| dc.description.abstract | This study examined the frame-building process of Russian (English-speaking news,aimed at U.S. audience) and U.S. news during the Russian election interference scandal. Hybrid war is an ambiguous and relatively new concept for the public, political elites, and journalists. Understanding how news covered Russian interference events is crucial because it gives a better understanding of how journalists construct the meaning behind Russian interference in the situation when U.S. official discussion surrounding the hybrid war is vague and ununified (Gotev, 2017). The study looked at how both U.S. news media and Russian news media covered the act of hybrid war and compared how both sources used frames. The study used a qualitative approach and a more specific thematic analysis of news content to distinguish its main frames. The study found that news sources used a common conflict theme, which engendered different frames. Frames varied depending on partisanship and the country of origin of the news sources. U.S. non-partisan and liberal media created similar frames, like external attack frame and national security frame. In contrast, the U.S. conservative news and Russian English-speaking news had some similarities. They produced a standard internal disunity frame and two differing guilt-based frames: American hypocrisy and Liberal guilt frame. Other similarities and differences within frames are discussed in the study. Keywords: Hybrid war, framing, election interference, media, misinformation, framing theory | |
