Competing Frames? The War on Terror in Campaign Rhetoric

dc.contributor.advisorSeybold, Peter James, 1950-
dc.contributor.authorKaufman, Heather L.
dc.contributor.otherWittberg, Patricia
dc.contributor.otherFoote, Carrie
dc.date2007-06en
dc.date.accessioned2007-06-05T13:36:47Z
dc.date.available2007-06
dc.date.issued2007-06
dc.degree.disciplineDepartment of Sociologyen
dc.degree.grantorIndiana Universityen
dc.degree.levelM.A.en
dc.descriptionIndiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)en
dc.description.abstractThe Iraq War and the War on Terror were pivotal issues in the presidential race for the White House in 2004. Competing frames about the meaning of September 11, 2001, terrorism, and American power were constructed by the rival candidates and established a limited debate that marginalized alternative interpretations of war and peace. It is likely that the dilemma over U.S. forces in Iraq and the War on Terror will continue to be a major issue in the upcoming 2008 Presidential Election. Therefore, the campaign speeches of the presidential candidates, President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry, during the 2004 Election regarding terrorism were important to understanding the themes that initiated public debate in the U.S. about the conflict in Iraq and the War on Terror. In this document analysis, these candidates’ public addresses illustrated how the role of the U.S. power to combat terrorism shaped a particular perspective about the post-9/11 world. Ideas that challenged “official” debate about war and national security were excluded from mainstream media coverage of the campaign. In order to examine the narrow debate over terrorism and how alternative “ways of seeing” war have been and continue to be marginalized, this study compared how the candidates framed the war in contrast to anti-war voices. Cindy Sheehan, who is an emergent leader in the peace and social justice movement, and more “official” voices of dissent like Representative Dennis Kucinich, have criticized “official” framing of the war. Dissenting perspectives about the Iraq War and the War on Terror invite a different understanding about U.S. hegemony, terrorism, and the consequences of the War on Terror for foreign and domestic policies. The impact of the war upon domestic policy and national crises, such as the widely televised and heavily criticized federal response to Hurricane Katrina Summer 2005, were examined to explore how domestic crises undermine “official” framing of the Iraq War and the War on Terror and empower alternative understandings of war and peace.en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/997
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.7912/C2/673
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.subjectcompeting framesen
dc.subjectSeptember 11, 2001en
dc.subjectIraq Waren
dc.subjectWar on Terroren
dc.subjectGeorge W. Bushen
dc.subjectJohn Kerryen
dc.subjecthegemonyen
dc.subjectthe peace and justice movementen
dc.subject.lcshBush, George W. (George Walker), 1946- -- Political and social viewsen
dc.subject.lcshPresidents -- United States -- Election -- 2004en
dc.subject.lcshWar on Terrorism, 2001-2009 -- Public opinionen
dc.subject.lcshWar on Terrorism, 2001-2009 -- Political aspectsen
dc.subject.lcshSeptember 11 Terrorist Attacks, 2001 -- Political aspectsen
dc.subject.lcshCampaign speeches -- United Statesen
dc.subject.lcshKerry, John, 1943- -- Political and social viewsen
dc.subject.lcshPolitical campaigns -- United Statesen
dc.titleCompeting Frames? The War on Terror in Campaign Rhetoricen
dc.typeThesisen
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
FINAL THESIS COPY.pdf
Size:
499.87 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.92 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: