首页> 外文OA文献 >Insane or evil? How Norway's Dagbladet and Aftenposten newspapers covered the perpetrator of 22 July 2011
【2h】

Insane or evil? How Norway's Dagbladet and Aftenposten newspapers covered the perpetrator of 22 July 2011

机译:疯了还是邪恶?挪威的Dagbladet和aftenposten报纸如何报道2011年7月22日的肇事者

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

This article investigates how the two Norwegian newspapers Aftenposten and Dagbladet framed the reporting about Anders Behring Breivik (henceforth Breivik) in the aftermath of the terror attacks at the government building in Oslo, leaving eight dead behind, and the killing of 69 young people at the AUF youth summer camp on Utøya on 22 July 2011. On the basis of critical discourse analysis, Robert Entman’s framing theory and theories about enemy images, we have analysed a selection of articles from a total sample of 1323 articles covering landmark periods related to the attacks of 22 July 2011: the immediate reaction (22–29 July); the meeting in court to prepare the trial (14–15 November); and the presentation of first psychiatric report (29–30 November). Did the media speculate, before Breivik’s identity was known, on the possibility that Muslim extremists were responsible? An analysis of the editorials in Aftenposten and Dagbladet concludes that Aftenposten hypothesized that Muslims might be behind the attack, while Dagbladet mostly avoided such speculation. The divergence in representation is reiterated in the interviews the authors conducted with the two newspapers’ editors. After Breivik’s identity became known we found three dominating frames, the perpetrator as a ‘right-wing extremist’, as an ‘insane person’ or as an ‘attention-seeker’. The framing analysis show that the ‘insane’ frame was the most usual in both Aftenposten and Dagbladet, followed by the ‘extreme right wing’ frame and ‘the attention-seeker’ frame. The article discusses how this framing might have influenced the long-term consequence for public debate in Norway.
机译:本文调查了挪威的两份报纸Aftenposten和Dagbladet在奥斯陆政府大楼发生恐怖袭击后如何对安德斯·贝林·布雷维克(Anders Behring Breivik)(henceforth Breivik)的报道进行了陷害,造成八人丧生,并杀死了69名年轻人。 AUF青少年夏令营于2011年7月22日在Utøya举行。基于批判性话语分析,罗伯特·恩特曼(Robert Entman)的成帧理论和有关敌意图像的理论,我们从1323篇文章的样本中选择了一些文章,这些文章涵盖了与袭击有关的标志性时期2011年7月22日:立即作出反应(7月22日至29日);筹备审判的法庭会议(11月14日至15日);并提交了第一份精神病学报告(11月29日至30日)。在布雷维克的身份被人们所知之前,媒体是否在猜测穆斯林极端分子可能对此负责?对Aftenposten和Dagbladet社论的分析得出的结论是,Aftenposten假设穆斯林可能是袭击的幕后黑手,而Dagbladet大多避免了这种猜测。作者在与两家报纸的编辑进行的采访中重申了代表制的差异。在布雷维克的身份广为人知之后,我们发现了三个主导框架,肇事者是“右翼极端主义者”,“疯子”或“关注者”。框架分析表明,“疯狂”框架在阿夫滕珀森和达格布拉德最常见,其次是“极右翼”框架和“寻求注意者”框架。本文讨论了这种框架可能如何影响挪威公众辩论的长期后果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号