| Summary: | 碩士 === 淡江大學 === 大眾傳播學系 === 91 === The purpose of this thesis is to analyze the news coverage of the New York Times and the Christian Science Monitor on 911 terrorist attack from September 12, 2001 to October 12, 2001. Based on news framing theory and the propaganda model of international news, this study employs the methods of content analysis and news discourse analysis to investigate 3 research questions as follows: (1) What are the subject topics and forms of the news coverage on 911 terrorist attack; (2) What are the sources adapted by the two elite newspapers; (3) How are the news framed by the two newspapers.
The results of content analysis show that the most emphasized subject topic of the New York Times is “U.S. economy”, but that of the Christian Science Monitor is “U.S. anti-terrorism campaign”. Besides, both papers’ subject topics are almost coherent with U.S. government‘s anti-terrorism policies. In terms of the news sources and news forms adopted by the New York Times and the Christian Science Monitor, the results show that “US officials” are both papers’ dominant news sources, and the “pure news” form is adopted most by the two papers, but the latter shows more diversified news sources on related issues. On the other hand, the results of news discourse analyses show that both papers represent thirteen news frames on the 911 terrorist attack, but there are four different news frames between two papers.
In conclusion, the most emphasized subject topic of the New York Times and the Christian Science Monitor on 911 terrorist attack is different. As for news sources, the results confirm the propaganda model’s assertions. Furthermore, both elite papers represent the same nine news frames, but still have four different news frames.
|
|---|
