Domesticating a Global Moment

Elisabeth Eide, Risto Kunelius, Bergen Nov 18 2010

Short history of MediaClimate

• Born out of the Mohammed Cartoon project (15 nations: two major publications)

• Scope: Monitoring media coverage of Bali and Copenhagen summits: newspapers, TV and blogs Content analysis, framing analysis

• 19 countries. Leadership: Risto Kunelius, Finland, Elisabeth Eide, Norway

The project’s reach:

Australia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, Germany, Indonesia, Israel, Norway, Pakistan, Russia, South

Africa, Sweden and USA.

Climate change/global warming as a topic

• Media attention– Rising volumes: 1980s, 1990s,

2000s (CoP 15 as the peak) (see next slide) => similar pattern globally

– From dominated by scientists (science field) to a controversy (political) (Carvalho, Boykoff)

– From a particular problem to a key, overarching problem - for better and worse…

CC as a topic

• CC is a fundamental topic– Modernization

• CC is a globalized topic, perhaps uniquely– ”Globalization” as re-articulation of modernization

discourse/theory

• A chance to elaborate key theories/concepts of modernization…– but in a more transnationalizing context

The Perspective of the Global Commons

• Global commons: air, water, ocean, climate for all vs commercialization, privatization (Shiva)

• Hannerz: Transnational cultural commons (1996)

• Global warming, climate crisis may require:- a critical global media commons (digital media, access) and- increasingly critical transnational media studies – and cross-disciplinary studies (research as part of the commons)

Two key aspect of modernization theory for media research

• Rationalization• Deliberation• Communicative action• Legitimation A normative take on the

role of journalism ”the public (sphere)” Habermas et al

• Differentiation• Expertise• Power/manipulation• Strategic action• Effectivity A sociological take on

the role of journalism ”field theory” Bourdieu et al

Transnationalizing ”rationalization”

Global public sphere?Necessary ingredients…1.Material structures of

communication and knowledge production

2. Narratives of solidarity3. Recognition of shared

problems=> The summits, then…

The summit as a GPS platform?

1. Structures: concentration of actors and resources; focus; shared agenda, etc2. Narrative: actors, personalities, pressing time, conflicts, expectations, etc.3. Problems: claims, discussions, bargaining, etc.

=> Potential for transnational ”rationalization”, dialogue, deliberation and legitimate decisions?

Fields (journalistic and others) in transnational social space

”Fields” have relative autonomy in relation to their environment, this is based on..

– Dominating a particular set of capital (the resource of media/journalism –power)• What is this? (attention, controlling access,

contructing moral perspectives…?)– Contradictory influences of other fields

(political, scientific, economic) and contradictions between them

In a transnational situation… then

Transnationalizing”differentiation”

• Local/national journalistic fields

• Local field relations (political, economic, etc)

• ”Our” take on the CC/summit agenda

• Routine domestication?

• Transnational professional references and practices

• Transnational field relations • Potentially multiple

perspectives on the agenda: contrapuntal reading?

• Critical/reflexive domestication?

Actors and moves – journalists and others – on simultaneous but not synchronized fields of action => new complexity?

Hence… JournalismS…

The state of the field: Is tomorrow’s journalism fit for the job?

• Trim-downs to meet commercial pressures• Celebrity and reptilian vs thinking journalism• Less Science sections (in US media, Boykoff 2010), less in-

depth and ‘explanatory’ journalism.• 25% of the news industry work force cut since

2001:tighter deadlines, increased multi-platform (and multi-topic) demands

• New genre hierarchies in the press: Opinion journalism on the rise: what does that entail – seen in the light of ”politization of science” (v.d.Sluis etc)

The Editorial Dec 7, 2009 as a Transnational Example

Focus on summits• Potential moments to study the

dynamics of ‘global journalism’• Normative aspect/questions:

– Journalism and ‘global public spheres’

• Sociological aspect/questions:- Journalism and/as domestication

• Methodological considerations- choice of partners- choice of material & limitations- quantification and intersubjectivity- framing analysis

• What is missed when studying summits?

Research material/scope

• In each country: Two newspapers, one elite, one popular (Bali and Copenhagen)

• Cop 15: One (main) TV station• Cop 15: One blog (NGO)• This material: based on

newspaper monitoring, Bali and Copenhagen

• Content analysis mapping: voices, genre, sources, time perspective etc.

• Framing analysis

Some results from our research

Differing emphasis between countries: from large to minimal. More coverage of Copenhagen than BaliElite vs popular media: More coverage in the elite pressFraming: a great variety connected to a country’s statusGloomy perspectives in conference sum-up/editorialsNew world order: Power of the emerging nations (China, India, Brazil, South Africa)

Copenhagen: Priorities by number of stories

• High priority: Denmark, Bangladesh, Norway, Canada, Australia, Finland (> 200 stories)

• Mid-range: Brazil, Sweden, China, Germany, USA (> 100 stories)

• Low-range: Indonesia, Israel, South Africa, Egypt, Pakistan, El Salvador, Chile, Russia (< 100 stories)

Voices, Cop15 material; 18 countries (Denmark excluded)

42 %

11 %

23 %

4 %

15 %

5 % National political system

Transnational politicalsystem

Civil society

Business

Science, expertise

Other

Voices from civil society

Genre: It seems the largest proportion of civil society voices (as well as female voices) are found in ”letters to the editor” category – and in

the feature stories

0 %10 %20 %30 %40 %50 %

60 %70 %80 %90 %

100 %

Pakist

an

Israel

El Salv

ador

Austra

lia

Russia

Brasil

South

Afri

ca

China

USA

Chile

Germ

any

Egypt

Indo

nesia

Canada

Bangla

desh

Finlan

d

Norway

Sweden

Total

Other

Science, expertise

Business

Civil society

Transnational political system

National political system

The top fives, voicesMEASURED: National

political syst(Total 42%)

Science(Total 15%)

Civil Society(Total 23%)

Female voices (Total 12%)

Pakistan, Australia (57%)

Russia (26%)(small sample)

Sweden (43%) Finland 29%

Brazil, Russia (53%)

China (25%) Norway (33%) Sweden 26%

Germany, Chile (47%)

Chile (23%) Finland (31%) El Salvador 23%

El Salvador(45%)

El Salvador (22%)

Canada (28%) Denmark (20%)

Israel (44%) USA (19%) Indonesia (26%) Norway, South Africa 19%

Resources matter: Copenhagen

• 24 % of the stories were referred to on the front page

• 17 % of stories were from news agencies (developing countries: Egypt 66%, Pakistan 57%, South Africa 49%, El Salvador 47%, Bangladesh 34%)

• 42 % of the voices are from the national political system. (11 % foreign; 23% from civil society (NGO/grass roots); 15% from science, 9% from business or other).

• 12% of the voices are female• 24% are from the ’global South

(59% global North, 17% unclear)0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %

Indonesia

El Salvador

Israel

South-Africa

Egypt

Bangladesh

Brasil

China

Pakistan

Total

Chile

Usa

Germany

Sweden

Canada

Finland

Norway

Russia

Australia

North

South

Unclear

Domestication: Bringing it all back home

• Restricted prisms• Domestication vs

journalistic professionalism

• Domestic ours vs Planet Ours (the larger commons)

• Source-oriented (own politicians, NGOs etc)

• Nation’s interest oriented (what’s in it for ‘us’?)

• Expansion (heroism, global leader)

• Critical domestic (challenging lofty global discourses from national actors): What about situation at home?

A variety of domestications

Domestication, examples• Heroic frames: ’our

politicians’ (saving the rain forest, Norway; taking a lead, China)

• Emphasizing claims: What’s in it for us? (Bangladesh, El Salvador)

• Critical domesticated perspective (NGO-driven, journalistic scrutiny)

Domestication, Copenhagen

0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %

Chile

South-Africa

Pakistan

El Salvador

Israel

China

Germany

Egypt

Sweden

Bangladesh

Usa

Brasil

Totall

Canada

Finland

Norway

Russia

Indonesia

Australia

Domestic

Foreign

Transnational

Unknown

Domestic here = all national voices (politicians, NGOs, scientists, grass roots, etc.)

0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %

Norway

Finland

Canada

Sweden

USA

Indonesia

Israel

Germany

Russia

Bangladesh

China

El Salvador

domestic

foreign

transnat

Voices in stories, Bali-coverage 2007

Framing analysis (Entman 2007)

• Entman (salience): The process of culling (sorting out) a few elements of perceived reality and assembling a narrative that highlights connections among them to promote a particular interpretation […]. Frames introduce or raise the salience of apparent importance of certain ideas, activating schemas that encourage target audiences to think, feel and decide in a particular way. (2007: 164)

• FOUR ASPECTS: Problem definition, causality, morality, remedy

Clusters of frames• Thematic vs episodic frames

(future scenarios/concerns vs political game framing)

• Four clusters:- political: domesticated, blame frames, development- techno-optimist :hero, transfer- moral: collective and individual responsibility, consumer habits, rich responsibility for poorer nations etc- fear frames: dystopias ?

Heroes

• Domestic heroes • World heroes (Al Gore,

(Peace Award))• Moment victim heroes:

Papua New Guinea (drowning nations), Yvo de Boer in tears

• Activist groups• NGOs

The great demonstration in Copenhagen a

good -spririted festival

A two kilometer long line of over 50 000 demonstrators

The climate march demanded big deeds

”The atmosphere here is just amazing”

HELSINGIN SANOMAT 13.10.2010

Blame frames• Bali: blaming the US

(alternatively ’the west’/rich world)

• Copenhagen: more blame of the ’emerging nations’ (China, India etc.)

• Blaming high emission industries (oil producers etc)

• Blaming leadership (Danish hosts and the UN at Cop15)

• Self flagellation (exposing double standards)

Victim Frames

• Travelling images: The self-representations (self-victimization) of the Maldives, Mongolia and Nepal

• Papua New Guinea (Bali); Tuvalu; G77 (Copenhagen)

• Emphasis on the need for economic damage compensation (raised by developing nations)

The ’not-theres’: symbolic absence

• First nation peoples (Bali). Women (!)

• Sceptics • Low proportion of scientists• Far-from-summits

sufferers/victims• Business people (preferred

absence?)• In some countries due to

national events: the summit itself (Chile, Russia)

The ’always theres’ …

Genres and discourses

• IPCC is unreliable (opinion genres, letters to the editor)

• The political game is what matters (news, opinion)

• The poor are the most vulnerable (feature stories)

• Dystopic future (cartoons, other images)

GPS requires Transnational Literacy

[…] the ability to read the world in its differences even when required categories such as ‘literature’ or ‘decolonization’ impose a uniformity […] It allows us to sense that the other is not just a ‘voice’ but that others produce articulate texts, even as they, like us, are written in and by a text not of our own making. It is through transnational literacy that we can invent grounds for an interruptive praxis from within our disavowed hope in justice under capitalism

(Gayatri Spivak 2006)

Transnational climate (journalism) literacy?

• Read Climate in context: the interplay of other fields (in the world as well as in research) with journalism as a field

• Understand ‘remote-controlled suffering’: the future is now for some, if not all (trans-temporal)

• See ‘knowledge’ in critical ways (St Clair, Shiva); deconstruction ‘transfer’?

• How to obtain transnational literacy through media?

Findings and further questions• National ‘fundamentalistic’ (realistic) framing of actors and

identities => still a dominant feature• Summits as structured events, the effect of the ‘script’ of events =>

summit as a period of ‘hope discourse’• Some signs of journalistic transnational (alarmist) journalistic

discourse on climate change => global pressure to decision makers• Actors of multiple fields, ‘summit’ and global journalistic arena as a

resource for critical domestication • Emerging ‘new realism’ paired with dystopian perspectives after

Copenhagen failure, and then:• Pre-Cancun: Predestined not to succeed? Framed already as non-

important

To concludeUniversal to a degree: • Domestication• Difference between

domestication and ”national patriotism”

• Shared professional structures of the field:- use of NGOs- to a degree: domestic watchdog journalism- implicit moral discourse

How to be heard in the battle for attention?

Transnational media literacy

• Awareness: Local and national media events going global (cartoon issue); OR transnational media events all generate a plurality of readings and interpretations.

• Ability: to see the world with the eyes of (also) the distant Other; implying an exchange of lenses:

- across continents- between media researchers and practicioners

• A recognition that transnational media literacy also operates and is required within a nation’s borders

• A shared in-depth research of the various media systems of this world and of how the struggles for media freedoms and human dignity take various shapes due to a variety of national and local circumstances

0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %

Total

Chile

Pakistan

South-Africa

El Salvador

Denmark

Israel

China

Germany

Sweden

Egypt

Bangladesh

Usa

Brazil

Canada

Finland

Norway

Russia

Indonesia

Australia

Domestic

Foreign

Transnational

Unknown

Figure 4. Distribution of domestic, foreign and transnational voices (N=5522 )

0 %

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

Other

Science, expertise

Business

Civil society

Transnational political system

National political system

Figure 3. Countries ordered by growing share of civil society actors (N=5522).

Civic activism…