Advertisement

Representing Conflict: Gatekeeping Practices and Framing Devices of African Diasporic Press

  • Ola OgunyemiEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter sheds some light into the gatekeeping practices of African diasporic press and its effects on framing African conflicts. The theoretical approach of gatekeeping enables the author to elicit how diaspora journalists develop an inclination to give prominence to African conflict news, and the framing approach gives an insight into their preferred framing devices. These were empirically grounded through an interview with the editors of the African Voice and the Nigerian Watch newspapers and textual analysis of their content. Hence, the data reveals that they are sceptical of reproducing African conflict stories from western news agency and that they also have a tendency to prioritise ‘conflict’, ‘human interest’ and ‘responsibility’ angles.

References

  1. Abubakar, A. T. (2016). Communicating violence. The media strategies of Boko Haram. In M. Bunce, S. Franks & C. Paterson (Eds.), Africa’s media image in the 21st century (pp. 200–210). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Aghedo, I., & Osumah, O. (2012). The Boko Haram uprising: How should Nigeria respond? Third World Quarterly, 33(5), 853–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajayi, A. I. (2012). Boko Haram and terrorism in Nigeria: Exploratory and explanatory notes. Global Advanced Research Journal of History, Political Science and International Relations, 1(5), 103–107.Google Scholar
  4. Asogwa, C. E., Iyere, J. I., & Attah, C. O. (2012). The mass media reportage of crimes and terrorists activities. The Nigerian experience. Asian Culture and History, 4(2), 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dipeolu, Y. (2014a). UK Foreign secretary chairs ministerial meeting on Boko Haram. African Voice, June 13.Google Scholar
  6. Dipeolu, Y. (2014b). Boko Haram kidnap more women. African Voice, Jun 11.Google Scholar
  7. Ekwueme, A. C., & Obayi, P. M. (2012). Boko Haram assault on Nigeria: Toward effective mass media response. New Media and Mass Communication, 5, 1–7.Google Scholar
  8. Elkaim, Z. (2013, November). Boko Haram: The rise, success, and continued efficacy of the insurgency in Nigeria. ICT Working Paper Series, pp. 1–37.Google Scholar
  9. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ette, M. (2016). Condensational symbols in British press coverage of Boko Haram. The International Communication Gazette, Online First.Google Scholar
  11. Fleischer, J. (2013). Time and crisis. Public Management Review, 3(1), 75–91.Google Scholar
  12. Franklin, B., Hamer, M., Hanna, M., Kinsey, M., & Richardson, J. E. (2005). Key concepts in journalism studies. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  14. Global Conflict Tracker. (2016). Retrieved on August 2, 2016 from http://www.cfr.org/global/global-conflict-tracker/p32137#!/.
  15. Guenduez, A. A., Schedler K., & Ciocan, D. (2016). Generic frames and tonality: Mapping a polarizing issue in a multifaceted context. European Journal of Communication. Online First.Google Scholar
  16. Hawkins, V. (2008). Stealth conflicts: How the world’s worst violence is ignored. Hampshire: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  17. Jemide, M. (2015). Comment. Nigerian Watch, May, April/May, Issue 51, p. 2.Google Scholar
  18. Matthes, J. (2009). What’s in a frame? A content analysis of media framing studies in the world’s leading communication journals, 1990–2005. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(2), 349–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Musa, A. O. (2012). Socio-economic incentives, new media and the Boko Haram campaign of violence in Northern Nigeria. Journal of African Media Studies, 4(4), 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Oakley, A. (2014). Somalia: Not all our people are terrorists. African Voice, April 17, http://www.africanvoiceonline.co.uk/somalia-not-all-our-people-are-terrorists/. Accessed 1 Nov, 2016.
  21. Ogunrotifa, M. E. (2013). Class theory of terrorism: A study of Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(1), 27–59.Google Scholar
  22. Ogunyemi, O. (2016). The media image of Africa from the perspectives of African diasporic press. In M. Bunce, S. Franks, & C. Paterson (Eds.), Africa’s media image in the 21st century (pp. 61–70). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Okemi, M. E. (2013). Boko Haram: A religious sect or terrorist organisation. Global Journal of Politics and Law Research, 1(1), 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Osisanwo, A. (2016). Discursive representation of Boko Haram terrorism in selected Nigerian newspapers. Discourse & Communication, 10(4), 341–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Popoola, I. S. (2012). Press and terrorism in Nigeria: A discourse on Boko Haram. Global Media Journal: African Edition, 6(1), 43–66.Google Scholar
  26. Semetko, H. A., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television. Journal of Communication, 50, 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shoemaker, P. J., Vos, T. P., & Reese, S. D. (2009). Journalists as gatekeepers. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), The handbook of journalism studies (pp. 73–87). New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Shuriye, A. O., Adeyemi, B. K., & Huud, S. (2013). Global challenge of manual suspicion: Boko Haram uprising in Nigeria. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 3(5), 105–111.Google Scholar
  29. Van der Meer, T. G. L. A., Verhoeven, P., Beentjes, J. W. J., & Vliegenthart, R. (2016). Disrupting gatekeeping practices: Journalists’ source selection in times of crisis. Journalism, Online First.Google Scholar
  30. White, D. M. (1950). The ‘Gatekeeper’: A case study in the selection of news. In D. Berkowitz (Ed.), Social meanings of news: A reader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Yusha’U, M. J. (2012). Representation of Boko Haram discourses in the British broadsheets. Journal of Arab & Muslim Media Research, 5(1), 91–108.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LincolnLincolnUK

Personalised recommendations