Publication:
Communicating strategically in the face of terrorism: The Spanish government’s response to the 2004 Madrid bombing attacks

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2012
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Elsevier
Citations
Google Scholar
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Abstract
With the re-emergence of insurgency tied to terrorism, governments need to strategically manage their communications. This paper analyzes the effect of the Spanish government’s messaging in the face of the Madrid bombing of March 11, 2004: unlike what happened with the 9/11 bombings in the USA and the 7/07 London attacks, the Spanish media did not support the government’s framing of the events. Taking framing as a strategic action in a discursive form (Pan & Kosicki, 2003), and in the context of the attribution theory of responsibilities, this research uses the “cascading activation” model (Entman, 2003, 2004) to explore how a framing contest was generated in the press. Analysis of the coverage shows that the intended government frame triggered a battle among the different major newspapers, leading editorials to shift their frame over the four days prior to the national elections. This research analyzes strategic contests in framing processes and contributes insight into the interactions among the different sides (government, parties, media, and citizens) to help bring about an understanding of the rebuttal effect of the government’s intended frame. It also helps to develop an understanding of the role of the media and the influence of citizens’ frames on media content.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Canel, M. J., & Sanders, K. (2006). Morality tales. Scandals and the media in Britain and in Spain. New Jersey: Hampton Press. Canel, M. J., & Sanders, K. (2010). Crisis communication and terrorist attacks: Framing a response to the 2004 Madrid bombings and 2005 London bombings. In W. T. Coombs, & S. J. Holladay (Eds.), The handbook of crisis communication (pp. 449–466). Wiley-Blackwell. Chalvidant, J. (2004). ([3/11. The manipulation) 11-M. La manipulación. Madrid: Ediciones Jaguar. Coombs, T. W. (2007). Attribution theory as a guide for post-crisis communication research. Public Relations Review, 33, 135–139. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. Entman, R. M. (2003). Cascading activation: Contesting the White House’s frame after 9/11. Political Communication, 20, 415–432. Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power. Framing news, public opinion, and US foreign policy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Entman, R. M. (2010). Media framing biases and political power: Explaining slant in news of Campaign 2008. Journalism, 11(4), 389–408. Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourses and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1–37. García Abadillo, C. (2004). (3/11. The revenge) 11-M. La venganza. Madrid: La esfera de los libros. Heath, R. L. (2001). A rhetorical enactment rationale for public relations. The good organization communicating well. In R. L. Heath, & G. Vasquez (Eds.), Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 31–50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hutcheson, J., Domke, D., Billeaudeaux, A., & Garland, Ph. (2004). U.S. national identity, political elites, and a patriotic press following September 11. Political Communication, 21, 27–50. Iyengar, S. (1989). How citizens think about national issues: A matter of responsibility. American Journal of Political Science, 33(4), 878–900. Iyengar, S. (1996). Framing responsibility for political issues. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 656, 59–70. Nacos, B. (2002). Mass-mediated terrorism. The central role of the media in terrorism and counterterrorism. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Norris, P., Kern, M., & Just, M. (Eds.). (2003). Framing terrorism. The news media, the government and the public. New York/London: Routledge. Olmeda, J. A. (2005). Fear or falsehood? Framing the 3/11 terrorist attacks in Madrid and electoral accountability. Working paper 24/2005. Madrid: Real Instituto Elcano. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (2003). Framing as a strategic action in public deliberation. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Ghandi Jr., & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (pp. 35–65). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Reese, S. D., & Seth, C. L. (2009). Framing the war on terror. The internationalization of policy in the US press. Journalism, 10(6), 777–797. Richards, B. (2004). Terrorism and public relations. Public Relations Review, 30, 169–176. Rodero, E., Aurora, P., & Tamarit, A. (2009). El atentado del 11 de marzo de 2004 en la Cadena Ser desde la teoría del framing [Analysis of the Ser radio 3/11 coverage from the theory of framing]. Zer, 14(26), 81–103. Rodríguez, J. (2004). (3/11. The State lie. Three days in which Aznar was defeated) 11-M. Mentira de Estado. Los tres días que acabaron con Aznar. Barcelona: Ediciones B. Sampedro, V. (2005). (3/13. Crowds on line) 13-M. Multitudes on line. Madrid: Los libros de la catarata. Sampedro, V., Alcalde, K., & Sádaba, I. (2005). El fin de la mentira prudente. Colapso y apertura de la esfera pública. In V. Sampedro (Ed.), 13-M. Multitudes on line (3/13. Crowds on line). Madrid: Los libros de la catarata. Sanders, K., & Canel, M. J. (2004). Political communication and ethics. Government communication and the Madrid bombings. Paper presented at the Institute of Communication Ethics, Lincoln. Schubert, J. N., Stewart, P. A., & Curran, M. A. (2002). A defining presidential moment: 9/11 and the rally effect. Political Psychology, 23(3), 559–583. Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. In B. Klandermans, H. Kriesi, & S. Tarrow (Eds.), From structure to action: Comparing social movement research across countries (pp. 197–217). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Zald, M. N. (1996). Culture, ideology, and strategic framing. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp. 261–274). New York: Cambridge University Press. Zelizer, B., & Stuart, A. (2002). When trauma shapes the news. In B. Zelizer, & A. Stuart (Eds.), Journalism after September 11 (pp. 1–23). New York/London: Routledge. Zoch, L. M., & Molleda, J. C. (2006). Building a theoretical model of media relations using framing, information subsidies, and agenda-building. In C. Botan, & V. Hazleton (Eds.), Public relations theory II (pp. 279–309). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Collections