No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Comparison of Press Coverage in Canada and the United States of the 1982 and 1984 Salvadoran Elections
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 November 2009
Abstract
This article investigates press coverage in Canada and the United States of the 1982 and 1984 Salvadoran elections employing the concept of the “demonstration election,” which posits that some elections occur not to select governments and solve problems but rather to confer international legitimacy on the government holding the election. The press plays a vital role in creating this aura of legitimacy. There is some evidence that the American press played a legitimizing role in the elections. While the elections received twice as much coverage in the American press as they did in the Canadian press, with the exception of some differences in leader evaluation and emphasis on issues, Canadians received essentially the same media portrayal of the elections as did Americans.
Résumé
Le présent article examine la façon dont la presse aux États-Unis et au Canada a rendu compte des élections tenues en 1982 et 1984 au Salvador. Pour ce faire l'auteur utilise le concept de « l'élection de démonstration », selon lequel certains élections ont lieu, non pour élire des gouvernements et pour résoudre des problèmes, mais plutôt pour conférer une légitimité internationale au gouvernement qui tient l'élection. La presse joue un rôle essentiel dans la création de cette apparence de légitimité. Et, il y a lieu de croire que la presse américaine a aidé à légitimer ces élections. Et bien que la presse américaine ait consacré deux fois plus de place à ces élections que la presse canadienne, et malgré quelques différences dans l'évaluation des chefs et dans le choix des questions soulignées, au fond les. Canadiens ont reçu de leurs médias le même tableau des élections que celui qu'ont eu les Américains des leurs.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , March 1990 , pp. 59 - 72
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1990
References
1 See Bennett, W. Lance, Gressett, Lynne A. and Hatton, William, “Repairing the News: A Case Study of the News Paradigm,” Journal of Communication 35 (1985), 50–68Google Scholar; Kriesberg, Martin, “Soviet News in the New York Times,” Public Opinion Quarterly 10 (1946), 540–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Soderlund, W. C. and Surlin, S. H., “Press Images of Maurice Bishop, Prime Minister of Grenada: A Pre- and Post-Death Comparison,” Canadian Journal of Communication 13 (1988), 50–62Google Scholar; Ericson, Richard V., Baranek, Patricia M. and Chan, Janet B. L., Negotiating Control: A Study of News Sources (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), 172–258Google Scholar; and Cassara, Catherine, “Presidential Initiative and Foreign News Coverage: The Carter Human Rights Policy's Effect on U.S. Coverage of Central and South America,” paper presented at Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication meetings, Washington, D.C. (August 1989Google Scholar).
2 Herman, Edward S. and Brodhead, Frank, Demonstration Elections: U.S.-Staged Elections in the Dominican Republic, Vietnam and El Salvador (Boston: South End Press, 1984Google Scholar).
3 Herman and Brodhead, Demonstration Elections, x.
4 Herman, Edward S., “Diversity of News: ‘Marginalizing’ the Opposition,” Journal of Communication 35 (1985), 136–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Herman and Brodhead, Demonstration Elections, ix.
6 Feber, Walter La, Inevitable Revolutions: The United States in Central America (New York: Norton, 1983), 10, 69–74, 172–76, 242–56.Google Scholar
7 North, Liisa, Bitter Grounds: Roots of Revolt in El Salvador (Toronto: Between the Lines, 1981), 73–97Google Scholar, Appendix 1.
8 Soderlund, Walter C., “An Analysis of the Guerrilla Insurgency and Coup d'Etat as Techniques of Indirect Aggression,” International Studies Quarterly 14 (1970), 335–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9 Baloyra, Enrique A., El Salvador in Transition (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982Google Scholar). For background and evaluation of the election, see especially Chapter 8, “Illusion and Reality,” 167–84.
10 Herman and Brodhead, Demonstration Elections, 3.
11 Ibid., 10.
12 Ibid., 116.
13 Baloyra, El Salvador in Transition, 180–82.
14 Frederick, Howard H., “Communication, Ideology, and Democracy in Cuba, Nicaragua and the United States,” in Soderlundand, W. C.Surlin, S. H. (eds.), Media in Latin America and the Caribbean: Domestic and International Perspectives (Windsor: OCPLACS, 1985), 42–53.Google Scholar
15 Herman and Brodhead, Demonstration Elections, ix–x.
16 See Canada, Special Senate Committee on Mass Media, The Uncertain Mirror: Report of the Special Senate Committee on Mass Media (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1970), 229–35Google Scholar, and Cuming, Carman, Cardinal, Mario and Johanson, Peter, Canadian News Services, Research Studies on the Newspaper Industry (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, 1981), 37.Google Scholar
17 Major contributions to the debate include Baranyi, Stephen, “Canadian Foreign Policy Toward Central America, 1980–1984: Independence, Limited Public Influence and State Leadership,” Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 10 (1985), 23–57Google Scholar; Morales, Cecilio, “A Canadian Role in Central America,” International Perspectives (January-February 1985), 12–15Google Scholar; Lemco, Jonathan, “Canada and Central America: A Review of Current Issues,” Behind the Headlines 44 (1986), 1–19Google Scholar; Haglund, David G., “How is Canada Doing in Central America?” International Perspectives (September/October 1987), 5–8Google Scholar; Haglund, David G., “The Missing Link: Canada's Security Interests and the Central American Crisis,” International Journal 42 (1987), 789–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rochlin, James, “Aspects of Canadian Foreign Policy Towards Central America,” Journal of Canadian Studies 22 (1987–1988), 5–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Rochlin, James, “The Political Economy of Canada's Relations with Central America,” Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 12 (1988), 45–70.Google Scholar
18 In the absence of alternative channels of information, the image of the Salvadoran election held by a majority of Americans and Canadians would be largely furnished by the press. See Smith, Anthony, The Geopolitics of Information: How Western Culture Dominates the World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1980), 24.Google Scholar See also Kegley, Charles W. and Wittkopf, Eugene R., American Foreign Policy: Pattern and Process (3rd ed.; New York: St. Martin's Press, 1987Google Scholar), chap. 9.
19 Letters to the editor were not coded.
20 “Legitimization” is operationalized as any statement made either by the newspaper, or by another source and reported by the newspaper, which enhances the image of the election as democratic or as a step likely to help solve the country's problems. Conversely, “delegitimization” is operationalized as any statement made by the newspaper, or by another source and reported by the newspaper, which detracts from the image of the election as democratic by casting doubts as to its integrity or by questioning its efficacy in helping to solve the country's problems.
21 “Cold War language” is operationalized as words or phrases likely to cause the reader to interpret the political events surrounding the election in the context of East-West conflict. Such words and phrases include: communist, communist-backed, Marxist, Marxist-Leninist, Cuban-backed, leftist and left-wing.
22 The author wishes to thank Jana Truka and Mark Restoulle for their assistance in coding, Robert Burge for assistance in computer-related aspects of the study, the Department of Employment and Immigration and the Canadian Institute for International Peace and Security for grants which made the research possible. Thanks go also to the Canadian Studies Center at Duke University and the School of Journalism and the Institute for Research in Social Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for assisting the author during a sabbatical leave.
23 Holsti, Ole R., Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1969), 140.Google Scholar
24 For example, see Schmitt, Carmen and Soderlund, Walter C., “Television and Newspaper Coverage of Latin American and Caribbean News: A Canadian-American Comparison,” Canadian Journal of Latin American Studies 7 (1982), 57–74Google Scholar; Soderlund, Walter C., “Press Reporting of El Salvador and Nicaragua in Leading Canadian and American Newspapers,” Canadian Journal of Communication 11 (1985), 353–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Soderlund, Walter C., “El Salvador: A Comparative Study of Canadian and American Press Coverage, 1981–1983,” Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 10 (1985), 15–26Google Scholar; and Soderlund, Walter C. and Schmitt, Carmen, “El Salvador's Civil War as seen in North and South American Press,” Journalism Quarterly 63 (1986), 268–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25 Soderlund, Walter C., “Canadian and American Press Coverage of the 1984 Nicaraguan Election,” Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 13 (1988), 87–102.Google Scholar
26 Herman and Brodhead, Demonstration Elections, 163–73.
27 The specific words and phrases used to describe Duarte and D'Aubuisson are available from the author on request.
28 Following are examples of textual language coded as legitimizing and delegitimizing: (1) legitimizing—“It is clear the people of El Salvador want peace and feel the ballot box is the best way to achieve it” (The Globe and Mail, March 27, 1982): “These elections are a major achievement in the development of democracy in El Salvador” (The New York Times, March 30, 1982); “It was a tremendous victory for the electoral process” (The Washington Post, March 30, 1982); “… the Salvadoran people have clearly repudiated violence and voiced their commitment to a democratic future” (The Los Angeles Times, April 1, 1982); “[the election is] a major step forward in the democratic process” (The Globe and Mail, March 27, 1984): “On balance the vote had more than its share of encouraging aspects—undaunted determination of Salvadoran citizens, the absence of post-election recriminations between leading contenders, the strictly neutral stance of Salvadoran armed forces—all attested to by a corps of genuinely impressed observers from Washington and elsewhere” (The Atlanta Constitution, April 2, 1984); and (2) delegitimizing—“… the only result of this election will be to augment violence afterward” (author's translation) (Le Devoir, February 26, 1982); “The elections will be a dubious measure of popular sentiment since the leftists are boycotting” (The Chicago Tribune, March 4, 1982); “… the election is unlikely to bring political stability or peace” (The Washington Post, March 4, 1984); “To many people outside of El Salvador the election lacks legitimacy because the political left is not involved” (The Vancouver Sun, March 26, 1984); “The real winners of Sunday'selections may well turn out to be the guerrillas” (The Atlanta Constitution, March 26, 1984); “In El Salvador… there is an absence of even the most basic conditions necessary for the exercise of effectual electoral politics” (The Los Angeles Times, March 27, 1984).
29 Following are examples of headlines coded legitimizing and delegitimizing: (1) legitimizing—“Birth of a New Democracy” (The Washington Post, March 21, 1982); “Salvador Voters Jam Polls” (The Chronicle-Herald, March 29, 1982); “A Vote for Peace” (The Vancouver Sun, March 30, 1982); “Salvadorans Show Courage” (The Atlanta Constitution, March 30, 1982); “Democracy Served Canadian Team Says” (The Globe and Mail, March 27, 1984); “El Salvador's Hope for Democracy Returns” (The Atlanta Constitution, March 27, 1984); and (2) delegitimizing—“Violence and Cynicism Mar Campaign for Next Month's Vote in El Salvador” (The New York Times, February 27, 1982); “Salvador: Le grand electeura toujours été l'armée” (Le Devoir, February 27, 1982); “El Salvador Vote Dismissed as a ‘Travesty’ “(The Winnipeg Free Press, March 30, 1982); “Canada Should Shun El Salvador Vote” (The Citizen, March 6, 1984); “Chicago's Bad Old Days Look Good to This Election” (The Chicago Tribune, March 28, 1984); “Chaos of Salvador Vote Submerges Democracy” (The Globe and Mail, March 29, 1984).