A Discourse Study Of The Positioning Of Korean War In The News Reports Of New York Times(1950-53): A News Narrative Perspective

To maintain hegemony,America and the other 15 countries participated in Korean War,which was unjust and illegal.However,as the primary propaganda tool of the American government,the New York Times made a series of relevant propaganda on Korean War to work with the American government and military.To reflect how the New York Times positioned Korean War,to be more specific,how the New York Times manipulated the American people and world,this thesis aims to solve the following two questions:(1)What is the positioning of Korean War in the macro-and-micro level on the news reports of the New York Times?(2)What are the discourse features of the representation of Korean War on the micro-level in the news reports of the New York Times?To solve the mentioned questions above,this research randomly collects 322 news reports on the Korean War from June 1950 to July 1953 in the New York Times,which ranges from the beginning of Korean War to signing the truce agreement.Firstly,it introduces the current research of news narrative analysis,news report of war and the studies of Korean War.Then,based on the literature review of news narrative analysis and warfare discourse analysis,this thesis constructs the analytical framework.After that,using keyword search,it aims to collect the sentences with the explicit positioning of Korean War in each phase,and then analyze the positioning and discourse features in these sentences on micro-level,which lays the evaluative tone for the next chapter.Then,it selects five most representative news reports published at the crucial time of Korean War as the case study,and makes the analysis on macro-and-micro level,which further explores the positioning of Korean War and discourse features at the different phases of Korean War and serves for the opinions of American participation in the Korean War in the New York Times.According to the detailed study,some significant findings of this research could be concluded as follows:Firstly,the positioning of Korean War by the New York Times is characterized as the stability and instability,and suffers from recognition and repositioning.(1)The positioning of the Korean War by the New York Times is characterized as stability and instability.The stability is reflected as Korean War was one started by the North Korea sponsored by the Soviet Union and the South Korea headed by the United States,and it was more termed as a war for freedom and independence or even unification or the spread of the American values,principles and even maintaining the status of the United States in the American eyes.On the other hand,the instability is that Korean War was repositioned again and again with the turning of Korean War: the beginning perception of Korean War is later positioned in the second phase and then is repositioned again in the third phase and is somewhat finally repositioned again until the ending Korean War.(2)The distinguishing features for each phase of the American positioning of Korean War can be summarized as follows: it was first taken as a war between North Korea sponsored by the Soviet Union and South Korea headed by the United States(the former labelled as the invader).And then,it was repositioned as a war in need of control as limited but not enlarged.At the same time,the unfavorable views thought Korean War would bring serious disaster to the United States.And then,it was further repositioned as a way to safeguard American principle and values,which needed more excellent support of the world instead of retreating from the peninsular,but also the fight between political parties in America.Before it came to an end,the coming signing of the armistice was further repositioned as Korean War ended with a satisfying armistice,which was pledged and guaranteed by all the parties involved in Korean War.Finally,it was conclusively repositioned as a war ending with an armistice that deserved thanksgiving despite the mixture of sorrow and celebration.Secondly,the discourse features of the positioning of Korean War can be mainly summarized as intentionally achieving the polarity effect by the preferential using of the perspective mainly dominated by the American source,the biased usage of the transitivity for the favorable representative of the American side,the positive words for the American group and the negative words for the communists’ group.(1)the whole process(1950.6.25-1953.7.27): firstly,News York Times mainly reported from the American perspective,though Communist countries and other western countries were mentioned.Secondly,it positioned Korean War from many dimensions,such as the aim of Korean War,the Korean War participant and the significance,but the political nature of Korean War was emphasized in the whole process.Thirdly,the expressions of all processes represented polarity,in which the positive words went with the American government,and the negative words described the Communist countries.Fourthly,the source information was non-objective,which significantly spread the American ideology and discredited the communist countries.Fifthly,New York Times selectively reported the information about Korean War to construct America’s victory image.Lastly,the news reports were inductive and misleading,which could be reflected by positioning North Korea as aggressor and America as “peace-keeper.”(2)The discourse features of news reports of the New York Times can be summarized as follows:(1)The first phase(1950.6.25-1950.10.28): The expressions of the New York Times had high polarity in terms of the perspective,the transitivity and the preference of words.The American perspectives were dominant,but the perspectives of communist countries were less reported;the transitivity was more patterned with how North Korea was the agent of an adverse action while the United States was more patterned as an agent exerting great power;the negative words went with Communist countries while positive expressions were used to describe America.(2)The second phase(1950.10.19-1951.6.23): Although the Communist countries’ perspectives reported increasingly,the Americans were still the main narrators,which represented over half of all perspectives and the polarity also embodied between Bradley and Mac Arthur,which reflected the Americans had a new understanding of Korean War.In terms of the transitivity,Bradley was at the advantage when criticizing Mac Arthur,Mac Arthur mostly went with negative words and Bradley the opposite regarding the use of words.(3)The third phase(1951.6.24-1953.7.23): There were two perspectives in the third case,which were from General Ridgeway addressing his opinions through spoken words and the critics adopting indirect speech;transitivity examination showed that Ridgway was more related to the explicit speaker,while the opposing side was often realized as the unidentified agent;the words preference showed that positive words went with Ridgeway and the negative words describing the critics;the conceptual metaphors were also used to polarized Ridgeway and the critics.In the fourth case describing the coming of the armistice signing,it mostly adopted the equal polarity between the American side and the Communist in terms of the narrative perspectives and the preference of positive words narrating the coming of the armistice signing.However,the transitivity study found that the American side had a direct speech while the communists’ side was often realized as indirect,creating an asymmetrical polarity of narrative.The perspective was mainly from the American President Eisenhower,with a few coming from others,like the old people Abraham Lincoln,which created an asymmetrical polarity in the speech.Transitivity study of the text also found that agents of the sentences were mostly “We” or “the American people” or “America”,and none was given to the other end of the polarity.The preferential use of words found that the news report took more words with the sense of self-inclusion and intimacy as highly preferred words,increasing the perception that America play a more positive or powerful role in signing the armistice.Based on the theory of news narrative analysis,this thesis examined the positioning of the Korean War and discourse features of news reports of New York Times using the qualitative and quantitative research methods.It will hopefully provide the research paradigm and reference for the future research of warfare discourse.