outside. In the end, to soften the heated anger nationwide, the Chinese media had to withhold the complete version of the apologetic letter. By doing that, the entire occurrence had been shaped and framed into a previously established mold. Likewise, the American media downplayed in their reports some key information of the incident. For example, the omission of the 200-mile exclusive economic zone and

PAGE 78

68 the US’s own wider identification area reinforced American readers’ frame that a militarily aggressive China and a reckless “top gun” pilot caused the collision and the standoff. It needs to be noted here that the omission or deliberate delay of news reporting by the four newspapers by no means represents the overall performance of the entire mass media as a whole. Nonetheless, the extent and the magnitude of these findings in this research with regard to the operational framing strategy are still significant enough to help build the complete framework of framing theory. Summary Two basic facts make framing research meaningful and significant. First, people don’t live in the vacuum; second, a fact itself doesn’t have a mouth. As a result, we watch everything through a huge frame, and at the same time, our existence constitutes a fraction of other people’s frames. All these illusions are extracted by the mass media every day, reinforced by the mass media every week, and revitalized by the mass media every month. The data collected in this particular case study demonstrate, from a comparative perspective, framing functions in two socially and politically different media systems. The magnitude of divergence among the four newspapers with regard to three dimensions of framing reinforces the adaptability of such a new categorization. However, from an academic point of view, the design and execution of this research is not without defects. First, the actual readers’ reaction toward those framing strategies, especially for contextual framing techniques, was not examined in the research. Instead, the coders and the author himself substitute, at least partially, for the audience’s role. Although from the content analysis designing stage, the researcher tried to minimize the proportion of

PAGE 79

69 subjective judgment in the coding process, it is practically impossible to get an absolutely objective result in any social research. Thus, the personal interpretation of the author and coders cast a layer of subjective color on the final results. Second, the language problem must be addressed. Cross-culture studies always face some kind of “comparing incomparables” dilemma. To correctly and accurately translate a phrase from one language to another language without losing all of its delicate meaning requires a highly professional expert. Also, one of the two languages, Chinese is widely known for its complexity and ambiguity. Moreover, the volatile media vocabulary and delicate diplomatic rhetoric increase the difficulties in the pursuit for accuracy. Nonetheless, the selection of words and their underlying implications constitute one of the essential components of framing study, thus further research in this regard is highly recommended. Third, the design of this research is based upon the three dimensions of framing categorization, which, to my knowledge, lack relevant methodological establishment to follow. Some of the operationalization, such as the visual framing index points, are to some extent, arbitrary. Thus, the internal validity and integrity of the data relied considerably on personal experiences and understandings, which by no means, are authoritative. Despite the shortcomings of the research design, the researcher wants to quote Rachlin’s (1988) argument to end this study, “There are striking similarities here in the character—though obviously not the perspective – of the American free press and a state-controlled press” (p. 92).

PAGE 80

70 To understand framing, as tried in this research, is a necessary step to build knowledge about it and eventually to “deframe” the illusions surrounding the fact. By doing that, communication researchers can get closer to the ultimate goal of social science research – the Truth.

PAGE 81

APPENDIX A THREE DIMENSIONS OF FRAMING STUDIES

PAGE 82

Table A-1. Three dimensions of framing studies Author Time Media Type Case Studied Contextual Framing Visual Framing Operational Framing Lee, A.M. & Lee, E.B. 1939 Broadcasting & Printing Examples from Father Charles E. Coughlin’s radio program Seven propaganda devices: name calling, glittering generality, transfer, testimonial, plain folks, card stacking and band wagon. Merrill, J.C. 1965 News magazine(Time) How Time magazine stereotyped three U.S. presidents: Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy Attribution bias; adjective bias; adverbial bias; contextual bias and outright opinion. Photographic bias Fedler, Meeske & Joe 1979 News magazine(Time) How Time magazine covered four presidents: Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter Adopt Merrill’s categories; divided biases into positive, neutral and negative. Cartoon bias Fedler, Smith & Meeske 1983 News magazine(Time & Newsweek) How Time & Newsweek portrayed JFK, Robert Kennedy &Edward Kennedy. Replicate Merrill’s measurements, adding reference sources. 72

PAGE 83

Table A-1. continued 73 Author Time Media Type Case Studied Contextual Framing Visual Framing Operational Framing Coffey, Philip J. 1975 Newspaper Political newsstories in eight Colorado daily newspapers Budd’s attention score: (news story headings, page position, position in newspaper edition and length of story) & Stempel’s headline classifications: (Streamer, spread head, two-column head, major one-column head and minor one-column head). Tuchman, Gaye 1972 Newspaper 10 articles from a daily metropolitan newspaper 1, presentation of conflicting possibilities; 2, presentation of supporting evidence; 3, the judicious use of quotation marks; 4, structuring information in an appropriate sequence Tuchman, Gaye 1978 TV news,Newspapers The woman’s movement in 1970s Narrative forms: inverted pyramid, block styles, relocating factuality and judicious use of quotation marks TV: bird’s eye view vs. worm’s eye view Hard news vs. soft news Gitlin, Todd 1980 TVnetworks, New York Times New Left liberal movement “the Time’s piece deprecated the size and significance of the march; marginalized it by identifying it with youthful deviance; trivialized it to its ostensible right-wing equivalent by choosing a wire-service photo that likened Left to Right”(p.58) Column inches of article, size of photograph attached, the size of headline, position of article and juxtaposition

PAGE 84

Table A-1. continued Author Time Media Type Case Studied Contextual Framing Visual Framing Operational Framing Herman, Edward S. 1985 Mass mediaas a whole and New York Times particular 1, strife in Cambodia & East Timor; 2, Election in El Salvador and Nicaragua Propaganda framework (publicity campaign) – selective use of criteria, deliberately make up the unsupportive topics to the unfriendly country, withhold those unfavorable items of the client countries. Rachlin, Allan 1988 TVnetwork, New York Times, magazine & Canadian and Cuban media The shooting down of Korean Airline 007 by then Soviet Union nature determination (Murder in the sky); evidence of responsibility (Communist cold-bloodiness); emotional stimulation (global outrage), moral evaluation (disregard human lives/ready to murder); source quoted and relied on (unquestioning acceptance of government-supplied explanation) Cover of magazine; Headlines; Photographs. 1, Withhold those unfavorable information; 2, jump up to the “irrefutable” proof which finally proved to be “nonexistent”; 3, first reaction time to the incident (delay the report in Cuba) 74

PAGE 85

Table A-1. continued 75 Author Time Media Type Case Studied Contextual Framing Visual Framing Operational Framing Entman, Robert, M. 1991 1, Time, Newsweek; 2, CBS Evening News 3, New York Times & Washington Post Soviet fighter shot down Korean Flight 007 in 1983; U.S. Navy ship shot down Iran Air Flight 655 in 1988. 1, the consistent use of words and images that portrayed responsibility for the reported action, agency (Who did it?); 2, encouraged or discouraged identification with those directly affected by the act (victims discrimination); 3, advanced a particular categorization of the act (choice of labels); 4, stimulated or suppressed broad generalization from the act (political systems / personal fault). Sizing --the essence of framing (magnifying or shrinking elements of the depicted reality to make them more or less salient (p.9)--measures and helps determine a news event’s political importance. (P.10) Number of program aired or stories published. Lee, Chin-Chuan & Yang Junghye 1995 NewsAgency (AP in US and Kyodo in Japan) Tiananmen Student movement in China (1989) 1, Emphasis of movement demand (ideological aspirations vs. specific, concrete demands); 2, Legitimacy of the movement groups attributed sources—student protestors vs. Chinese government; nature of movement—protest vs. turmoil descriptive verbs—attack vs. forbid.

PAGE 86

Table A-1. continued Author Time Media Type Case Studied Contextual Framing Visual Framing Operational Framing Kim, sung Tae 2000 Newspapers: New York Times & Washington Post Kwangju movement in Korea (1979) and Tiananmen Movement in China (1989) Type and direction of news sources—government/demonstrators; positive/neutral/negative; Symbolic Terms— demands of demonstrators movement nature suppression of government 76

PAGE 87

APPENDIX B CODING SHEET SAMPLE Framing Effect Research Coding Sheet Article ID No. _________ Coder ID: A. (China Coder A) B. (China Coder B) C. (American Coder A) D. (American Coder B) 1. Paper name: A. People’s Daily B. Beijing Youth Daily C. USA Today D. New York Times 2. Date: _________. Part A: (Visual Framing)__________________________________________________ 3. Page & Prominence: A. Leading article on the front page (on the upper-left corner) B. Article on the upper half page on the front page C. Article on the lower half page on the front page. D. Article on the upper half page on the inside page. E. Article on the lower half page on the inside page. 4. Word Count: ____________________________. 5. Picture & Graphs: A. No. B. Yes, ----------B1, Small picture ( < 2 column * 2 inch) No. __________ 77

PAGE 88

78 B2, Large picture ( >= 2 column *2 inch) No. __________ [Note: 2 column *2 inch approx.= the size of a typical business card] 6. Juxtaposition: (The positioning or content of the neighboring picture or article has a noticeable implication on the interpretation of the article studied.) A. No. B. Yes. b1: Article Title: _________________________________ b2: Juxta-Items: ________________________________ Part B. (Contextual Framing)______________________________________________ 7. Nature of event (First Paragraph): A: No. B: Yes----Positive Neutral Negative CH: +1, 0 -1 US: +1, 0 -1 8. Responsibility (Whole Article): A: No. B: Yes----Positive Neutral Negative CH: +1, 0 -1 US: +1, 0 -1 (Note: if the responsibility claims from both parties are equally mentioned in the article, the article is regarded as “neutral”) 9. Result assessment (whole article, refers to the arguments regarding foreign policy analysis, consequences evaluation, bilateral relationships, etc.) A: No. B: Yes----

PAGE 89

79 Positive Neutral Negative CH: +1, 0 -1 US: +1, 0 -1 10. Generalization (Whole article, refers to the context generalizing to other broader issues, such as political system, ideology, moral basis, tradition, etc.): A: No. B: Yes----Positive Neutral Negative CH: +1, 0 -1 US: +1, 0 -1 11. News Sources: A. No. B. Yes -----(list the number of times being quoted) a. _____ Chinese Official / Government departments b. _____ Chinese Scholars / Public reaction c. _____ Other Chinese Media (news report & editorial) d. _____ American Official / Government (Congress) e. _____ American Scholars / Public reaction f. _____ Other American Media (news report & editorial) g. _____ International news sources (leaders, media, scholars) 12. Mis-Translation: A: No. B: Yes-----: ___________________________________________. Part C. (Operational Framing)___________________________________________ 13. Event covered: ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________. 14. Event occurred Time: _______________ ______________________________. (the earliest time that the event being publicized).

PAGE 90

LIST OF REFERENCES Altschull, J. Herbert (1984). Agents of Power: the role of the news media in human affairs. White Plains, N.Y.: Longman. ----(1995). Agents of power: The media and public policy. N.Y.:Longman. AP News (2001, Oct.). Circulation of the nation’s 40 biggest papers. Retrieved on Nov. 7, 2001 at www.ap.org/pages/indnews/ Bagdikian, Ben H. (2000). The media monopoly. (6 th ed.). Boston: Beacon Press. Bennett, W. Lance (1990). Toward a theory of press-state relations in the United States. Journal of Communication, Spring, 103-125. Coffey, Philip J. (1975). A quantitative measure of bias in reporting of political news. Journalism Quarterly. 52, 551-53. Cohen, Bernard (1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press. Dearing, J.W. & Rogers, E.M. (1996). Agenda-setting. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Entman, Robert M. (1991). Framing U.S. coverage of international news: contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran Air incidents. Journal of Communication, 41(4), 6-27. Entman, Robert M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), Autumn, 51-58. Fedler, Fred, Meeske, Mike & Hall, Joe (1979). Time magazine revisited: presidential stereotyped persist. Journalism Quarterly, 56, 353-359. Fedler, Fred, Smith, Ron & Meeske, Mike (1983). Time and Newsweek favor John F. Kennedy, criticize Robert and Edward Kennedy. Journalism Quarterly, 60, 489-496. Gamson, W.A. & Modigliani, A. (1987). The changing culture of affirmative action. In R.G. Braungart & M.M. Braungart (Eds.), Research in Political Sociology (Vol. 3, pp.137-177). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 80

PAGE 91

81 Gans, Herbert J. (1979). The messages behind the news. Columbia Journalism Review. Jan.-Feb., 40-45. Ghanem, Salma (1997). Filling in the tapestry: the second level of agenda-setting. In M. McCombs, D. Shaw & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory. Pp.3-14. Mahwah, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gitlin, Todd (1980). The whole world is watching—mass media in the making and unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley: University of California Press. Goffman, Erving (1974). Framing analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row. Herman, E.S. (1985). Diversity of news: “Marginalizing” the opposition. Journal of Communication, 35, 135-146. Holsti, Ole R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading, MA: Addision – Wesley. Iyengar, Shanto (1987). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Iyengar, Shanto (1997). Framing responsibility for political issues. In Shanto Iyengar & Richard Reeves (Eds.), Do the media govern? pp.276-282. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Iyengar, Shanto & Simon, Adam (1993). News coverage of the Gulf Crisis and public opinion: A study of agenda-setting, priming and framing. Communication Research, 20(3), 365-383. Kahneman, D. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Science, 246, 136-142. Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350. Kim, SungTae (2000). Making a difference: U.S. press coverage of the Kwangju and Tiananmen Pro-Democracy Movements. Journal of Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(1), 22-36. Klapper, J.T. (1960). The effect of mass communication. New York: Free Press. Kobland, C. E., Du, L. & Kwon, J. (Spring, 1992). Influence of ideology in news reporting: case study of New York Times’ coverage of student demonstrations in China and South Korea. Asian Journal of Communication, 2, 64-77.

PAGE 92

82 Lasswell, H.D. (1927). Propaganda techniques in the world war. New York: Peter Smith. Lasswell, H. D. (1948). The structure and function of communication society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas: A series of addresses. N.Y.: Harper. Lee, Chin-Chuan & Yan, Junghye (1995). Foreign news and national interest: comparing U.S. and Japanese coverage of a Chinese student movement. Gazette, 56, 1-18. Li, Qin (April, 2001). US plane violates international law. People’s Daily, April 16, 2001, page 4, para. 3 &5. Lippmann, Walter (1922/1965). Public opinion. New York: The Free Press. McChesney, Robert W. (1999). Rich media, poor democracy: communication politics in dubious times. Urbana &Chicago: University of Illinois Press. McCombs, M.E. (1997, August). New frontiers in agenda-setting: Agendas of attributes and frames. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. Chicago. McCombs, Maxwell E.& Ghanem, Salma (2001). The convergence of agenda-setting and Framing. In Stephen D. Reese, Oscar H. Gandy, August E. Grant (Eds.), Framing Public Life: Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of the Social World. Mahwah, N.Y.: Lawrence Erlbaum. McCombs, Maxwell E. & Shaw, Donald L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176-187. McCombs, Maxwell E. & Shaw, Donald L. (1993). The evolution of agenda-setting research: Twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. Journal of Communication, 43(2), Spring, 58-67. Merrill, John C. (1965). How Time stereotyped three U.S. presidents. Journalism Quarterly, 42, 563-570. Myers, Steven Lee. The Pentagon: US tape is said to show reckless flying by Chinese. The New York Times, April 14, 2001, Section A, page 6, column 1; para.1&4. Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Pan, Zhongdang & Kosicki, Gerald M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55-75. Parenti, Michael (1993). Inventing reality: the politics of news media. (2 nd ed.). N.Y.:St. Martin’s Press

PAGE 93

83 Perlez, Jane. (April 9, 2001). Powell warns of damage to ties as crisis drags on, The New York Times, Section A, page 10, column 1; para4. Pollingreport.com. Retrieved on Feb. 24 2002 at www.pollingreport.com/china.htm Rachlin, Allan (1988). News as hegemonic reality: American political culture and the framing of news accounts. New York: Praeger. Reese, S.D. & Danielian, L.J. (1989). Inter-media influence and the drug issue: Coverage on cocaine. In P.J. Shoemaker (Ed.), Communication campaigns about drugs: government, media and the public, pp29-45. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rosenthal, Elisabeth & Sanger, David E. (April 2, 2001). US plane in China after it collides with Chinese jet. The New York Times, Section A, page 1, column 6; para3. Salisbury, Harrison, E. (1980). Without fear or favor: The New York Times and its times. N.Y.: Times Books. Sanger, David E. (April 3, 2001). Bush is demanding a “prompt” return of plane and crew. The New York Times, Section A, page 1, column 1; para2 &15. Scheufele, Dietram A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103-122. Scheufele, Dietram A. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication and Society, 3(2&3), 297-316. Severin, Werner, J. & Tankard, J.W. Jr. (1997). Communication theories: Origins, methods, and uses in the mass media. (4 th ed.). New York: Longman. Shoemaker, Pamela J. (1991). Gatekeeping. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Shoemaker, Pamela J. & Reese, Stephen D. (1991). Mediating the message: theories of influences on mass media content. N.Y.: Longman. Siebert, F.S., Peterson, T.B. & Schramm W. (1956). Four theories of the press. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Strobel, Warren, P. (1996). The CNN effect. American Journalism Review, 18 (May), 33-37. Tuchman, Gaye (1972). Objectivity as strategic ritual: An examination of newsmen’s notion of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology, 77, 660-79.

PAGE 94

84 Tuchman, Gaye (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: The Free Press. Turner, J.C. (1982). Toward a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and inter-group relations, pp. 15-40. Cambridge, Eng: Cambridge Univ. Press. USA Today News (April, 3 rd 2001). Rising hostilities boost risks in spy-plane incident. USA Today. Pg. 12 A. US Pacific Command. (April, 1 st 2001). Transcript: US Pacific Command briefing on US-China plane incident. Retrieved on Feb. 24, 2002 at www.defense-aerospace.com/data/verbatim/data/ve171/index.htm Xinhua News (April, 4, 2001). Chinese FM spokesman gives full account of air collision. Retrieved on Feb. 24, 2002 at http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20010404/393124A.htm Yu, Guoming (1995). Beijing Youth Daily: The newspaper that refuses to behave properly. (Bu anfen de Bejing Qingnian Bao). Research on Youth Work in Beijing, Aug. & Sept., 19-20. Zhao, Yuezhi (1998). Media, market, and democracy in China: Between the party line and the bottom line. Urbana and Chicago: Univ. of Illinois Press. Zhu, Jian-hua, Weaver, David, Lo, Ven-hwei, Chen, Chongshan & Wu, Wei. (1997). Individual, organizational, and societal influence on media role perceptions: A comparative study of journalists in China, Taiwan, and the United States. Journal of Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(1). 84-96.

PAGE 95

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Xu Wu was born on August 3 rd , 1969 in Beijing, China. In 1988, he attended the People’s University of China, where he received a Bachelor of Arts degree. During his study there, Wu published his first book on the fate and struggle of 50 Chinese contemporary intellectuals. After graduation, Wu worked as an assistant editor and reporter in the Domestic Department, Xinhua (New China) News Agency. In 1997, he set up a media consulting company that sponsored and published the first soccer weekly newspaper in Beijing. Realizing his passion for mass communication research, Wu joined the University of Florida to pursue a master’s degree in Mass Communication. After graduation, Wu plans to further his graduate study and eventually return home to continue his media consulting career. 85