IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rfa/smcjnl/v12y2024i3p375-392.html

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. Aaron Deslatte, 2019. "A bayesian approach for behavioral public administration: Citizen assessments of local government sustainability performance," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    2. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    3. 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).
    4. Brett Gordon & Mitchell Lovett & Ron Shachar & Kevin Arceneaux & Sridhar Moorthy & Michael Peress & Akshay Rao & Subrata Sen & David Soberman & Oleg Urminsky, 2012. "Marketing and politics: Models, behavior, and policy implications," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 391-403, June.
    5. Midha, Joshua, 2022. "The Cycle of Rule: Existential Risks, Continuity Of Governance, And Conflict-Based Preservation," SocArXiv vc7w9, Center for Open Science.
    6. 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.
    7. Julie Hassing Nielsen, 2016. "Personality and Euroscepticism: The Impact of Personality on Attitudes Towards the EU," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(5), pages 1175-1198, September.
    8. Marlène Gerber & André Bächtiger & Irena Fiket & Marco Steenbergen & Jürg Steiner, 2014. "Deliberative and non-deliberative persuasion: Mechanisms of opinion formation in EuroPolis," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(3), pages 410-429, September.
    9. 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.
    10. Dillard, James Price & Cruz, Shannon M. & Shen, Lijiang, 2023. "Spillover effects of anti-sugar-sweetened beverage messages: From consumption decisions to policy preferences," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    11. Bloemraad, Irene & Voss, Kim & Silva, Fabiana, 2014. "Framing the Immigrant Movement as about Rights, Family, or Economics: Which Appeals Resonate and for Whom?," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt3b32w33p, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    12. Przeszlowski, Kimberly & Guerette, Rob T., 2025. "Public perceptions on police use of information technologies: Findings from a randomized vignette experiment," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    13. Justin Wedeking, 2010. "Supreme Court Litigants and Strategic Framing," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 617-631, July.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Christy Aroopala, 2011. "Are group sources always credible? An experimental study of sources, stakes and participation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 87-110, January.
    17. Benjamin T Jones & Eleonora Mattiacci, 2023. "How foreign information campaigns shape US public pronouncements about civil wars," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 60(5), pages 839-852, September.
    18. Peter John Loewen & Daniel Rubenson & Leonard Wantchekon, 2010. "Help Me Help You: Conducting Field Experiments with Political Elites," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 628(1), pages 165-175, March.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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.