Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2013 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Bonone, Luana Meneguelli
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Pinheiro, Amálio
|
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Comunicação e Semiótica
|
| Departamento: |
Comunicação
|
| País: |
BR
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/4558
|
Resumo: |
This research aims to investigate whether there is,and how is constructed pluralityin news coverage in two weekly magazines Vejaand Carta Capital. The research corpus consists ofjournalistic texts from the magazines Vejaand Carta Capitalabout privatizations in Brazil for the periods 1996-1998 and 2005-2007. The specific objectives are to describe the concept ofprivatization in each one of the vehicles; identifysimilarities and differences present in the framework given the topic privatization in vehicles; identify whether the framework performed by each vehicle is pro-privatization, anti-privatization or offers plural perspective; identifying the opinion expressed by the vehicles on the role of the state in the economy; realize how vehicles relate the theme privatization to the evaluation of governments and elections; and identify how each vehicle evaluates theprivatization process in Brazil. These issues have beenstudied to understand how vehicles that excel by news interpretative news weekly magazines lead the race for hegemonyat different times of the political situation. In this sense, the research methodology isbe based in the Frame Analysis, as a tool using content analysis, quantitative and qualitative methods. It has been outlined the following hypotheses: there are probably coincidences in some points of frameworks, because of the fact that the two vehicles are entered in the same society, but the trend is that there are differences consistent with each editorial line; it is believed that in the two cases the magazines act as social actors who advocate a position (pro or anti privatization), not offering a plural debate, and the latter is that Vejamagazine presents a superficial interpretation, while Carta Capitaloffer a more complex analysis (although not necessarily plural.).The theoretical basis is given by the theories of the Frame Analysis (Goffman, Entman, Mauro Porto), the Agenda-Setting Theory (Maxwell McCombs, Donald Shaw and Walter Lippmann) and constructionist theories of communication (from Stuart Hall) |
