Copyright and Use of This Thesis This Thesis Must Be Used in Accordance with the Provisions of the Copyright Act 1968
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
COPYRIGHT AND USE OF THIS THESIS This thesis must be used in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Reproduction of material protected by copyright may be an infringement of copyright and copyright owners may be entitled to take legal action against persons who infringe their copyright. Section 51 (2) of the Copyright Act permits an authorized officer of a university library or archives to provide a copy (by communication or otherwise) of an unpublished thesis kept in the library or archives, to a person who satisfies the authorized officer that he or she requires the reproduction for the purposes of research or study. The Copyright Act grants the creator of a work a number of moral rights, specifically the right of attribution, the right against false attribution and the right of integrity. You may infringe the author’s moral rights if you: - fail to acknowledge the author of this thesis if you quote sections from the work - attribute this thesis to another author - subject this thesis to derogatory treatment which may prejudice the author’s reputation For further information contact the University’s Director of Copyright Services sydney.edu.au/copyright The Evolving Case for Peace Journalism A thesis in fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Media and Communication The University of Sydney January 2014 ii Declaration I declare that this thesis is the product of my own independent research. It contains no material which has been accepted for another degree or diploma, or any copy or paraphrase of another person’s material except where due reference is made. It has been conducted according to the ethical standards and guidelines of the University of Sydney. Annabel McGoldrick 29th of January 2014 iii iv Abstract This thesis evaluates the evolution of a strengthening case for a kind of news reporting defined as ‘Peace Journalism’. It explores the differences such journalism makes to television audiences. Additionally, by delving into the developing understanding of meaning-making and rationality, it combines interdisciplinary insights that add to the evolving case for Peace Journalism. It tests propositions that meaning is formed emotionally as well as cognitively, and that human nature is both cooperative and empathetic as well as competitive and violent. The mixed design study marks the first audience research, involving more than 450 participants from four countries, to indicate that television news framed as peace journalism prompts and enables viewers to consider and value nonviolent responses to conflict. Qualitative and quantitative data on audience responses were gathered in Australia, the Philippines, South Africa and Mexico. Two versions of a set of familiar stories from television news in each country were produced, coded as war journalism (WJ) and peace journalism (PJ) respectively. PJ was denoted by the presence of background and context; ideas for solutions; a broad range of views; challenges to propaganda, and images of peace. WJ was defined by the absence of such factors. Two news bulletins, a WJ and a PJ, were created with professional media partners in each country. The bulletins were shown to groups of students and professionals filling in questionnaires or joining focus groups after viewing, with no participant aware of the distinctions between the bulletins or that a second version existed. The predominant conclusion was PJ viewers tended to respond with less anger and fear, and more hope and empathy. They were more likely than those who watched WJ to perceive structural and/or systemic explanations for problems, and more likely to see opportunities for therapeutic and/or cooperative remedies to be applied. v Acknowledgements I would first like to acknowledge Professor Johan Galtung, for his leadership in educating the world about the principles of peace with justice. I should also thank him for acceding to my request to write out, on one sheet of paper, the peace journalism theory he introduced at the summer school in Taplow Court in 1997. Then to Associate Professor Jake Lynch, my partner in life and throughout my 15-year journey with peace journalism, for his tireless support and encouragement, I owe a huge debt of gratitude. He won the grant from the Australian Research Council to carry out a Linkage Project, entitled ‘A Global Standard for Reporting Conflict’, which provided for an Australian Postgraduate Award (Industry), the financial support for me to undertake this research. Some of the results have already been published in his book of the same name, by Routledge, in 2013. In it, they are considered with reference to a different set of theoretical models and harnessed to reach a different set of conclusions, than those in this thesis. Throughout the research process, Jake put up with all my moans and complaints during the endless blocks, obstacles and delays laid in my path by the University of Sydney. The Dean of Arts, Professor Duncan Ivison, made an overly bureaucratic interpretation of the conflict of interests rule, and would not allow me to enrol in this degree with supervision in the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPACS) despite a decade of teaching in the department. This decision was, moreover, made without discussing helpful alternatives, in what I believe was effectively an abdication of responsibility. I do want to acknowledge Associate Professor Judith Keene from the Department of History, who agreed to supervise me to facilitate my enrolment to begin this project. That came about through the good offices of Professor Margaret Harris, the Faculty’s Director of Research. Although Judith was kind, and interested, it rapidly became clear that we did not inhabit the same academic disciplines. My other natural home would have been the Department for Media and Communication (MECO), but repeated attempts to find supervisory support vi there were declined for a number of years until the arrival of Professor Gerard Goggin as Chair. I want to acknowledge his generosity in agreeing to be my Associate Supervisor through the final year of writing this thesis. But this only came about due to a creative plan by the Associate Dean for Postgraduate Research, Professor Rodney Smith, making use of a rule change allowing the Primary Supervisor for a PhD thesis to be from a department other than that in which the candidate is enrolled as a student. Finally, after three annual reviews, the Department of History withdrew their support in an attempt to force the University into action supportive of my candidacy. I want to thank Associate Professor Andrew Fitzmaurice, Chair of the Department of History, who was always most pleasant and complimentary in his repeated attempts to ‘kick me out’ of the History department. In fact he went as far as suggesting that my lack of institutional support was so bad that I should leave the University of Sydney and he could recommend media colleagues at other Universities who would in his words “snap me up”. Throughout this period, an outstanding academic, Senior Lecturer Dr Karen Gonsalkorale from the Department of Psychology, was a light in the darkness. As a social psychologist, Karen had an interest in the psychological implications of peace journalism and agreed to support me right from the outset, although her hard science discipline clashed, at times, with approaches from social sciences. But her clear boundaries, patience, efficiency and sharp intelligence meant that half an hour with Karen could resolve any issue on which my research was even slightly relevant to her interests. I also have Karen to thank for shepherding me through the shark-infested waters of the University Ethics procedures, plus preparing and processing the study Questionnaires. She also sent the most useful feedback within a couple of days on the first drafts of the country data chapters. Dr Antonio Castillo, now head of the journalism program at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, also merits my gratitude. Firstly for agreeing to be my supervisor at the start, though that was knocked back by a superior. He ultimately did become an Associate Supervisor for a year, offering great support, advice, encouragement and translations for Mexico. vii Finally, a special thanks goes to Dr Wendy Lambourne, Senior Lecturer and Academic Coordinator of CPACS, who agreed to support me right from the outset and finally took up the role of lead supervisor in the last year. As mentioned earlier, this was another part of Rodney Smith’s plan to allow me to be supervised in CPACS, whilst my departmental home would be MECO. Finally, an arrangement was in place that actually made sense, given the two main conceptual streams being combined in this research: peace and communications. Up to then, this had been blocked due to the bureaucratic over-interpretation of the rules, as mentioned earlier. In darker moments I have connected this with the treatment CPACS has received over the years, including repeated attempts to dilute or undermine it. Like many, I am sure this is because it puts the wind up University authorities by speaking truth to power in the name of justice. Management have often seemed keener on the so-called ‘Institute for Democracy and Human Rights’ (now defunct), whose members – unlike those of CPACS – could apparently be relied upon, ultimately, to put expediency before principle. This became apparent during the fiasco of the invitation to the Dalai Lama that was first extended by Human Rights degree students, then withdrawn by academics from the Institute, in 2013. An attitude that would, if shared by historical actors, have deprived us of the legacy of human rights and democracy in the first place. Luckily CPACS and the Sydney Peace Foundation stepped in, to make sure His Holiness had a place to speak to students in Sydney after all.