管道、保护者和定居者殖民主义:媒体对达科他输油管道抗议的报道

IF 1.1 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Katie M Grote, Jay T. Johnson
{"title":"管道、保护者和定居者殖民主义:媒体对达科他输油管道抗议的报道","authors":"Katie M Grote, Jay T. Johnson","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2021.1999008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Indigenous Resistance to the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) garnered national and international media attention in 2016 as thousands gathered near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in protest. Increased media attention spurred enquiry concerning the representation of the Indigenous peoples leading the movement, subjecting the movement to settler assumptions about Indigenous resistance. This research employs a qualitatively-based content analysis of 80 news articles reporting on the DAPL protest. These articles range in political bias and can be categorized in one of the following groups: Conservative Bias, Liberal Bias, Mainstream News, Local News, and Indigenous News. Commonly occurring codes and themes are analysed across each category. Word count and frequency of reporting are also considered to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the media representations as they develop through time. While the non-Indigenous-led media commonly cites water security and destruction of sacred sites as the reasons for protest, the Indigenous led media also cites treaty rights, tribal sovereignty, economic vulnerability, climate change, and colonial history more frequently, indicating a multi-dimensional and more holistic understanding of the movement and the Indigenous experience. The mainstream of U.S. reporting on the DAPL protests perpetuate a reductive, one-dimensional framing of the daily struggles of Indigenous Americans by ignoring the impacts of ongoing settler colonial operations.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"123 1","pages":"487 - 511"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pipelines, protectors, and settler colonialism: media representations of the Dakota Access Pipeline protest\",\"authors\":\"Katie M Grote, Jay T. Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2201473X.2021.1999008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Indigenous Resistance to the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) garnered national and international media attention in 2016 as thousands gathered near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in protest. Increased media attention spurred enquiry concerning the representation of the Indigenous peoples leading the movement, subjecting the movement to settler assumptions about Indigenous resistance. This research employs a qualitatively-based content analysis of 80 news articles reporting on the DAPL protest. These articles range in political bias and can be categorized in one of the following groups: Conservative Bias, Liberal Bias, Mainstream News, Local News, and Indigenous News. Commonly occurring codes and themes are analysed across each category. Word count and frequency of reporting are also considered to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the media representations as they develop through time. While the non-Indigenous-led media commonly cites water security and destruction of sacred sites as the reasons for protest, the Indigenous led media also cites treaty rights, tribal sovereignty, economic vulnerability, climate change, and colonial history more frequently, indicating a multi-dimensional and more holistic understanding of the movement and the Indigenous experience. The mainstream of U.S. reporting on the DAPL protests perpetuate a reductive, one-dimensional framing of the daily struggles of Indigenous Americans by ignoring the impacts of ongoing settler colonial operations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Settler Colonial Studies\",\"volume\":\"123 1\",\"pages\":\"487 - 511\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Settler Colonial Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2021.1999008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Settler Colonial Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2021.1999008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

2016年,数千人聚集在立岩苏族保留地附近抗议,原住民对达科他输油管道(DAPL)建设的抵制引起了国内外媒体的关注。媒体关注的增加促使人们对领导该运动的土著人民的代表进行调查,使该运动受到定居者对土著抵抗的假设的影响。本研究对80篇报道DAPL抗议的新闻文章进行了定性的内容分析。这些文章带有政治偏见,可以分为以下几类:保守派偏见、自由派偏见、主流新闻、地方新闻和土著新闻。在每个类别中分析常见的代码和主题。报道的字数和频率也被认为是为了更全面地了解随着时间的推移而发展的媒体表现。非原住民主导的媒体通常以水源安全和破坏圣地作为抗议理由,但原住民主导的媒体也更频繁地以条约权利、部落主权、经济脆弱性、气候变化和殖民历史为理由,显示他们对这场运动和原住民经验有更多元、更全面的理解。美国主流媒体对DAPL抗议活动的报道,忽略了正在进行的移民殖民行动的影响,延续了对美国原住民日常斗争的简化和一维框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pipelines, protectors, and settler colonialism: media representations of the Dakota Access Pipeline protest
ABSTRACT Indigenous Resistance to the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) garnered national and international media attention in 2016 as thousands gathered near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in protest. Increased media attention spurred enquiry concerning the representation of the Indigenous peoples leading the movement, subjecting the movement to settler assumptions about Indigenous resistance. This research employs a qualitatively-based content analysis of 80 news articles reporting on the DAPL protest. These articles range in political bias and can be categorized in one of the following groups: Conservative Bias, Liberal Bias, Mainstream News, Local News, and Indigenous News. Commonly occurring codes and themes are analysed across each category. Word count and frequency of reporting are also considered to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the media representations as they develop through time. While the non-Indigenous-led media commonly cites water security and destruction of sacred sites as the reasons for protest, the Indigenous led media also cites treaty rights, tribal sovereignty, economic vulnerability, climate change, and colonial history more frequently, indicating a multi-dimensional and more holistic understanding of the movement and the Indigenous experience. The mainstream of U.S. reporting on the DAPL protests perpetuate a reductive, one-dimensional framing of the daily struggles of Indigenous Americans by ignoring the impacts of ongoing settler colonial operations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Settler Colonial Studies
Settler Colonial Studies SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: The journal aims to establish settler colonial studies as a distinct field of scholarly research. Scholars and students will find and contribute to historically-oriented research and analyses covering contemporary issues. We also aim to present multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research, involving areas like history, law, genocide studies, indigenous, colonial and postcolonial studies, anthropology, historical geography, economics, politics, sociology, international relations, political science, literary criticism, cultural and gender studies and philosophy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信