Introduction: Tracing the Meanings of Fukushima

  • Katja ValaskiviEmail author
  • Anna Rantasila
  • Mikihito Tanaka
  • Risto Kunelius


This chapter presents the background for the book. Our point of departure is a distinction between occurrences (contingent things that take place in the world) and events (discursive constructions that make sense of occurrences). This chapter opens the central trajectories that come together in our attempt to explain how the triple disaster on 11 March 2011 in Japan was made sense of. This chapter suggests that the meanings, affects and articulations are linked to four intersecting discussions, looking at the event (1) as a dramatic example of processing cultural trauma, (2) as a disruptive global media event that unfolds in (3) a new kind of hybrid media environment, and that carries with it the exceptional political and cultural tensions related to (4) nuclear politics.


Fukushima Global media events Hybrid media system Cultural trauma Nuclear politics Social media Digitalization 


  1. Ahmed, S. (2004a). Affective economies. Social Text, 79(22), 117–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmed, S. (2004b). The cultural politics of emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Alexander, J. C. (2012). Trauma. A social theory. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  5. Archetti, C. (2013). Understanding terrorism in the age of global media: A communication approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnhurst, K. G. (2016). Mister Pulitzer and the spider: Modern news from realism to the digital. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnhurst, K. G., & Mutz, D. (1997). American journalism and the decline in event-centered reporting. Journal of Communication, 47(4), 27–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Benkler, Y. (2016). Degrees of freedom, dimensions of power. Daedalus, 145, 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Benkler, Y., Faris, R., & Roberts, H. (2018). Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radicalization in American politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Scholar
  13. Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Scholar
  14. Cottle, S. (2006). Mediatized conflict: Understanding media and conflicts in the contemporary world. Maidenhead/Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
  15. Couldry, N. (2003). Media rituals: A critical approach. London: Routledge. Scholar
  16. Couldry, N. (2012). Media, society, world: Social theory and digital media practice. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  17. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The mediated construction of reality. Cambridge, UK/Malden: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. (2018). Data colonialism: Rethinking big data’s relation to the contemporary subject. Television & New Media. Scholar
  19. Dayan, D. (2010). Beyond media events: Disenchantment, derailment, disruption. In N. Couldry, A. Hepp, & F. Krotz (Eds.), Media events in a global age (pp. 23–42). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Dayan, D., & Katz, E. (1992). Media events: The live broadcasting of history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Ekecrantz, J. (1997). Journalism’s ‘discursive events’ and sociopolitical change in Sweden 1925–87. Media, Culture and Society, 19(3), 393–412. Scholar
  22. Fiske, J. (1994). Media matters: Everyday culture and political change. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Gillespie, T. (2018). The custodians of the internet. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hepp, A., & Couldry, N. (2010). Media events in globalized media cultures. In N. Couldry, A. Hepp, & F. Krotz (Eds.), Media events in a global age. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Innis, H. (1951). The bias of communication. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  26. Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2009). Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva, 47, 119–146. Scholar
  27. Joas, H., & Knöbl, W. (2010). Social theory. Twenty introductory lectures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Katz, D., & Liebes, T. (2007). ‘No more peace!’: How disaster, terror and war have upstaged media events. International Journal of Communication, 1, 158–166.Google Scholar
  29. Kellner, D. (2003). Media spectacle. London: Routledge. Scholar
  30. Kraidy, M. (2002). Hybridity. The cultural logic of globalization. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Liebes, T., & Blondheim, M. (2005). Myths to the rescue: How live television intervenes in history. In E. W. Rothenbuhler & M. Coman (Eds.), Media anthropology. London: Sage.
  33. Lippmann, W. (1920). Liberty and the news. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  34. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: Signet cop.Google Scholar
  35. Papacharissi, Z. (2014). Affective publics. Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Peters, J. D. (2015). The Marvelous Clouds: Toward a philosophy of elemental media. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rothenbuhler, E. (2010). Media events in the age of terrorism and the internet. Revista Romana de Jurnalism si Comunicare – Romanian Journal of Journalism and Communication, 2, 34–41.Google Scholar
  38. Schudson, M. (2008). Why democracies need an unlovable press. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
  39. Sewell, W. (2005). The logic of history. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sonnevend, J. (2016). Stories without borders. The Berlin Wall and the making of a global iconic event. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stepinska, A. (2009). 9/11 and the transformation of globalized media events. Media Events in a Global Age, 10. Scholar
  42. Sumiala, J., Valaskivi, K., Tikka, M., & Huhtamäki, J. (2018). Hybrid media events: The Charlie Hebdo attacks and global circulation of terrorist violence. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tambini, D., & Moore, M. (Eds.). (2018). Digital dominance: The power of Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  45. Turow, J. (2011). The daily you. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Van Dijck, J., & Poell, T. (2013). Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication, 1(1), 2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wagner-Pacifici, R. (2018). What is an event? Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Weart, S. R. (2012). The rise of nuclear fear. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wu, T. (2016). The attention merchants. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  50. Zelizer, B. (2018). Seeing the present, remembering the past: Terror’s representation as an exercise in collective memory. Television & New Media, 19(2), 136–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katja Valaskivi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Anna Rantasila
    • 1
  • Mikihito Tanaka
    • 2
  • Risto Kunelius
    • 1
  1. 1.Tampere UniversityTampereFinland
  2. 2.Waseda UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations