| Annotation |
The article is devoted to a comparative analysis of publications by Western media and Chinese media during the period of the unrest and protests caused by an amendment to the “Fugitive Offenders Ordinance” in Hong Kong in the summer of 2019. The relevance is explained by the fact that in the summer of 2019, Hong Kong immediately became the center of attention of the world community and the press. The innovation lies in comparative analysis of Chinese and Western media texts in the aspect of tolerance. The purpose of the study is to identify the reporting frames on Hong Kong protests in different countries (China, the USA, the UK) and analyze their characteristics. The author’s attention is focused on the problem of tolerance / intolerance in the discussing of events in Hong Kong by Western and Chinese media. Content analysis, frame analysis and the method of comparative studies are used in this article. Content analysis of the news reports from The Washington Post, People’s Daily and the BBC website from July to August 2019 was conducted to clarify their tones and directions, as well as the meaning of the metaphors used by journalists. The frame analysis is to identify differences in event assessments, information sources, theme settings, report objects, main subjects and event definitions in the analyzed media. The language features in texts were also compared. By results of the study, we see clear ideological bias and tendentiousness in reports from the Western media, and also the inability to have a tolerant vision. The Chinese media also strongly show peculiarities of ideology and obvious propagandistic tendency. The dogmatism of propagandistic thoughts interferes with objective perception of the situation. Conclusions: mass medias holding different positions, “choosing” and “constructing” social realities in their news reports, painting different pictures and choosing their own perspectives to reflect attitude of the authority towards participants in the movements. In this way, they take completely irreconcilable positions. |
| References |
1.
Blokhin, I. N. Tolerance as a principle of journalistic activity. Vestnik of St. Petersburg University, no. 3, pp. 120–126, 2008. (In Rus.)
2.
Wang Runjie, Xu Cheng. Ideological Bias and Selection Frame in Western Media Reporting Connecting with Hong Kong. Chinese Journalists, no. 1, pp. 34–38, 2020. (In Chn.)
3.
Mao Wei. Frame of Discourse and Information of the Belt and Road Initiative in Foreign Public Opinions ‒ The Case of the Main Indian Media. External Communications. Web. 15.12.2020: http://www.cm-ecd.org/bar/ view.aspx?id=1240. (In Chn.)
4.
Sun Zhipeng. The Reporting Framework of Ethnic Minority Images in New Mainstream Media — Based on the analysis of minority reports by People’s Daily Online (2008–2017). Web. 15.12.2020. http://www.cssn.cn/mzx/201902/t20190201_4821913_2.shtml/. (In Chn.)
5.
Chen Lisheng, Deng Yaxin. A summary of research on the development of inclusive journalism. Western Radio and Television of China, no. 20, pp. 52–53, 2017 (In Chn.)
6.
Abisheva, V., Mazhitayeva, Sh., Khairova, Ju., Kozhakhmetova, L., Khassenov, B. Phenomenon of tolerance in the information society. European Journal of Science and Theology, no. 4, pp. 111–121, 2017. (In Engl.)
7.
Chelysheva, I., Mikhaleva, G. Interethnic Tolerance among University Students in the Context of Contemporary Russian and Foreign Media Education. Media Education, no. 59, pp. 14–22, 2019. DOI: 10.13187/яe.2019.1.14 (In Engl.)
8.
Entman, R. M. Framing: Towards Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, no. 3, pp. 51–58, 1993. (In Engl.)
9.
Gamson, William A. “Review of ‘Frame analysis’ by Erving Goffman”. Contemporary Sociology, no. 4, pp. 7–603, 1975. (In Engl.)
10.
Goffman, E. Framing Analysis: An essay on the organization of experience [M]. New York: Harper & Row, 1974. (In Engl.)
11.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., Kelley, H. H. [translated by Zhang Jianzhong, Li Xueqing, Zeng Wan etc.]. Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change [M]. Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2015. (In Engl.)
12.
John, B. Thompson translated by Gao Tian [etc.]. Ideology and Modern Culture [M]. China: Yilin Press, 2005. (In Engl.)
13.
John, Fiske [et al.] [translated by Li Bin. Key Concepts in Communication and Cultural Studies [M]. Beijing: Xinhua Publishing House, 2004. (In Engl.)
14.
Lippmann, W. [translated by Lin Shan]. Public Opinion [M]. Beijing: Huaxia Press, 1989. (In Engl.)
15.
Werner, J. Severin, J. W. TankardJr [translated by Guo Zhenzhi]. Communication Theories. Origins, Methods and uses in the Mass Media [M]. Beijing: Huaxia Press, 2006. (In Engl.) |
