de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean

Post

 
 Vis
  Krig, information og entropi
Item is

Ophav

 Ophav:
Elkjær, Johan1, Forfatter
Vedby Rasmussen, Mikkel 2, Vejleder
Tilknytninger:
1Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet, Københavns Universitet, København, Danmark, diskurs:7001              
2Institut for Statskundskab, Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet, Københavns Universitet, København, Danmark, diskurs:7003              
skjul Ophav
Vis Ophav

Indhold

Ukontrollerede emneord: Krig, Afghanistan, Meningsmålinger, Entropi
 Abstract: When the organization WikiLeaks published its first trove of information about the war in Afghanistan it revolutionized the way the public gets updated about war. The actuality and extent of the military reports eclipse most other revelations about any war in American history. But what eect did this leak have on public opinion in the US? Could it be compared to the Pentagon Papers, which had a monumental impact on the relationships between the American government, the media and the public? Or is its effect more subdued or even not noticeable at all? This thesis argues, with the help of concepts originating in information theory and thermodynamic that the effect of the Afghanistan leak is not to unequivocally heighten public disapproval of the war. Instead public opinion seems to follow a different seasonal pattern closely related to the intensity of the war, especially the number of dead US soldiers in Afghanistan. At the same time war is shown to be intensely mediatized, here understood as the process where society becomes dependent of the media and their logic making all communication go through the media. The high amount of articles about the war in Afghanistan that has NATO, Pentagon, or State Department o cials as a source is seen as a clear indication of the war's mediatization.
Finally it is argued that the three media outlets that originally published stories based on the Afghanistan leak, New York Times, the British Guardian and the German weekly Der Spiegel, did so in a manner supporting existing narratives in their own publications. It is shown that the New York Times focused on a link between the Pakistani intelligence agency and the Taliban both before and after the leak as made public. In a similar way the Guardian has focused on civilian casualties emanating from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and so-called collateral damage by NATO and especially US troops both before and after the leak. Der Spiegel's focus has naturally been on the German effort in Afghanistan.
skjul Indhold
Vis Indhold

Filer

Navn:
Færdigt speciale.pdf (Hovedtekst)
Bemærkninger:
Embargo udløb d. 31-01-2012
Tilgængelighed:
Offentlig
Mime-type / størrelse:
application/pdf / 2MB
Copyright dato:
2012-06-26
Copyright information:
De fulde rettigheder til dette materiale tilhører forfatteren.
skjul Filer
Vis Filer

Basal

Bogmærk denne post: https://diskurs.kb.dk/item/diskurs:31272:4
 Type: Speciale
Alternativ titel: Afghanistankrigen og amerikansk opinion
Alternativ titel: War, Information, and Entropy
Alternativ titel: The Afghanistan War and Amerian Public Opinion
skjul Basal
Vis Basal

Links

Vis Links

Detaljer

Sprog: Danish - dan
 Datoer: 2011-11-14
 Sider: -
 Publiceringsinfo: København : Københavns Universitet
 Indholdsfortegnelse: Indhold
1 Introduktion 1
1.1 Indledning . 1
1.2 Problemfelt og problemformulering . 2
1.2.1 Afghanistanlækagen vs. Pentagonpapirerne 4
1.3 Læsevejledning 6
2 Metode 7
2.1 Analysedesign og valg af case 7
2.2 Denition af modstand mod krig 10
3 Teori 11
3.1 Krig og information . 11
3.1.1 Entropi 11
3.1.2 Systemteori 14
3.2 Krig og information . 17
3.2.1 Medialiseret krig . 21
3.3 Sammenhæng mellem krig og opinion 25
3.3.1 Almond-Lippmann-paradigmet 26
3.3.2 Stabile meninger-paradigmet . 28
3.3.3 Informationsopdaterings-paradigmet . 29
3.4 Operationalisering af teori 31
4 Analyse 34
4.1 Aggregering af opinionsundersøgelser 35
4.1.1 Associated Press-GfK Poll: Do you favor or oppose the war in Afghanistan? . 37
4.1.2 CNN-Opinion Research Poll: Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war in Afghanistan? 38
4.1.3 Angus Reid Poll (1): Overall, do you support or oppose
the military operation involving American soldiers in Afghanistan? 39
4.1.4 Angus Reid Poll (2): Do you think the United States made a mistake or did the right thing in sending military forces to Afghanistan? . 40
4.1.5 Washington Post-ABC News Poll: All in all, considering the costs to the United States versus the benets to the United States, do you think the war in Afghanistan has been worth ghting, or not? . 41
4.1.6 Pew Research Center Poll: How well is the U.S. military
eort in Afghanistan going? . 43
4.1.7 Alternativ forklaringsmodel . 44
4.1.8 Delkonklusion . 48
4.2 Hvor kommer informationen om krigen fra? 50
4.2.1 Forstudie af New York Times internetartikler . 52
4.2.2 New York Times . 53
4.2.3 The Guardian . 55
4.2.4 Der Spiegel 58
4.2.5 Delkonklusion . 59
4.3 Styrkelse af eksisterende narrativer . 60
4.3.1 IED'er og civile tab . 64
4.3.2 Den underbemandede forpost 66
4.3.3 Pakistansk støtte til Taleban 69
4.3.4 Delkonklusion . 70
4.4 Journalistiske beretninger og klassiske læk . 72
5 Afslutning 75
5.1 Konklusion 75
5.2 Perspektivering 78
 Note: -
 Type: Speciale
skjul Detaljer
Vis Detaljer

Kilde

Vis Kilde