When Threats are Internal: National Identity and Cascading Frames, From My Lai to Abu Ghraib Charles Michael Rowling A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2012 Reading Committee: David Domke, Chair Patricia Moy Nancy Rivenburgh Mark Smith Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of Political Science University of Washington Abstract When Threats are Internal: National Identity and Cascading Frames, From My Lai to Abu Ghraib Charles Michael Rowling Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor David S. Domke Department of Communication This dissertation explored the role of national identity in shaping how political actors, journalists and citizens interact and respond to moments in which America’s image has been threatened by the transgressions of the U.S. military. I focused on what types of national identity frames tend to emerge within public discourse in these moments, what kind of contestation is advanced by political opponents and journalists, and how the public responds to these dynamics. Three studies were conducted. I began by analyzing the communication environment surrounding two nationally dissonant moments in U.S. history—the My Lai Massacre and the Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal. In these studies, I systematically examined: (1) White House and U.S. military communications to determine whether and what extent these officials articulated national identity frames; (2) Congressional communications to measure the degree to which these officials echoed or challenged the frames; and (3) news coverage to assess whether the range of debate in official discourse was matched by parallel disagreements in news content. As a final step, I conducted an experiment to test the effects of these national identity frames—when echoed or contested in the press—on citizens in response to a news article about U.S. military transgressions. Methodologically, I combined quantitative content analysis with experimental methods. The results suggest that frames designed to protect and restore the nation’s identity in nationally dissonant moments broadly resonate within the citizenry and, in turn, encounter diminished resistance as they cascade downward in the framing hierarchy from political opponents to journalists and finally into the public. By examining political communication in these three important areas—political messages, news content, and public opinion—I sought to illuminate the complex process through which the press aligns its coverage with government communications and how national identity plays a crucial role in this process. This work has important implications for our understanding of press-state relations and how Americans perceive and evaluate the nation, its leaders, and its policies. TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................................. Page List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. ii List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. iii Chapter One: National Identity, Political Leadership, the Press, and Public Opinion .................1 Chapter Two: Research Design ..................................................................................................31 Chapter Three: The My Lai Massacre ........................................................................................52 Chapter Four: The Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal ..........................................................................82 Chapter Five: Cultural Resonance, National Identity and Frame Contestation ........................119 Chapter Six: Insights and Implications .....................................................................................162 References .................................................................................................................................177 Appendix A: Message Manipulations Used in Experiment ......................................................194 Appendix B: Message Measurement Used in Experiment .......................................................203 i LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number ........................................................................................................................ Page 3.1 Frame usage in White House and military statements ..........................................................59 3.2 Percentage of White House and military statements with two or more of each frame .........64 3.3 Frame valence within Congressional statements, by party ...................................................69 3.4 Valence of frames in statements by Congressional Democrats ............................................71 3.5 Sources in My Lai news coverage over time ........................................................................76 3.6 Valence of frames within My Lai news coverage ................................................................78 4.1 Frame usage within White House and military statements ...................................................90 4.2 Percentage of White House and military statements with two or more of each frame .........97 4.3 Frame usage within White House and military statements, bi-weekly .................................99 4.4 Frame valence within Congressional statements, by party .................................................101 4.5 Valence of frames in statements by Congressional Democrats ..........................................103 4.6 White House, military, Congressional and press communications, bi-weekly...................110 4.7 Sources in Abu Ghraib news coverage over time ...............................................................111 4.8 Valence of frames within Abu Ghraib news coverage ....................................................113 4.9 Valence of frames in Congressional statements and news coverage over time ..................115 5.1 Means on incident attitudes, within frame conditions, presence versus absence ...............137 5.2 Means on incident attitudes, within frame conditions, echoed versus challenged .............149 ii LIST OF TABLES Table Number ......................................................................................................................... Page 5.1 Public opinion in response to My Lai .................................................................................123 5.2 Public opinion in response to Abu Ghraib ..........................................................................125 5.3 Mean scores on incident attitudes, presence versus absence, across all conditions ...........135 5.4 Mean scores on incident attitudes, presence versus absence, within conditions ................136 5.5 Mean scores on national attachment, presence versus absence, across conditions ............139 5.6 Mean scores on War and military, presence versus absence, across all conditions ............140 5.7 Predicting support for War, presence versus absence, across all conditions ......................143 5.8 Predicting confidence in military, presence versus absence, across all conditions ............145 5.9 Predicting confidence in military, presence versus absence, within minimization ............146 5.10 Mean scores on incident attitudes, echo versus contestation, within conditions ..............148 5.11 Mean scores on national attachment, echo versus contestation, across all conditions .....151 5.12 Mean scores on War and military, echo versus contestation, across all conditions .........152 5.13 Predicting support for War, echo versus contestation, across all conditions ....................154 5.14 Predicting confidence in military, echo versus contestation, across all conditions ..........156 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are a number of people I would like to thank for their love, support and encouragement throughout this process. I particularly want to thank my chair, David Domke, for his mentorship and friendship over the last four years. Words cannot express how much I appreciate all that you have done for me, David. You’ve taught me how to be a scholar, teacher, colleague, mentor and road-tripper, and for that I will be forever grateful. Let me know if you ever want to road-trip through Nebraska! I also want to thank the other members of my committee—Mark, Nancy and Patricia—for their guidance. You each made a significant impact on this project and I sincerely thank you for your support. I would also like to express my appreciation to current and former members of the DRG—Ariel, Colin, Damon, Fahed, Justin, Lindsey, Michelle and especially Penny, Jason and Tim. Despite the long commute from Tacoma, I always looked forward to our weekly meetings. Your advice, humor and support these last four years have been invaluable. Penny, you have been a wonderful colleague and friend and I look forward to working on our many projects together. Jason, I’m going to miss our late nights hanging out together, commiserating, laughing and talking about our research. You were responsible for the epic Norman, Oklahoma trip, for which all of us who were there owe you a huge debt of gratitude. Tim, there were numerous ups and down during our time in graduate school, but we persevered and we’ve finally finished—together, as it should be. I’ll always remember the good times—the frying pan incident,