Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Many thought that the 11 March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan might be the end of the “global nuclear renaissance.” In Europe, mass media after Fukushima increasingly presented negative framing of nuclear energy and highlighted declining support for the nuclear industry. In the United States, however, nuclear production and public support for the industry remained steady. This article analyzes US media documents to understand the construction of public discourse on nuclear power in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. Through a content analysis of US newspapers, it demonstrates that post-Fukushima media framed the crisis in a way that privileged expert knowledge and opinion, while delegitimizing non-expert engagement with nuclear energy issues. A comparison between national newspapers and newspapers located in two regions with controversial nuclear plants and active anti-nuclear citizens’ movements additionally demonstrates the power and reach of the identified framework across the spectrum of views on nuclear power.

Keywords

framing risk media and science media representations nuclear energy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abe

(2013) Why Safecast matters: A case study in collective risk assessment. In: STS forum on Fukushima, 2013. Available at: https://fukushimaforum.wordpress.com/workshops/sts-forum-on-the-2011-fukushima-east-japan-disaster/manuscripts/session-3-radiation-information-and-control/why-safecast-matters-a-case-study-in-collective-risk-assessment/

Arlt

Wolling

(2016) Fukushima effects in Germany? Changes in media coverage and public opinion on nuclear power. Public Understanding of Science 25(7): 842–857.

Beck

(1997) Global risk politics. Political Quarterly 68(B): 18–33.

Bengston

Webb

Fan

(2004) Shifting forest value orientations in the United States, 1980-2001: A computer content analysis. Environmental Values 13(3): 373–392.

Black

(2011) Nuclear power “gets little public support worldwide.” Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-15864806

Butler

Parkhill

Pidgeon

(2011) Nuclear power after Japan: The social dimensions. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 53(6): 3–14.

Callon

Lascoumes

Barthe

(2009) Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Chilton

(1987) Metaphor, euphemism and the militarization of language. Current Research on Peace and Violence 10(1): 7–19.

Fairclough

(2013) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. New York, NY: Routledge.

10.

Friedman

(2011) Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima: An analysis of traditional and new media coverage of nuclear accidents and radiation. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 67(5): 55–65.

11.

Gamson

Modigliani

(1987) The changing culture of affirmative action. In: Braungart

(ed.) Research in Political Sociology. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 137–177.

12.

Gamson

Modigliani

(1989) Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology 95(1): 1–37.

13.

Gieryn

(1983) Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review 48(6): 781–795.

14.

Grantham

Vieira ET Jr (2014) Risk dimensions and political decisions frame environmental communication: A content analysis of seven US newspapers from 1970–2010. Applied Environmental Education & Communication 13(2): 91–98.

15.

Hébert

(2016) Chronicle of a disaster foretold: Scientific risk assessment, public participation, and the politics of imperilment in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 22(S1): 108–126.

16.

Herman

Chomsky

(1988) Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.

17.

Jung

(2012) Social media use and goals after the Great East Japan earthquake. First Monday 17(8). Available at: https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4071/3285#:~:text=Different%20types%20of%20social%20media%20were%20examined%20with%20regard%20to,earthquake%2C%20while%20Twitter%20was%20mainly

18.

Katchanovski

(2012) Fukushima vs. Chernobyl: Coverage of the nuclear disasters by American and Canadian media. In: APSA 2012 annual meeting, 2012. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2108667

19.

Kinder

Sanders

(1990) Mimicking political debate with survey questions: The case of white opinion on affirmative action for blacks. Social Cognition 8(1): 73–103.

20.

Kinsella

(2012) Environments, risks, and the limits of representation: Examples from nuclear energy and some implications of Fukushima. Environmental Communication 6(2): 251–259.

21.

Kinsella

(2013) Negotiating nuclear safety. In: STS forum on Fukushima, 2013. Available at: http://fukushimaforum.wordpress.com/workshops/sts-forum-on-the-2011-fukushima-east-japan-disaster/manuscripts/session-3-radiation-information-and-control/negotiating-nuclear-safety-responses-to-the-fukushima-disaster-by-the-u-s-nuclear-community/

22.

Kinsella

Kelly

Autry

(2013) Risk, regulation, and rhetorical boundaries: Claims and challenges surrounding a purported nuclear renaissance. Communication Monographs 80(3): 278–301.

23.

Lai

(2015) Content analysis of social media: A grounded theory approach. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research 16(2): 138–152.

24.

Lansdall-Welfare

Sudhahar

Veltri

Cristianini

(2014) On the coverage of science in the media: A big data study on the impact of the Fukushima disaster. In: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE international conference on big data, 27–30 October, pp. 60–66. New York: IEEE.

25.

LaPorte

Consolini

(1991) Working in practice but not in theory: Theoretical challenges of “high-reliability organizations.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 1(1): 19–48.

26.

Lavelle

(2012) One year after Fukushima, Japan faces shortages of energy, trust. Available at: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2012/03/120309-japan-fukushima-anniversary-energy-shortage/ (accessed 15 May 2020).

27.

Lazic

(2013) News analysis of the Fukushima accident: Lack of information disclosure, radiation fears and accountability issues. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia 12(2): 19–34.

28.

Lazic

Kaigo

(2013) US press coverage of the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident: Frames, sources and news domestication. Media Asia 40(3): 260–273.

29.

Martin

Hansen

(1998) Newspapers of Record in a Digital Age: From Hot Type to Hot Link. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.

30.

Maxwell

(2005) Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

31.

Molotch

Lester

(1974) News as purposive behavior: On the strategic use of routine events, accidents, and scandals. American Sociological Review 39(1): 101–112.

32.

Molotch

Lester

(1975) Accidental news: The great oil spill as local occurrence and national event. American Journal of Sociology 81(2): 235–260.

33.

Nuclear Energy Institute (2016) National public opinion survey on nuclear energy. Available at: https://www.nei.org/resources/reports-briefs/national-public-opinion-survey-nuclear-energy

34.

Nuclear Energy Institute (2017) US nuclear generating statistics. Available at: https://www.nei.org/Knowledge-Center/Nuclear-Statistics/US-Nuclear-Power-Plants/US-Nuclear-Generating-Statistics

35.

Pellizzoni

Ylönen

(2012) Neoliberalism and Technoscience: Critical Assessments. New York, NY: Routledge.

36.

Pizziconi

(2015) Japanese discourses on nuclear power in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster. In: Calvetti

Mariotti

(eds) Contemporary Japan: Challenges for a World Economic Power in Transition. Venice: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari: Digital Publishing, pp. 161–188.

37.

Reinhardt

(2019) 40 years after Three Mile Island, Americans split on nuclear power. Available at: https://news.gallup.com/poll/248048/years-three-mile-island-americans-split-nuclear-power.aspx

38.

Renn

(1990) Public responses to the Chernobyl accident. Journal of Environmental Psychology 10(2): 151–167.

39.

Scheufele

(1999) Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication 49(1): 103–122.

40.

Schmidt

Horta

Pereira

Oliveira

(2013) Portuguese media discourse on nuclear energy before and after Fukushima. In: EFDA work programme 2012 (WP12-SER-ACIF-1). Available at: https://repositorio.ul.pt/bitstream/10451/8677/1/ICS_LSchmidt_AHorta_Portuguese_RN.pdf

41.

Shaffer

(2014) A looming crisis of confidence in Japan’s nuclear intentions. Federation of American Scientists 67(4). Available at: https://fas.org/pir-pubs/looming-crisis-confidence-japans-nuclear-intentions/

42.

Sneider

(2013) Fukushima, shame and the accidental public. In: STS forum on Fukushima, 2013. Available at: https://fukushimaforum.wordpress.com/workshops/sts-forum-on-the-2011-fukushima-east-japan-disaster/manuscripts/session-1/fukushima-shame-and-the-accidental-public/

43.

Srinivasan

Gopi Rethinaraj

(2013) Fukushima and thereafter: Reassessment of risks of nuclear power. Energy Policy 52: 726–736.

44.

Strauss

Corbin

(1998) Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

45.

van der Meer

TGLA

Verhoeven

(2013) Public framing organizational crisis situations: Social media versus news media. Public Relations Review 39(3): 229–231.

46.

Visschers

Wallquist

(2013) Nuclear power before and after Fukushima: The relations between acceptance, ambivalence and knowledge. Journal of Environmental Psychology 36: 77–86.

47.

Weston

(2013) Unwanted intimacies: Technostruggle and radioactive embodiment after 3.11. In: STS forum on Fukushima, 2013. Available at: http://fukushimaforum.wordpress.com/workshops/sts-forum-on-the-2011-fukushima-east-japan-disaster/manuscripts/session-3-radiation-information-and-control/unwanted-intimacies-technostruggle-and-radioactive-embodiment-after-3-11/

48.

Wetts

(2020) Models and morals: Elite-oriented and value-neutral discourse dominates American organizations’ framings of climate change. Social Forces 98(3): 1339–1369.

49.

White House (2011) President Obama: “We will stand with the people of Japan.” Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/03/17/president-obama-we-will-stand-people-japan

50.

White House (2015) Fact sheet: Obama administration announces actions to ensure that nuclear energy remains a vibrant component of the United States’ clean energy strategy. Available at: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/11/06/fact-sheet-obama-administration-announces-actions-ensure-nuclear-energy

51.

World Nuclear Association (2014) The nuclear renaissance. Available at: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/The-Nuclear-Renaissance/

52.

World Nuclear News (2012) Hollande wins French presidential election. Available at: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP-Hollande_wins_French_presidential_election-0805124.html

53.

Yamamura

(2012) Effect of free media on views regarding nuclear energy after the Fukushima accident. Kyklos 65(1): 132–141.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.11 MB

Post-Fukushima discourse in the US press: Quantified knowledge,the technical object,and a panicked public

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material