著者

井上 泰浩 INOUE Yasuhiro イノウエ ヤスヒロ

出版者

広島市立大学国際学部

雑誌

広島国際研究 (ISSN:13413546)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.12, pp.103-127, 2006

---

This study examines how major newspapers in the world covered the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima by referring to the hegemony theory. This theory suggests that media content, especially international coverage, is influenced by historical views, the dominant public opinions, and the ideology of those in power in society. Qualitative content analysis is mainly used for this study. Data for this study consist of articles published between August 5 and 8, 2005, in newspapers in eight countries / region (China, France, Germany, Russia, South Korea, the U.K., the U.S., and the Arabic region). The findings generally confirm the existence of bias and differences in Hiroshima coverage across countries / region. Western European (France, Germany, and the U.K) newspapers criticized the bombing for aiming at civilians and presented it as an important moral lesson. American newspapers, on the other hand, generally depicted the bombing as a justifiable past event which has little significance in the present day. Chinese and South Korean newspapers focused mainly on the responsibility of the Japanese for having starting the war that ended up with the bombing. Different coverage on Hiroshima could be attributed to the difference in historical relations to and public sentiment on Japan, and other ideological factors.

著者

井上 泰浩 Brislin Tom INOUE Yasuhiro BRISLIN Tom イノウエ ヤスヒロ ブリスリン トム

出版者

広島市立大学国際学部

雑誌

広島国際研究 (ISSN:13413546)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.11, pp.179-194, 2005

---

This study examines the underlying values and practices in journalistic policies and decision-making between Japan and the United States on whether to identify youth offenders in serious, capital crimes. Benchmarks in youth crime coverage, particularly in Japan, are examined. Comparative data is presented from a survey of U. S. and Japanese journalists on factors that might influence naming of youth offenders, and on opinions regarding the handling of specific youth crime cases. The findings confirm the conventional wisdom that Japanese journalism remains consistent in its collective policy to not name juveniles under the age of 20 in any crime story, regardless of the severity of the crime. U. S. journalists, on the other hand, are constant in their inconsistency in terms of a policy on naming juveniles and seem to have adopted no policy, or no minimum age, as their policy. The distinction could be attributed to the difference in legal systems, journalistic values, and realities of juvenile crime between Japan and the U.S.