IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rfa/smcjnl/v12y2024i3p375-392.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Media's Perception of China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC): A Framing Analysis of Media Discourse on Chinese Investments in Myanmar

Author

Listed:
  • Zeyar Oo
  • Yonghong Dai
  • Yasmine Edderssi
  • Devkota Dipak
  • Bandana Singh

Abstract

Since media liberalization in 2011, news media has played a critical role in shaping public opinion, impacting the government’s policy-making process. After the emergence of the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC) in 2018, Chinese projects have increasingly attracted media attention in Myanmar. Previous studies mainly focus on Chinese projects with different perspectives, such as geopolitics and international perspectives, while lacking an understanding of media. Therefore, this article set out to study media perceptions of Chinese projects under the CMEC to examine how the news media frames Chinese projects in Myanmar. Qualitative content analysis with Entman’s four frames was applied to find media frames with Chinese investments in Myanmar. Three news media outlets, Eleven News, The Irrawaddy, and Radio Free Asia (RFA), were selected to find critical news stories related to Chinese projects under the CMEC. 15 news stories (N=15) between 2018 to the present were selected, and the study was systematically conducted, following Braun and Clarkes’ six-phase-analytical process. The study proved that four themes addressed the research question, "How do news media frame news about Chinese projects in Myanmar?†It was concluded that news media primarily framed two factors, public concerns and domestic issues, that impeded the successful implementation of Chinese investments in Myanmar. Finally, the study found that news media called for effective collaboration between China and Myanmar to ensure mutual benefits. It also further recommended that future research should consider longitudinal studies to examine media framing impacts public opinion and policy changes, and to incorporate a wider range of media sources to improve the generalizability of findings to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of media perceptions over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Zeyar Oo & Yonghong Dai & Yasmine Edderssi & Devkota Dipak & Bandana Singh, 2024. "Media's Perception of China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC): A Framing Analysis of Media Discourse on Chinese Investments in Myanmar," Studies in Media and Communication, Redfame publishing, vol. 12(3), pages 375-392, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:rfa:smcjnl:v:12:y:2024:i:3:p:375-392
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://redfame.com/journal/index.php/smc/article/download/6957/6637
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://redfame.com/journal/index.php/smc/article/view/6957
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chong, Dennis & Druckman, James N., 2007. "Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 637-655, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    2. Midha, Joshua, 2022. "The Cycle of Rule: Existential Risks, Continuity Of Governance, And Conflict-Based Preservation," SocArXiv vc7w9, Center for Open Science.
    3. Fung, Timothy K.F. & Choi, Doo Hun & Scheufele, Dietram A. & Shaw, Bret R., 2014. "Public opinion about biofuels: The interplay between party identification and risk/benefit perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 344-355.
    4. Rogers, Todd & Nickerson, David W., 2013. "Can Inaccurate Beliefs about Incumbents be Changed? And Can Reframing Change Votes?," Working Paper Series rwp13-018, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Hawkins, Christopher V. & Chia-Yuan, Yu, 2018. "Voter support for environmental bond referenda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 193-200.
    6. McComas, Katherine A. & Schuldt, Jonathon P. & Burge, Colleen A. & Roh, Sungjong, 2015. "Communicating about marine disease: The effects of message frames on policy support," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 45-52.
    7. Han, Wenchen & Gao, Shun & Huang, Changwei & Yang, Junzhong, 2022. "Non-consensus states in circular opinion model with repulsive interaction," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 585(C).
    8. Vincenzo Carrieri & Maria De Paola & Francesca Gioia, 2021. "The health-economy trade-off during the Covid-19 pandemic: Communication matters," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-25, September.
    9. Prendergast, Patrick & Pearson-Merkowitz, Shanna & Lang, Corey, 2019. "The individual determinants of support for open space bond referendums," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 258-268.
    10. Suparna Chaudhry & Marc Dotson & Andrew Heiss, 2021. "Who Cares about Crackdowns? Exploring the Role of Trust in Individual Philanthropy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S5), pages 45-58, July.
    11. Erika Franklin Fowler & Sarah E. Gollust, 2015. "The Content and Effect of Politicized Health Controversies," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 658(1), pages 155-171, March.
    12. Daniel J. Galvin, 2020. "Let’s not conflate APD with political history, and other reflections on “Causal Inference and American Political Development”," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 485-500, December.
    13. Carrieri, Vincenzo & De Paola, Maria & Gioia, Francesca, 2020. "The Health-Wealth Trade-off during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Communication Matters," IZA Discussion Papers 13943, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Whittemore, Andrew H. & BenDor, Todd K., 2018. "Talking about density: An empirical investigation of framing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 181-191.
    15. Junseop Shim & Chisung Park & Mark Wilding, 2015. "Identifying policy frames through semantic network analysis: an examination of nuclear energy policy across six countries," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(1), pages 51-83, March.
    16. Sandra Breux & Jérôme Couture & Nicole Goodman, 2017. "Fewer voters, higher stakes? The applicability of rational choice for voter turnout in Quebec municipalities," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(6), pages 990-1009, September.
    17. Lai Si Tsui‐Auch & Dongdong Huang & Jun Jie Yang & Si Zheng Koh, 2022. "Double Trouble: Containing Public Disapproval Arising from an Interplay of Stigmatized Categories," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(8), pages 2101-2123, December.
    18. Baccaro, Lucio & Bremer, Björn & Neimanns, Erik, 2020. "Is the euro up for grabs? Evidence from a survey experiment," MPIfG Discussion Paper 20/10, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    19. Cheryl Boudreau & Mathew D. McCubbins, 2008. "Nothing But the Truth? Experiments on Adversarial Competition, Expert Testimony, and Decision Making," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 751-789, December.
    20. Chien-shih Huang & Ruowen Shen, 2020. "Does city or state make a difference? The effects of policy framing on public attitude toward a solar energy program," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(2).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rfa:smcjnl:v:12:y:2024:i:3:p:375-392. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Redfame publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.