Framing of News through Editorials and Articles : An Analysis of the Asahi and Yomiuri Shimbun regarding the 2001 History Textbook Controversy

Abstract

Employing Robert Entman's news framing analysis, this article analyzes editorials and news articles in two Japanese newspapers, the Asahi Shimbum and Yomiuri Shimbun, on the 2001 history textbook controversy, and argues that the two national newspapers framed the controversy differently according to their differing definitions thereof. Entman's news framing analysis is a research paradigm that allows us to analyze a series of news articles and find a certain kind of news framing among them, without using a previously proposed framing. In this respect, his research paradigm fits this research in which there are no clues to assist the finding of a previously proposed framing. More precisely, his paradigm encourages us to find the definition of a newsworthy event or issue and related-information, and allows us to identify which aspects of news are more salient or less. The controversy that this analysis targets is about the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform and the history textbook that the Society attempted to publish for Japanese middle school students. This controversy actually brought about both domestic and international confrontations and problems. Yet, the analysis finds that Asahi in its editorials defines the controversy as Japan's domestic problem while Yomiuri explains it as an international or diplomatic problem between Japan and other states such as South Korean and China. Accordingly, in their series or news articles, Asahi presents domestic controversies and critics of the history textbook more saliently while Yomiuri reported the controversy between Japan and, South Korea and China more saliently. Although their framings appear not very clearly for many casual readers, the content analysis allows us to see their different framings in different newspapers and may encourage us to rethink newspapers' ideals such as objective journalism, neutrality, and impartiality.