Frames and images facing Ukraine: comparing Germany's and Russia's media perceptions of the EU relations with Ukraine
The recent EU-Ukraine Summit in July 2018 demonstrated that the leaders of the EU and Ukraine have committed to further deepen the political association and economic integration of Ukraine with the EU. Yet, this “strong partnership,” based on a joint association agreement, has been overshadowed by Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and its instigation of the war in Donbas. Given that Ukraine is an important geopolitical neighbour for both the EU and Russia, the EU and its Member States – especially Germany and France – have taken on the role of mediators in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The focus of our study is on the image of the EU-Ukraine relationship as a unique and outstanding case. Ukraine’s close ties with Russia appear to be waning, however, the more Ukraine tries to strengthen its ties with the EU, the more Russia seems to resist. In this regard, we ask: How are the relationships between the EU and Ukraine are represented in German and Russian print media? How do the print media sources frame this relationship and what different images do they communicate? The content analysis of data draws diverging pictures: within the same period, the patterns of interaction between the EU and Ukraine, evolving within European Neighbourhood Policy and Eastern Partnership, tend to be depicted as far more cooperative in the German press, whereas Russia’s print media portray EU-Ukraine relations as increasingly negative and more conflicted over the years.
Blumler, J., & Katz, J. (1974). The Uses of Mass Communications. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Casier, T. (2017). EU-Russia Relations in Crisis: The Dynamics of a Breakup, in: EU-Russia Relations in Crisis. Understanding Diverging Perceptions, 13–29. New York, NY: Routledge.
Chaban, N. (2016). How to Work with Media Content, in: ASEF Public Diplomacy Handbook: How to Win Hearts and Minds, 88–110. Singapore: Asia-Europe Foundation.
Chaban, N., Bain, J., & Kelly, S. (2014). En’vision’ing Europe’s crisis: Intertextuality in news coverage of the Eurozone crisis in Chinese, Indian and Russian press. Journal of Communication, 20 (1), 1–20.
Chaban, N., Bain, J., Stats, K., & Sutthisripok, P. (2008). Mirror reflections? The EU in print and broadcast media in Asia-Pacific, in: The European Union and the Asia-Pacific: Media, Public and Elite Perceptions of the EU, 22–61. New York, NY: Routledge.
Chaban, N., & Holland, M. (2008). Introduction. Research rationale, theoretical underpinnings and methodological considerations, in: The European Union and the Asia Pacific: Media, Public and Elite Perceptions of the EU, 1–21. New York, NY: Routledge.
Chaban, N., & Holland, M. (2014). Communicating Europe in Times of Crisis: External Perceptions of the European Union. New York, NY: Palgrave McMillan.
Chaban, N., & Holland, M. (2015). EU External Perceptions: From Innovation to an Established Field of Study, in: The SAGE Handbook of European Foreign Policy, 672–686. London: Sage.
Chaban, N., Knodt, M., & Verdun, A. (2017). ‘Talking with’ Not ‘Talking at’? Perceptions of the EU as a Global Normative Energy Actor in the Eyes of BRICS and EU ‘Big 3’. Comparative European Politics, 15 (1), 1–22.
Cohen, B.C. (1967). The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
EEAS (European External Action Service). (2015). ENP Review: stronger partnerships for a stronger neighbourhood, 17.11.2015. http://collections.internetmemory.org/haeu/content/20160313172652/http://eeas.europa.eu/top_stories/2015/181115_enp_review_en.htm. Accessed 10 June 2018.
Elgström, O., & Chaban, N. (2015). To Study External Perceptions of the EU: A Conceptual Approach, in: Perceptions of the EU in Eastern Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa Looking in from the Outside, 17–33. New York, NY: Palgrave McMillan.
Entman, R.M. (2003). Cascading Activation: Contesting the White House’s Frame After 9/11. Political Communication, 20 (4), 415–432.
Entman, R.M. (2004). Projections of Power: Framing News, Public Opinion, and U.S. Foreign Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
European Commission. (2015). Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Review of the European Neighbourhood Policy, JOIN(2015) 50 final, 2, 18 Nov. 2015, Brussels.
Früh, W. (2011). Inhaltsanalyse. München: UVK.
Häder, M. (2006). Empirische Sozialforschung. Eine Einführung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Herrmann, R.K. (2013). Perceptions and Image Theory in International Relations, in: The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, 285–314. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kleinschnitger, K., & Knodt, M. (2018). Asymmetric Perceptions of EU Relations with the near Eastern Neighbours: The Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and Belarus in Comparison. European Foreign Affairs Review, 23 (1), 79–100.
Knodt, M., Chaban, N., & Nielsen, L. (2017). Bilateral Energy Relations Between the EU and Emerging Powers: Mutual Perceptions of the EU and Brazil, China, India and South Africa. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag.
Lakoff, G., & Johnston, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Livingston, S. (1997). Clarifying the CNN Effect: An Examination of Media Effects According to Type of Military Intervention, Research Paper, John F. Kennedy School of Government’s Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University. Cambridge: Harvard University.
McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. (1972). The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36, 176–187.
Semetko, H.A., De Vreese, C.H., & Peter, J. (2000). Europeanised Politics – Europeanised Media? European Integration and Political Communication, 23 (4), 121–141.
Trabandt, V. (2012). Neue Nachbarn, gute Nachbarschaft? Die EU als internationaler Akteur am Beispiel ihrer Demokratieförderung in Belarus und der Ukraine 2004–2009. Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag.
Vowe, G. (2002). Politische Kommunikation. Ein historischer und systematischer Überblick der Forschung. Ilmenau: Technische Universität Ilmenau.
Westle, B. (2009). Methoden der Politikwissenschaft. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag.
Copyright (c) 2018 Katharina Kleinschnitger, Michèle Knodt, Nadiya Safonova
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors, who publish with this journal, accept the following conditions:
The authors reserve the copyright of their work and transfer to the magazine the right of the first publication of this work under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License, which allows other persons to freely distribute a published work with mandatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
Authors have the right to enter into separate additional agreements for the non-exclusive dissemination of the work in the form in which it was published by this journal (for example, to post the work in the electronic institutions' repository or to publish as part of a monograph), provided that the link to the first publication of the work in this journal is given.
The journal policy allows and encourages the authors to place the manuscripts on the Internet (for example, in the institutions' repositories or on personal websites), both before the presentation of this manuscript to the editorial board and during review procedure, as it contributes to the creation of productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of citing the published work (see The Effect of Open Access).