To foreignize or to domesticate? How media vary cross-nationally in their degrees of incorporating foreign events

Thijs van Dooremalen, J. Duyvendak
{"title":"To foreignize or to domesticate? How media vary cross-nationally in their degrees of incorporating foreign events","authors":"Thijs van Dooremalen, J. Duyvendak","doi":"10.1177/14648849231223576","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While the domestication literature indicates how national media link foreign events to a country’s domestic affairs, it has thus far only examined modes of domestication - the ways through which these links are created. In this article, we introduce a different dimension of the phenomenon: degrees of domestication. This includes the extents to which a foreign event gets connected with the domestic. By making a topic-modeling analysis of French and Dutch newspaper articles about 9/11, the 2004 tsunami in Southeast Asia, the Arab Spring and Donald Trump’s political rise, we provide an explorative case study of this dimension. We inductively arrive at a scale ranging from no to extreme domestication of the event, classified according to four degrees of domestication: (1) an entirely foreign affair; (2) a foreign political affair involving domestic actors; (3) a domestic political affair; (4) or a personal disruption. French newspapers score higher on the second degree, the Dutch ones on the third and fourth. A deepening of this pattern shows how these differences stem from two distinctive cultural repertoires that journalists and other media participants employ when relating to foreign events: a French one, which sees them as an opportunity to dominate the international political stage, and a Dutch one, which considers them a reason for reflecting on domestic or personal matters. These clear differences indicate the concept’s importance for the literature and for investigating it within other national media contexts.","PeriodicalId":506068,"journal":{"name":"Journalism","volume":"192 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231223576","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the domestication literature indicates how national media link foreign events to a country’s domestic affairs, it has thus far only examined modes of domestication - the ways through which these links are created. In this article, we introduce a different dimension of the phenomenon: degrees of domestication. This includes the extents to which a foreign event gets connected with the domestic. By making a topic-modeling analysis of French and Dutch newspaper articles about 9/11, the 2004 tsunami in Southeast Asia, the Arab Spring and Donald Trump’s political rise, we provide an explorative case study of this dimension. We inductively arrive at a scale ranging from no to extreme domestication of the event, classified according to four degrees of domestication: (1) an entirely foreign affair; (2) a foreign political affair involving domestic actors; (3) a domestic political affair; (4) or a personal disruption. French newspapers score higher on the second degree, the Dutch ones on the third and fourth. A deepening of this pattern shows how these differences stem from two distinctive cultural repertoires that journalists and other media participants employ when relating to foreign events: a French one, which sees them as an opportunity to dominate the international political stage, and a Dutch one, which considers them a reason for reflecting on domestic or personal matters. These clear differences indicate the concept’s importance for the literature and for investigating it within other national media contexts.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外国化还是本土化?跨国媒体对外国事件的吸收程度有何不同
尽管 "国内化 "文献指出了国家媒体如何将外国事件与一国国内事务联系起来,但迄今为止,这些文献只研究了 "国内化 "的模式--即建立这些联系的方式。在本文中,我们将从另一个维度探讨这一现象:"国内化程度"。这包括国外事件与国内事件的联系程度。通过对法国和荷兰报纸上有关 "9-11"、2004 年东南亚海啸、"阿拉伯之春 "和唐纳德-特朗普政治崛起的文章进行主题建模分析,我们对这一维度进行了探索性案例研究。我们归纳出了一个事件国内化的量表,从没有到极端国内化,分为四种国内化程度:(1) 完全是外国事件;(2) 涉及国内参与者的外国政治事件;(3) 国内政治事件;(4) 或个人破坏。法国报纸在第二种程度上得分较高,荷兰报纸在第三和第四种程度上得分较高。对这一模式的深化表明,这些差异源于记者和其他媒体参与者在处理外国事件时所采用的两种不同的文化模式:法国模式将其视为主导国际政治舞台的机会,而荷兰模式则将其视为反思国内或个人事务的理由。这些明显的差异表明了这一概念对文献的重要性,以及在其他国家媒体背景下对其进行研究的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Radio journalism and podcast news in the Global South Disclosure of perpetrator origin in crime news: Changing practices in journalism after populist accusations? Tale of two requesters: How public records law experiences differ by requester types Coronaphobia or sinophobia: How journalistic practices in early COVID-19 coverage and online commentary affect anti-Chinese sentiment in the U.S. Digital histories of news in Europe: An introduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1