The discursive reproduction of ideologies and national identities in the Chinese and Japanese English-language press

Abstract

Using critical discourse analysis this study analyzes how ideologies and national identities are discursively constructed through editorial and opinion commentaries in two English-language newspapers from China and Japan on an international incident involving the two countries. The first four editorials/opinions on the East China Sea trawler collision incident from the China Daily and Daily Yomiuri are analyzed. Findings show that a variety of discursive strategies are adopted by the newspapers to construct national identity and intergroup relations, including: 1) the discursive categorization of group identity, 2) the discursive re-categorization of intergroup relations, and 3) the discursive re-categorization of intragroup relations. Even though both newspapers are products of globalization, and purport to target international and cosmopolitan audiences, the reporting of the East China Sea incident closely adheres to official narratives and discourses of the respective governments.

Keywords

China critical discourse analysis editorials globalization ideology intergroup communication Japan national identity newspapers opinions

‘China should intensify its patrol off the Diaoyu Islands to protect Chinese fishermen . . . and it should never compromise its sovereignty and integrity.’ (Op-ed in China Daily, 10 September 2010)

‘China’s responses to the recent collisions are intolerant. We see ugliness – looking down on one’s neighbor and repeating intimidation against Japan . . .’ (Op-ed in Daily Yomiuri, 29 September 2010)

Introduction

On 7 September 2010 a Chinese fishing vessel collided with a Japanese coastguard ship in the territorially disputed East China Sea area. The Chinese captain and his 14 fellow crew members were subsequently arrested for violating Japanese territory and detained. A diplomatic fallout soon followed and every detail was followed and reported by the media from both countries: the Japanese ambassador was summoned in the middle of the night for a dressing down; flag-waving residents protested outside embassies; citizens from both nations marched in the streets; and politicians on both sides urged government leaders to take strong affirmative action.

Some scholars argue that the advent of globalization means that the ‘nation-state’ is losing its relevance (Ōmae, 1995) and is ‘on its last legs’ (Appadurai, 1996). Others say that journalism is entering a global era and is leading towards the trend of deterritorialization of news and the convergence of working practices, norms and values among journalists (Reese, 2008). While these viewpoints have merit, and there is evidence to show that the processes of globalization are affecting international journalistic practices in tangible ways, the ‘nation’ as a mental construction is still strongly rooted and continually reproduced by newspapers that purport to cater to an international and cosmopolitan readership. Ethnocentrism is still the norm rather than the exception in news reporting, especially when a conflict between the ‘home’ nation and the ‘other’ nation is involved. This standpoint is succinctly summarized by Lee et al. (2001: 346):

The discursive binding of a national community shines at critical moments or around special occasions that function as a reference point and furnish rich repertoire of cultural symbols. As public theaters, the media rank among the key institutional venues for each national community to express its shared experiences and to disclose its underlying cultural and ideological premises.

Such a perspective of nationhood aligns with Anderson’s (1991) conception of the nation as a socially constructed ‘imagined political community’ (p. 6) that exists only to the extent that its citizens acknowledge and identify with it psychologically. Along with the political elite and social institutions such as the family and schools, the media functions to reinforce the psychological bonds between nation and citizen through the pervasive construction and reproduction of founding myths, a common identity and a sense of collective purpose, which during times of national crises and conflicts becomes even more intense and explicit. Thus, by studying how ideologies are reproduced in the press through language, we can gain greater insights into how ideologies, in particular those relating to national identity, are reproduced in society.

The mass communication literature has generally not paid much attention to the study of ideological discourses in the press (Van Dijk, 2009). The few studies that have done so typically adopt framing theory (Entman, 1993) and content analyses to show how news reports often reproduce the dominant ideologies of the political establishment. For example, Akhavan-Majid and Ramaprasad (1998) compared how the Chinese and American press reported on a United Nations conference on women held in Beijing, China. While the Chinese press adopted a ‘pro-equality’ frame in accordance with Communist Party doctrine to report on the conference, the American press focused on an ‘anti-China’ frame that criticizes the host as a communist country with a poor record of human rights. Parsons and Xu’s (2001) comparative analysis of Chinese and American reporting on the 1999 Chinese Embassy bombing in Yugoslavia showed that the frames adopted by the newspapers closely mirrored the official discourses of the respective governments, with the Chinese press emphasizing that the bombing was premeditated, while the American press claimed that it was accidental. More specific to national identity, Hutcheson et al. (2004) found that the American press frequently used language that affirmed American national identity and values after the 11 September attacks.

While these studies are insightful in showing how the mass media perpetuate the opinions and values of the political elite, the findings are limited because the ‘frames’ they use to categorize the news are usually idiosyncratic to the particular events that are being analyzed. The multiplicity of frames for different contexts and situations thus limits the generalizability of the theory to explain the broader relationship between ideology and news discourse.

More recent studies of news have adopted the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) approach, which offers a more comprehensive and cohesive theoretical framework as well as a set of conceptual tools that integrates the analysis of ideology and news discourse. Li (2009) explored how Chinese and American newspapers reported on two national incidents between the two countries. Through the analysis of various linguistic devices and patterns he found that the quotation patterns in the respective news articles were constructed in ways that accentuated and justified the respective positions and interests of the home country, while concurrently diminishing the voice of the other. Similarly, Izadi and Saghaye-Biria’s (2007) study found that elite American press discourse on Iran’s nuclear program typically reproduced Orientalist discourses that accentuated differences between the in-group (the West) and out-group (Muslim nations). The discursive demarcation of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ is useful because it helps to uncover ideologies that serve as the basis of shared group identity and perceptions of intergroup differences (Van Dijk, 2009). This study continues with this line of analysis by exploring how ideologies and national identities are discursively constructed and reproduced by the respective China Daily and the Daily Yomiuri editorial and opinion pages in the context of the East China Sea dispute.

Ironically, both the English-language newspapers in this study came into being as a direct consequence of globalization. Both China and Japan were at different times engaged in the process of economic expansion and integrating with the global economy. The English-language media therefore were important channels for them to reach out to the non-Chinese and non-Japanese speaking local and international community.¹ The China Daily was founded in the early 1980s soon after economic reforms enacted by the Chinese government that opened up the country to international trade. It is considered the de facto English voice of the Chinese government and a way to explain and elaborate the government’s stance on foreign policy issues (Stone, 1994). The Daily Yomiuri was founded in 1955 soon after the end of the allied occupation after the Second World War and the country entered a phase of economic reconstruction. It is the sister newspaper of the Yomiuri Shimbun, the largest national newspaper in Japan, and considered to be a conservative pro-government and pro-US paper (Nanri, 2004).

The two newspapers were chosen for comparison because they both target international audiences and have bureaus and offices throughout the world. Therefore, they have the necessary resources and manpower to report on international events. Their layouts and design follow the same conventions and practices of other international newspapers and they use content from international news agencies such as Reuters and the Associated Press. Moreover, both newspapers gave prominent coverage to the East China Sea incident. During the three-week span between the Chinese trawler captain’s arrest and his eventual release, the incident received front-page coverage on 17 editions of the Daily Yomiuri and 13 editions of the China Daily. This demonstrated the perceived importance of the incident and its high place in the public agenda.

Before describing the theoretical framework of the study in detail I will first elaborate more on the context of the dispute in light of the historical relationship between China and Japan.

Context of the dispute: China and Japan relations

The historical relationship between China and Japan is long and complex. Hsiung (2007: 1) gives a rather succinct summary of the historical relations between the two countries:

Rarely, if ever in human history, did two nations culturally and ethnically as close as China and Japan find themselves in a relationship marked so much more by blood and tears than by joy and jubilation – over a span of time measured not by years or decades, but by centuries.

Given the wide scope of China–Japan relations, this study only examines those aspects that are pertinent to the context of this study. In terms of its history Japan is indebted to China for many aspects of its culture, such as its writing system, religion, architecture, law and philosophy. From the end of the 19th century to the present the two countries have been involved in two costly wars, and formal diplomatic relations after the Second World War were only reestablished in 1972. Since then, China has been one of the biggest beneficiaries of Japanese foreign investment and presently the countries are the second and third largest economies in the world with enormous bilateral economic ties. Chinese consumers have long had a favorable impression of Japanese products because they are associated with quality and status (Laforet and Chen, 2012), while China has been the top destination for Japanese tourists for several years (Koh, 2010). Therefore, at the economic and cultural levels it can be said that the relationship between the countries is quite benign and based on relatively pragmatic ideals, concerns and interests.

Yet the political sphere is characteristically much more volatile and is characterized by mutual distrust and suspicion that sometimes manifest into well-publicized diplomatic rows and standoffs. An underlying and recurring dominant official Chinese government narrative is that Japan has not adequately and properly apologized for the various wartime actions committed against China and its people during the Second Sino–Japanese War. On occasions such feelings are spilled into the international political arena when Japanese politicians do something that is considered provocative and insensitive towards the Chinese government and its people, such as visits to the Yasukuni shrine to honor the war dead (Shibuichi, 2005) and the revision of Japanese school textbooks that appear to downplay Japan’s actions during the war (Schneider, 2008).

Part of the reason for the sensitivity towards Japan is that the legitimacy of the Chinese government is closely intertwined with its perceived role in fighting and defeating the occupying Japanese forces during the Second Sino–Japanese War (Calder, 2006). It is a legacy that is institutionalized and constructed through nationalist teachings in schools and discourses reproduced by government propaganda and the media. Therefore, the government and the media are quick to respond to any Japanese actions that can be construed as provocative or offensive to China and its people.

The East China Sea dispute is another recurring source of tension between the two countries, as there have been five previous diplomatic flare-ups between the two nations over the sovereignty of the Daioyu Islands since 1968.² Yet each time any potential escalation of the dispute was defused in order to protect the countries’ mutual economic interests (Koo, 2009). Nevertheless, the arrest of the Chinese trawler and its crew by the Japanese navy on 7 September 2010 posed three critical challenges for the Chinese government. First, it had to demonstrate its duty and ability as a sovereign nation to secure the release of its citizens and stand up to Japan. Second, it had to assert its power by laying claim to the group of islands in the East China Sea area, known as Diaoyutai in Chinese (‘Fishing Platform Islands’) and Senkaku Retto in Japanese (‘Rocky Hill Islands’). The two are closely connected since without asserting sovereignty there is no case to be made that the Chinese trawler crew was unjustly arrested. Third, the government had to placate popular nationalism that had been facilitated in part by the gradual liberalization of the Chinese mass media and the widespread use of the Internet which allowed the media, and citizens to vent their anger in an unsanctioned and excessive way that could potentially escalate the dispute (Zhou, 2006).

As far as the Japanese government is concerned the issue about sovereignty was already settled according to previous international treaties, including the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty and the 1972 Okinawa Reversion Treaty (Su, 2005). Their perspective is that the Chinese leadership uses incidents such as the East China Sea issue to flex its rising political and economic power in the region, and to placate prevalent nationalist and anti-Japanese sentiments among its own citizens. Moreover, China uses the ‘history card’ strategically and purposefully to frustrate Japan’s attempts to assert itself as an international power that befits its economic clout and status (Calder, 2006).

Considering that the economic ties between the two countries have become so interdependent, it is likely that the direction of the current dispute will follow the same path as the previous five and gradually fade into the background of the public agenda. Nevertheless, it is often in such international spats that we can observe how ideologies relating to national identity are constructed and reproduced in discourse through the press. The next section will elaborate on the theoretical framework of this study and explicate the two core concepts of ideology and national identity.

Theoretical and analytical framework

This study adopts the socio-cognitive approach of critical discourse analysis (CDA) (Van Dijk, 1995) to explore the research question of how ideologies and national identities are constructed and reproduced through news discourse. While there are a variety of approaches to CDA within the discipline of discourse studies, all of them share the view that discourse is a form of social practice that is dialectically related to particular contexts, institutions and social structures. It is ‘critical’ in the sense that the CDA practitioners are ‘fundamentally interested in analyzing opaque as well as transparent structural relationships of dominance, discrimination, power and control as manifested in language’ (Wodak and Meyer, 2009: 10). Ideology and identity are two important concepts in the social sciences, yet there is a lack of consensus on what they mean. Therefore, it is important to elaborate on the ontological and epistemological grounding of these terms and how they fit within the CDA approach.

Van Dijk conceives ideology in the plural as ‘basic frameworks of social cognition, shared by members of social groups, constituted by relevant selections of sociocultural values, and organized by an ideological schema that represents the self-definition of a group’ (1995: 248). This conception has several interrelated components comprising social functions, cognitive structures and discursive expression and reproduction (Van Dijk, 1998). The social component refers to the function of ideology and its role in the reproduction and legitimation of ideas that aid in the promotion of group interests, which in the case of this study are the newspapers’ discursive construction of what constitutes ‘Chineseness’ or ‘Japaneseness’ and the reproduction of collective memory and historical continuity (Halbwachs, 1992). These constructions in turn typically reflect the ‘official’ version of historical events espoused by the political establishments in China and Japan.

The mental component refers to the mental representations shared by the group and the mechanisms that guide behavior, such as attitudes, norms and values. This conception is similar to Hall’s (1986) view of ideology as ‘mental frameworks’ and ‘systems of presentation’ that individuals use to make sense of society and their own lives. More formally, researchers in the field of intergroup relations have defined ‘social identity’ as ‘an individual’s self-image that derives from the social categories to which he perceives himself as belonging’ (Tajfel and Turner, 1979: 40). Two core assumptions of this view of identity is that 1) individuals are inherently motivated to maintain a positive self-image and 2) this is largely achieved by perceiving one’s in-group to be distinct and superior to the out-group. National identity is one such mental representation and it is often structured by individuals in a polarized way that maximizes the differences between ‘us’ and ‘them’. This is linked with Van Dijk’s (2011) framework of the ‘ideological square’ where news discourses at different levels often emphasize the ‘good’ and downplay the ‘bad’ of the in-group, while concurrently highlighting the ‘bad’ and downplaying the ‘good’ of the out-group.

These discourses are necessary, if not essential, because the social constructionist perspective views identity not as a fixed entity, but a process by which individuals and groups construct and negotiate their own identities according to their own personal interactions and the social context in which they are embedded (De Fina et al., 2006). News consumption is one such site of negotiation and it is through the discursive expression and reproduction component that ideologies are expressed through discourse. According to De Cillia et al., national identity is constructed and reproduced through various ‘reifying, figurative discourses continually launched by politicians, intellectuals and media people and disseminated through the systems of education, schooling, mass communication, militarization as well as through sports meetings’ (1999: 153).

The content of such discourses can include the nation’s founding myths, achievements, successes and defeats. One example is history education in China where the State Education Commission in 1989 instituted new directives that made schools emphasize Chinese resistance to foreign invasion and the experience of national humiliation at the hands of imperial invaders. Such a construction thus represented Japan as an enemy and aggressor (He, 2007). Another example is the construction and reproduction of the narrative prevalent in Japan that it was a ‘victim’ of the Second World War and not the instigator, a view partly justified with the argument that it was the only nation to ever suffer the devastating consequences of the atomic bomb (Schalow, 2000).

Central to this tripartite view of ideology is that linkages between ideology and discourse are not direct, but are instead mediated by mental models. These are cognitive representations of personal and subjective experiences of individuals that help them make sense of the environment. Newspaper discourses are therefore a confluence of the mental models of journalists and the social representations commonly understood by the readers. News commentaries are constructed with text and visual elements in ways to represent such mental models, while readers use their own mental models to construct meaning from the news discourses. However, CDA scholars have long pointed out that news discourses are structured in ways that not only shape but also constrain the mental models of its readers by emphasizing the dominant discourses of those in power, while limiting possible alternative discourses from those with limited access to the mass media (Van Dijk, 1988).

This study investigates specifically the discourses of editorial and opinion sections of newspapers because these genres are often persuasive in nature and not constrained by the journalistic norm of objectivity (Lee and Lin, 2006). Therefore, dominant discourses and ideologies of the newspapers can be more readily observed.

Findings and analysis

Editorial and opinion commentaries of the China Daily and Daily Yomiuri were collected for the analysis through the Factiva database. For the search parameters ‘Japan’ was inserted for the China Daily and ‘China’ for the Daily Yomiuri, with the date range starting from the arrest of the captain on 7 September 2010 to the end of the month. The results returned four editorial/opinion commentaries published by each newspaper. The headlines and macrostructures of the commentaries are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Editorials and opinions of the China Daily and Daily Yomiuri during the month of September 2010

	Editorials/opinions	Semantic macrostructures
1	Japan’s action off Diaoyu raises concern (China Daily, 10 September 2010)	Japan’s arrest of the Chinese trawler captain was unreasonable since the Daioyu Islands are undisputedly part of China, supported by historical documents dating to the 1400s.
2	Chinese fishing boat captain’s arrest reasonable (Daily Yomiuri, 10 September 2010)	The Japanese coastguard was right to arrest the captain as the islands are clearly part of Japan and its sovereignty was only contested in the 1970s by China and Taiwan after the discovery of potential lucrative gas reserves under the ocean. China should take a level-headed approach and act to calm anti-Japanese sentiments among its population.
3	Japan must honor law of sea (China Daily, 14 September 2010)	China’s claim to the Daioyu Islands is supported by a wealth of historical evidence. Japan should release the captain, pay compensation and apologize for its actions.
4	Diaoyu dispute sowed by US (China Daily, 15 September 2010)	When the US returned Okinawa to Japan in 1972 it included the Daioyu and surrounding islands. The current dispute is rooted in the deliberate actions of the US to create friction in Sino–Japan ties. China and Japan should reach a consensus on the issue and work together to share the natural resources that can benefit both nations.
5	China shouldn’t stir up anti-Japanese sentiment (Daily Yomiuri, 17 September 2010)	Japan is fully within its rights to arrest those suspected of engaging in illegal activities within its territory. China has adopted an excessive and unnecessary hard line on the collision issue in order to placate its citizens and to stir-up anti-Japanese sentiments.
6	Friendly advice to Japan (China Daily, 23 September 2010)	China’s countermeasures are fully justified since Japan’s claim to the islands is untenable and will hurt Sino–Japanese relations. Japan should respect historical facts and work towards a long-term and stable peace.
7	Chinese skipper’s release a political decision (Daily Yomiuri, 25 September 2010)	The release of the Chinese captain was driven by the need to maintain good ties with China. The failure to prosecute the Chinese’s captain represented a backdown from its previous stance and may encourage China to be even more daring and provocative towards Japan in the future.
8	China shrugs off world opinion in bullying Japan (Daily Yomiuri, 29 September 2010)	China’s overbearing diplomacy and unreasonable counter measures shows the international community China’s heavy-handedness in coercing Japan into freeing the captain.

Note: The Chinese trawler captain was released from detention on 23 September 2010.

Following an in-depth reading of the eight commentaries, two semantic macrostructures common to both newspapers were found: 1) the legality/illegality of the Chinese captain’s arrest, and 2) the sovereignty of the islands. Moreover, a recurrent macrostructure in the China Daily commented on the role and involvement of the US in undermining Sino–Japanese relations and the need for China and Japan to engage in dialogue to resolve the sovereignty issue. In the Daily Yomiuri, additional macrostructures included the heavy-handed and unnecessary response of the Chinese government that lead to anti-Japanese nationalistic sentiments and China’s use of its economic and political clout to coerce the Japanese government into releasing the captain.

The subsequent analysis will follow the guidelines articulated by Van Dijk (2011) on how to examine the different strategies and levels of discourse in which media texts operate. More specifically, I focus on ideological discourse strategies that describe group identity and intergroup relations. How such meanings are put into practice through various discursive devices will be analyzed in the following sections.

Discursive categorization of group identity

A core aspect of national identity is a shared common history and the recollection of past events. They are important for the in-group because in the process of categorization they provide members with a common narrative in which to relate themselves to the nation, set boundaries that define what the in-group is and is not, and legitimize claims and actions. As the sovereignty issue of the islands is inextricably tied to historical claims, both newspapers were engaged in the interpretation of historical narratives that justified their respective arguments and gave meaning to national identity. For the China Daily the focus on history and the narration of a common political past was central to its argument, as evidenced by three of the commentaries which devote space to describe in minute detail China’s long historical relationship with the islands, as extracts 1 and 2 demonstrate.

Extract 1

The Diaoyu Islands have been recorded in Chinese historical documents as Chinese territory since the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644). The Japanese government, however, regards them as a part of the Okinawa prefecture, which was under the independent Ryukyu Kingdom until 131 years ago. China had friendly relations with the Ryukyu Kingdom for about 500 years, before Japan annexed it. (‘Japan’s action off Diaoyu raises concern’, China Daily, 10 September 2010)

Extract 2

Fu Sheng Liu Ji (Six Chapters of a Floating Life), a famous book written by Shen Fu during the Qing Dynasty (1644–1911), has records showing the Diaoyu Islands are part of Chinese territory. The book says Qing Emperor Jiaqing (1760–1820) granted a title to the ruler of Ryukyu Kingdom with detailed descriptions, which show the territory of Ryukyu Kingdom started from Gumi Mountain (renamed Kumejima after Japan annexed Ryukyu). (‘Japan must honor law of sea’, China Daily, 14 September 2010)

Such specific descriptions with a high degree of specificity categorize China as a civilization with a long, continuous and distinguished history that was generally on friendly terms with other nations. On the other hand, Japan is de-emphasized of any historical significance and its agency is limited to its out-group categorization as an invader.

In contrast, the Daily Yomiuri commentaries frequently categorize China as an antagonist that violates international norms and obligations, for example, ‘This case has once again shown the international community how China behaves under such circumstances’ (‘China shrugs off world opinion in bullying Japan’, Daily Yomiuri, 29 September 2010); whereas Japan is categorized as a member of the global community that adheres to international laws and regulations, for example, ‘There is no question that the Senkaku Islands belong to Japan both historically and under international law’ (‘Chinese fishing boat captain’s arrest reasonable’, Daily Yomiuri, 10 September 2010). This is necessary because the newspaper is devoid of any specificity to Japan’s historical claims to the islands. Rather, it uses frequent vague presuppositions throughout the commentaries describing the islands as an ‘inherent part of Japan’ and ‘inherently Japanese’. Of the four commentaries, extract 3 provides the only detail to Japan’s historical claim:

Extract 3

The Chinese government asserts that the Senkakus belong to China and that, therefore, the trawler was not fishing illegally in Japanese waters. It also protested the captain’s arrest through diplomatic channels. However, no country protested when the Meiji government incorporated the islands into Japanese territory in 1895. Under the San Francisco Peace Treaty signed in 1951, the islands were not included among those territories abandoned by Japan. (‘Chinese fishing boat captain’s arrest reasonable’, Daily Yomiuri, 10 September 2010)

But even when such a claim is made, the metonymic use of the ‘Meiji government’ delinks the actions, and therefore responsibility, of political ruling elites of a bygone era (i.e. the Meiji period of 1868–1912) with those of present-day Japan. This categorization creates a boundary that separates the past Japanese national identity, and the associated cognitive representations that derive from it, from the modern Japanese identity.

In general, China Daily’s over-complete emphasis and the Daily Yomiuri’s vagueness on the historical context surrounding the sovereignty of the islands represents the wider discursive contestation of ideologies between the two nations on the whole issue of history, which has been a constant source of tension between Japan and its neighbors in Asia, including China (He, 2007). An integral part of such contestation is the discursive categorization of Chinese and Japanese identities. Discourses in the China Daily intertwine the sovereignty of the islands with the collective memory of China as an ancient civilization exploited by foreign nations – a narrative that is embedded within state education and used by the Chinese media when the situation requires. Therefore, the newspaper emphasizes a higher order Chinese national identity that is homogenous, inclusive and timeless.

The Daily Yomiuri’s attention to a shorter historical timeframe and the lack of explication of the context in which Japan has sovereignty over the islands reflects to some extent the lack of a political consensus in Japan on how to address its past (Schneider, 2008), which is demonstrated by the discursive categorization of multiple lower-order Japanese national identities separated by different eras in its recorded history. Therefore, to legitimize Japan’s claims on the island it was necessary for the Daily Yomiuri to construct and emphasize a less controversial and less contradictory higher order categorization of Japan as a member of the global community. Such a strategy of ‘re-categorization’ is used by both newspapers to further their respective discourses, as the following section will demonstrate.

Discursive re-categorization of intergroup relations

While the first two commentaries of the incident in the China Daily emphasize the differences between China and Japan in its discussion on the sovereignty issue and the legality of the captain’s arrest, the third and fourth commentaries add the additional semantic macrostructure of reconciliation with Japan. A broad pan-Asian identity is constructed that emphasizes the similarities between China and Japan as part of a broader ‘East Asian community’. The strategy of re-categorization entails reclassifying the out- group (Japan) with a higher order superordinate Asian identity (China, Japan and other Asian nations), which stresses mutually beneficial interests and the sharing of common values. According to the common in-group identity model, this strategy can shift the cognitive representation of two groups (‘us’ and ‘them’) into a single group (‘we’) and in doing so reduce intergroup bias and promote more harmonious intergroup attitudes and interactions (Gaertner et al., 1993). Such a strategy is not uncommon in Chinese media discourse and it has been adopted in the past to justify economic policies that appeared to contradict Communist Party principles (Ng et al., 2011). Typically, the strategy of re-categorization is also accompanied by de-categorization, which de-emphasizes group boundaries and differences, as the following extract exemplifies:

Extract 4

Both China and Japan can share abundant natural resources in the East China Sea, extricate themselves from the long-standing shackles of territorial disputes as soon as possible and convert potential resources in this area into wealth to realize a win–win result. (‘Diaoyu dispute sowed by US’, China Daily, 15 September 2010)

Further strengthening the cognitive representation of a broad Asian identity that encompasses China and Japan is the discursive construction of a new out-group that can provide the basis of intergroup comparison and differentiation for the broad in-group – the United States. Even though the US had no involvement in the East China Sea dispute, it was nevertheless introduced and categorized as a hegemonic power with long-held ambitions to destabilize the Asia region and so prevent China and Japan from developing friendly relations. The sheer force of the rhetoric and the negativity of the lexical choices describing the US, which was not adopted in any of the earlier commentaries when Japan was categorized as the out-group, can be observed in extract 5:

Extract 5

Washington’s viciously conceived move, a tactic often employed by imperialists, proved useful in serving its interests in the past decades. (‘Diaoyu dispute sowed by US’, China Daily, 15 September 2010)

Further attempts to re-categorize China and Japan with a common identity are made by emphasizing a common ‘victimhood’ as a direct result of historical actions taken by the US at a time when China had just concluded a civil war and Japan was still recovering from the aftermath of the Second World War. It is a re-categorization that adheres to the ‘historical script’ promulgated by Communist media discourse that China in the past had been humiliated and exploited by the West (Pan et al., 2001). The one difference in this case is that Japan is now also included within the in-group of the exploited, as the following extract shows:

Extract 6

The US unilaterally signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan on Sept 8, 1951. The treaty gave the US control over the Ryukyu Islands, as well as China’s Diaoyu Islands and their adjacent islets. China had vehemently opposed that treaty. (‘Friendly advice to Japan’, China Daily, 23 September 2010)

In comparison, the cognitive representations of intergroup relations between China and Japan are very consistent in the four Daily Yomiuri commentaries. The conception of ‘Asia’ is referred to only once and it was used to refer to another out-group, which de-emphasizes Japan as an Asian nation, that is, ‘The Chinese Navy is dispatching warships on the pretext of protecting Chinese fishing vessels in the South China Sea, increasing tensions with Southeast Asian nations (‘Chinese fishing boat captain’s arrest reasonable’, Daily Yomiuri, 10 September 2010). Instead, it is re-categorized within a broader global identity that emphasizes the similarities between Japan and other advanced democratic nations around the world. Frequent lexical choices such as ‘international law’, ‘international community’, ‘international law and custom’ are often associated with the re-categorized in-group. It is also often used in conjunction with the categorization of China as the out-group that violates not only global democratic values and norms, but also the freedoms and rights of its own citizens. Extract 7 is a representative example.

Extract 7

This kind of harassment is almost unthinkable in Japan and other free countries. In free countries, the media will try to stop their governments from actions that are forbidden under international law and custom, even if their countries are embroiled in trade friction with others. In China, however, where we cannot expect such a mechanism because freedom of the press does not exist and public opinion tends to lean in the same direction. (‘China shrugs off world opinion in bullying Japan’, Daily Yomiuri, 29 September 2010)

Further accentuating the intergroup differences are the recurrent lexical choices adopted by the Daily Yomiuri commentaries that use the adjectives ‘anti-Japan’ and ‘anti-Japanese’, which are often followed by a range of nouns such as ‘sentiments’, ‘protests’, ‘patriotism’, ‘riots’ and ‘hard-liners’. Behind these presuppositions is the cognitive representation of the Chinese as inherently anti-Japanese and by implication hostile towards democratic nations around the world.

In sum, the re-categorization strategies adopted by both newspapers not only attempt to construct a national identity of the self, but also the national identity of the other. These constructions are mutually incompatible since the different cognitive representations of in-groups and out-groups were purposefully constructed to serve the respective arguments and claims in relation to the East China Sea dispute.

Discursive re-categorization of intragroup relations

The strategy of re-categorization was adopted by the newspapers to shift the cognitive boundaries of Chinese and Japanese national identities in order to reconfigure the intergroup dynamics between the nations. At the same time, they also attempted to re-categorize intragroup dynamics. In particular, the China Daily frequently re-categorized the in-group so that the subordinate identities of the ‘Chinese people’ (‘us’) is merged with the ‘Chinese government’ (‘them’) to create a superordinate Chinese identity (‘we Chinese’). These discourses represent the Chinese government as being synonymous and inseparable with the Chinese people, thereby blurring differences between the two and emphasizing their common interest and fate. This is shown by the syntactic style adopted in extract 8 in response to the Chinese captain’s arrest. In comparison, the commentaries in the Daily Yomiuri do not make any linkages between the government and its citizens pertaining to national identity.

Extract 8

Japan claims that the detention of Zhan is in accordance with its so called domestic law, which is based on Tokyo’s new stance that ‘there is no territorial dispute with China over the Diaoyu Islands’. The Chinese government and people are shocked at the U-turn in Japan’s stance on the issue. (‘Friendly advice to Japan’, China Daily, 23 September 2010)

An even more frequently used strategy by both newspapers is the re-categorization of the out-group in order to expose tensions between the respective governments and their citizens. Such a strategy is the reverse of re-categorization as conceptualized in the common in-group identity model, because the respective discourses attempt to shift the cognitive representation of a superordinate identity towards several lower-order identities so that differences and boundaries among groups are made more salient. The strategy is useful because it can help to formulate arguments in accordance with the ideological square by focusing on the negative characteristics of one part of the out-group, such as: 1) their government misinforms their citizens; 2) their government acts in their own interests against the interests of their citizens; and 3) their government acts to placate public pressure from their citizens.

Both newspapers make the first and second arguments in their discourses as shown in extracts 9 and 10. In the extracts the relationships between government and citizen are syntactically delinked, which results in the de-emphasis of superordinate national identities. What is emphasized instead is one powerful subordinate out-group (government) exerting undue influence on another sub-ordinate out-group (citizens) that is not in a position to resist.

Extract 9

The Japanese government has often tried to instill into Japanese people the concept that the islands, which are called Senkaku within Japan, are an indisputable part of Japanese territory. The use of the propaganda machine for such a purpose has been so frequent that those in Japan who admit that the Diaoyu Islands belong to China have become the minority in the country. (‘Diaoyu dispute sowed by US’, China Daily, 15 September 2010)

Extract 10

Since the 1970s, China has claimed the Senkaku Islands belong to China. It has instilled this belief among its people through ‘anti-Japanese patriotism’ education since the 1990s. (‘China shouldn’t stir up anti-Japanese sentiment’, Daily Yomiuri, 17 September 2010)

To further represent the other more negatively, the Daily Yomiuri also makes the additional third argument by emphasizing the inherent strains and tensions surrounding the relationship between the Chinese government and its people, as shown in extract 11. Multiple lower-order out-groups are constructed and made salient, such as the ‘Chinese people’, ‘Chinese Communist Party’ and ‘Chinese government’, which emphasize ideological contradictions in China. This cognitive representation where the ruling party succumbs to public opinion contradicts constructions by the China Daily of a higher order Chinese national identity that is unified in its condemnation of Japan’s actions.

Extract 11

If Chinese people get the impression that their government is ‘weak-kneed’, it could ignite simmering public discontent over the country’s economic disparities and other ills, which could escalate into anger directed at the Chinese Communist Party leadership. This fear has apparently driven the Chinese government to take a high-handed stance toward Japan over the collisions. (‘China shouldn’t stir up anti-Japanese sentiment’, Daily Yomiuri, 17 September 2010)

Conclusion

Despite China and Japan’s importance in the world economy and their long historical ties, there has been a lack of studies on how the Chinese and Japanese press report on the other nation. This study focused on the discursive construction of ideologies and national identities during a diplomatic incident between China and Japan. Rather than selectively analyze individual editorial and opinion commentaries, the first four editorials and opinions were analyzed for the China Daily and Daily Yomiuri following the East China Sea incident. By analyzing the commentaries collectively and in sequence it is possible to identify recurring and shifting macrostructures during the course of the incident and the ways in which national identities are represented.

Because of the nature of the dispute between the two nations, the adoption of the ideological square in both newspapers is pervasive throughout the respective commentaries. Positive aspects of the self (‘us’) and negative aspects of the other (‘them’) are emphasized, while negative aspects of the self and positive aspects of the other are deemphasized. However, to do this effectively both newspapers had to construct cognitive representations of their own national identity and that of the other nation because such representations are required to provide the basis of categorizing the self and the other as well as subsequent intergroup comparisons. Three overall strategies were identified and analyzed in detail.

First, because of the underlying historical context of the sovereignty issue relating to the Daioyu Islands, both newspapers necessarily engaged in the discursive perpetuation of collective memory. For the China Daily this meant constructing in detail a homogenous Chinese identity, whereas the Daily Yomiuri’s venture into the historical position of the islands is marked by vagueness so as to avoid referencing its militaristic actions in the past. Therefore, Japanese national identity is constructed as something modern and recent.

Second, in the process of argumentation both newspapers reconfigured the self through the re-categorization to a higher order superordinate identity in line with the Common In-group Identity Model. Starting with the third commentary the China Daily invoked a higher order Asian identity that included Japan with the United States as the new out-group. On the other hand, the Daily Yomiuri re-categorized Japan as a member of the democratic free world with China as the out-group. Not only do these categories reconfigure group boundaries and intergroup dynamics, they also help to reproduce recurring ideologies commonly associated with the re-categorized higher-order identities (e.g. institutional narratives, intergroup biases, etc.), such as Western exploitation (e.g. China and Japan vs the West) and freedom of speech in a free democracy (e.g. Japan, the US, and other democratic nations vs China).

Third, both newspapers also engaged in reverse re-categorization in their attempts to emphasize boundaries and tensions with the out-group. In both cases the government of the out-group is constructed as a hegemonic power that exerts unreasonable ideological control on their citizens. Therefore, while re-categorization attempts to reduce bias in intergroup attitudes and actions, reverse re-categorization as used in this study attempted to break down the superordinate identity by emphasizing intragroup differences and contradictions within the out-group.

As De Fina et al. (2006) point out, identity is a social construction that has no fixed boundaries. Although it may appear on the surface that the China Daily and Daily Yomiuri reported the East China Sea dispute as a territorial issue between two sovereign nations, their respective arguments and justifications were derived from underlying social representations of national identities that have been constructed, categorized and re-categorized through different discourses in the commentaries. The contribution of this study is the explication of the three main strategies in an Asian context that were theoretically informed by socio-cognitive approaches to CDA and social identity explanations of intergroup relations.

Critical discourse scholars have long pointed out that the media has the ability to reproduce the dominant ideologies and social order of a nation of which it is a part (e.g. Van Dijk, 1988). It appears that international newspapers that are aimed at targeting international and cosmopolitan readers are no exception. This study shows the coverage of the East China Sea dispute is far from ‘international’, and the discourses are structured according to the respective ideologies and national identities of the ‘home’ nations. Rather than engendering feelings of a ‘global consciousness’ or laying the ground work for a ‘cosmopolitan citizenship’ as put forward by some global public sphere theorists, the two international newspapers constitute part of the wider ideological struggle between two economically powerful nations who have been engaged in the discursive contestation of national identity and collective memory for several decades. In this regard, critical discourse analysis offers an important perspective and approach to the study of the globalization of journalism by looking closely at the wider historical contexts of nations in which the newspapers are published and the various linguistic features of the news itself.

Some suggestions for further research should be noted. This study focused on national identity only at the ‘top–down’ discourse production level. An important avenue of further research is to explore how people ‘read’ such national identities from the ‘bottom–up’. This is related to Van Dijk’s conception of ‘mental models’ which mediate discourse and ideology. Ideology is not passively received by individuals, but is negotiated in relation to their own values and life experiences. An internationally educated Chinese will have different subjective experiences and mental representations of China compared to an Australian reader who will also have different mental representations than someone from Canada. How would an American national reading the US edition of the China Daily react to the jingoistic tone that his government are ‘vicious’ and ‘imperialists’? Do the editors of the China Daily, and by association the Chinese government, really believe that these lexical choices will resonate with such readers? Future studies of how ‘international’ readers read and cognitively process such discourses, and how such discourses are embedded within their own subjective experiences, will help answer some of these pertinent questions and contribute to the continuous debate on how the forces of globalization are shaping journalism.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Notes

Author biography

Michael Chan is an Assistant Professor in the School of Journalism and Communication at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. His research focuses on the relationships between social identities and communication.

References

Akhavan-Majid

Ramaprasad

(1998) Framing and ideology: A comparative analysis of U.S. and Chinese newspaper coverage of the Fourth United Nations Conference on Women and the NGO Forum. Mass Communication and Society 1(3/4): 131–152.

Anderson

(1991) Imagined Communities. London: Verso.

Appadurai

(1996) Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Modernity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Calder

(2006) China and Japan’s simmering rivalry. Foreign Affairs 82(2): 129–139.

De Cillia

Reisigl

Wodak

(1999) The discursive construction of national identities. Discourse & Society 10(2): 149–173.

De Fina

Schiffrin

Bamberg

(2006) Discourse and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Entman

(1993) Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43: 51–58.

Gaertner

Dovidio

Anastasio

. (1993) The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology 4: 1–26.

Halbwachs

(1992) On Collective Memory. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

10.

Hall

(1986) The problem of ideology: Marxism without guarantees. Journal of Communication Inquiry 10(2): 28–44.

11.

(2007) History, Chinese nationalism and the emerging Sino–Japanese conflict. Journal of Contemporary China 16: 1–24.

12.

Hsiung

(2007) Introduction: Theory and the long-running tussle. In: Hsiung

(ed.) China and Japan at Odds: Deciphering the Perpetual Conflict. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–22.

13.

Hutcheson

Domke

Billeaudeaux

Garland

(2004) U.S. national identity, political elites, and a patriotic press following September 11. Political Communication 21: 27–50.

14.

Izadi

Saghaye-Biria

(2007) A discourse analysis of elite American newspaper editorials: The case of Iran’s nuclear program. Journal of Communication Inquiry 31(2): 140–165.

15.

Koh

(2010) Japanese tourism to China tapers off. Wall Street Journal, 18 October. Available at: http://blogs.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2010/10/18/japanese-tourism-to-china-tapers-off/

16.

Koo

(2009) The Senkaku/Diaoyu dispute and Sino–Japanese political–economic relations: Cold politics and hot economics? The Pacific Review 22: 205–232.

17.

Laforet

Chen

(2012) Chinese and British consumers’ evaluation of Chinese and international brands and factors affecting their choice. Journal of World Business 47: 54–63.

18.

Lee

Pan

Chan

CYK

(2001) Through the eyes of U.S. media: Banging the democracy drum in Hong Kong. Journal of Communication 51(2): 345–365.

19.

Lee

Lin

AMY

(2006) Newspaper editorial discourse and the politics of self-censorship in Hong Kong. Discourse & Society 17(3): 331–358.

20.

(2009) Intertextuality and national identity: Discourse of national conflicts in daily newspapers in the United States and China. Discourse & Society 20(1): 85–121.

21.

Nanri

(2004) An anatomy of the homogeneity and innocuousness of Japanese editorials. Paper presented at the 15th Biennial Conference of the Asian Studies Association of Australia, Canberra, Australia.

22.

Lee

(2011) Media discourse on globalization in China: A social-psychological analysis. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 30(2): 139–157.

23.

Ōmae

(1995) The End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies. New York: Free Press.

24.

Pan

Lee

Chan

CKY

(2001) Orchestrating the family-nation chorus: Chinese media and nationalism in the Hong Kong handover. Mass Communication and Society 4(3): 331–347.

25.

Parsons

(2001) News framing of the Chinese Embassy bombing by the People’s Daily and the New York Times. Asian Journal of Communication 11(1): 51–67.

26.

Reese

(2008) Theorizing a globalized journalism. In: Loeffelholz

Weaver

(eds) Global Journalism Research: Theories, Methods, Findings, Future. London: Blackwell, pp. 240–252.

27.

Schalow

(2000) Japan’s war responsibility and the Pan-Asian movement for redress and compensation: An overview. East Asia 18(3): 7–13.

28.

Schneider

(2008) The Japanese history textbook controversy in East Asian perspective. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 617: 107–122.

29.

Shibuichi

(2005) The Yasukuni shrine dispute and the politics of identity in Japan: Why all the fuss? Asian Survey 45(2): 197–215.

30.

Stone

(1994) Speaking to the foreign audience: Chinese foreign policy concerns as expressed in China Daily, January 1989–June 1993. International Communication Gazette 53: 43–52.

31.

(2005) The territorial dispute over the Tiaoyu/Senkaku Islands: An update. Ocean Development & International Law 36: 45–61.

32.

Tajfel

Turner

(1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: Worchel

Austin

(eds) Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall, pp. 33–47.

33.

van Dijk

(1988) News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

34.

van Dijk

(1995) Discourse semantics and ideology. Discourse & Society 6(2): 243–289.

35.

van Dijk

(1998) Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: SAGE.

36.

van Dijk

(2009) News, discourse, and ideology. In: Wahl-Jorgensen

Hanitzsch

(eds) The Handbook of Journalism Studies. New York: Routledge, pp. 191–204.

37.

van Dijk

(2011) Discourse and Ideology. In: van Dijk

(ed.) Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. London: SAGE, pp. 379–407.

38.

Wodak

Meyer

(2009) Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory and methodology. In: Wodak

Meyer

(eds) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE, pp. 1–33.

39.

Zhou

(2006) Historicizing Online Politics: Telegraphy, the Internet, and Political Participation in China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.