中美媒体如何报道中美贸易冲突——以战争与和平新闻实践和外交政策均衡假设为例

IF 0.5 4区 管理学 Q4 MANAGEMENT Negotiation and Conflict Management Research Pub Date : 2020-07-07 DOI:10.1111/ncmr.12186
Louisa Ha, Yang Yang, Rik Ray, Frankline Matanji, Peiqin Chen, Ke Guo, Nan Lyu
{"title":"中美媒体如何报道中美贸易冲突——以战争与和平新闻实践和外交政策均衡假设为例","authors":"Louisa Ha, Yang Yang, Rik Ray, Frankline Matanji, Peiqin Chen, Ke Guo, Nan Lyu","doi":"10.1111/ncmr.12186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the news coverage of a nonmilitary conflict: The US–China trade conflict by major news media outlets in the USA and China using the war and peace journalism framework. Role in the conflict as initiator/responder, medium difference, the press role in each press system, and partisanship of news media were hypothesized to affect the war and peace journalism practice. Moreover, the trade conflict was divided into three stages to test the applicability of the “foreign policy market equilibrium hypothesis” by analyzing the changes in the uses of sources and presence of competing frames over time. US news media were found to employ more war journalism and less peace journalism than their Chinese counterpart. They also had much lower coverage of the conflict than their Chinese counterpart. Newspapers were more likely to use war journalism than television. US partisan liberal media selectively supported and opposed the US government trade policy.","PeriodicalId":45732,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12186","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How US and Chinese Media Cover the US–China Trade Conflict: A Case Study of War and Peace Journalism Practice and the Foreign Policy Equilibrium Hypothesis\",\"authors\":\"Louisa Ha, Yang Yang, Rik Ray, Frankline Matanji, Peiqin Chen, Ke Guo, Nan Lyu\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ncmr.12186\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines the news coverage of a nonmilitary conflict: The US–China trade conflict by major news media outlets in the USA and China using the war and peace journalism framework. Role in the conflict as initiator/responder, medium difference, the press role in each press system, and partisanship of news media were hypothesized to affect the war and peace journalism practice. Moreover, the trade conflict was divided into three stages to test the applicability of the “foreign policy market equilibrium hypothesis” by analyzing the changes in the uses of sources and presence of competing frames over time. US news media were found to employ more war journalism and less peace journalism than their Chinese counterpart. They also had much lower coverage of the conflict than their Chinese counterpart. Newspapers were more likely to use war journalism than television. US partisan liberal media selectively supported and opposed the US government trade policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ncmr.12186\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12186\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Negotiation and Conflict Management Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12186","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

本文利用战争与和平新闻框架,考察了美国和中国主要新闻媒体对非军事冲突的新闻报道:美中贸易冲突。假设冲突中作为发起者/回应者的角色、媒介差异、每个新闻系统中的新闻角色以及新闻媒体的党派性会影响战争与和平新闻实践。此外,贸易冲突被分为三个阶段,通过分析来源使用的变化和竞争框架的存在,来检验“外交政策市场均衡假说”的适用性。美国新闻媒体被发现比中国新闻媒体更多地使用战争新闻,更少地使用和平新闻。他们对冲突的报道也远低于中国同行。与电视相比,报纸更有可能使用战争新闻。美国党派自由派媒体选择性地支持和反对美国政府的贸易政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How US and Chinese Media Cover the US–China Trade Conflict: A Case Study of War and Peace Journalism Practice and the Foreign Policy Equilibrium Hypothesis
This article examines the news coverage of a nonmilitary conflict: The US–China trade conflict by major news media outlets in the USA and China using the war and peace journalism framework. Role in the conflict as initiator/responder, medium difference, the press role in each press system, and partisanship of news media were hypothesized to affect the war and peace journalism practice. Moreover, the trade conflict was divided into three stages to test the applicability of the “foreign policy market equilibrium hypothesis” by analyzing the changes in the uses of sources and presence of competing frames over time. US news media were found to employ more war journalism and less peace journalism than their Chinese counterpart. They also had much lower coverage of the conflict than their Chinese counterpart. Newspapers were more likely to use war journalism than television. US partisan liberal media selectively supported and opposed the US government trade policy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Value from Control: Subjective Valuations of Negotiations by Principals and Agents Why are Women Less Likely to Negotiate? The Influence of Expectancy Considerations and Contextual Framing on Gender Differences in the Initiation of Negotiation There is No Away: Where Do People Go When They Avoid an Interpersonal Conflict? Valuing Cooperation and Constructive Controversy: A Tribute to David W. Johnson Issue Information
×
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