Following the successful merger of Group ‘A’ and Group ‘B’, this week we made important strides towards nailing down the scope and content of our research for the presentation.
Firstly, we agreed upon the following research question (which may be subject to minor tweaking in the week to come): How has media documentation of war in the US differed from that of conflicting states?
Because our central theme is War, we looked into defining the term in our own specific disciplines (Sebastian – Geography; Kistina – Politics; Kayoko & Greta – History; Ares – Philosophy) and found that it can mean many different things depending on through the lens that it is seen from. Because of this, we settled on 3 wide and varied case studies of ‘war’, being:
- 1945 US atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima
- 1991 Gulf War between the US and its NATO allies against Iraq and the Saddam regime
- Climate Change rhetoric within the US and other states as a war between the earth and its inhabitants
We agreed that each case study would be analysed by looking at the messages portrayed/documented by mass media outlets in the US versus those of the public (e.g. social or independent media) and from outside the US. Granted, this is quite a large scope so we will be looking to refine this in the weeks to come. We agreed on a loose allocation of work with respect to the case studies, which is the following:
- Sebastian: 1991 Gulf War
- Kayoko & Ares: 1945 Hiroshima
- Kistina & Greta: Climate Change
These are all subject to change as we have not started specific research yet. In addition, as Kistina mentioned in the previous update, we will also be looking at aspects of ‘media theory’ to help us with the research and the analysis of each case study.
Overall, this week’s meeting was very successful as we settled on our case studies and approaches. We have come pretty far in a short space of time, taking the merger of our groups into account and will build on this for our supervised meeting commencing week 5.