Russia’s typical frames of civilian harm cases in the full-scale Russo-Ukrainian war: exploratory frame analysis (2022–2024 data)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17721/CIMC.2024.36.43-53Keywords:
strategic narratives, strategic communication, framing, Russo-Ukrainian war, civilian harmAbstract
The purpose of this exploratory study is to preliminarily highlight the key frames that Russia uses within its strategic communication to explain the cases of civilian harm done by its forces in the full-scale Russo-Ukrainian war. The main research method applied in the research is the qualitative frame analysis of the messages by Russia’s communicators (primarily, state officials) that were spread in 2022 – 2024. The sample of civilian harm cases is identified based on the randomized selection from the Bellingcat dataset. Entman’s (1993) analytical framework of the 4 frame functions is used in interpretation of the results. The results show that Russian communicators apply the set of at least three frame types (ignoration, hit military targets, and anti-Russian insinuation) to interpret Russia’s war crimes in a favorable light. On the other hand, two more less typical, but important frame types are identified (depersonalized accident and vengeance). The results indicate Russia’s attempts to legitimize or reinterpret its war crimes and serve as a theoretical base for further studies of Russia’s framing within its strategic communication.
Downloads
References
Bellingcat. (n. d.). Civilian Harm in Ukraine. https://ukraine.bellingcat.com/.
Bellingcat Investigation Team. (March 17, 2022). Hospitals Bombed and Apartments Destroyed: Mapping Incidents of Civilian Harm in Ukraine. https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/03/17/hospitals-bombed-and-apartments-destroyed-mapping-incidents-of-civilian-harm-in-ukraine/.
Bradshaw, S., Elswah, M., Haque, M., Quelle, D. (2024). Strategic Storytelling: Russian State-Backed Media Coverage of the Ukraine War. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 36(3). https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edae028.
Cacciatore, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Iyengar, S. (2015). The End of Framing as we Know it … and the Future of Media Effects. Mass Communication and Society, 19(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2015.1068811.
Coticchia, F., & Catanzaro, A. (2022). The fog of words: Assessing the problematic relationship between strategic narratives, (master) frames and ideology. Media, War & Conflict, 15(4), 427-449. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635220965622.
Daniele, L. (2024). Incidentality of the civilian harm in international humanitarian law and its Contra Legem antonyms in recent discourses on the laws of war. Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 29(1), 21–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krae004.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. The Journal of Communication, 43, 51-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x.
Fridman, O. (2020). Information War’ as the Russian Conceptualisation of Strategic Communications. The RUSI Journal, 165(1), 44-53. 10.1080/03071847.2020.1740494.
Fridrichová, K. (2023) Mugged by reality: Russia's strategic narratives and the war in Ukraine. Defense & Security Analysis, 39(3), 281-295. https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2023.2201018.
Gamson, W. A., & Lasch, K. E. (1980). The Political Culture of Social Welfare Policy. CRSO Working Paper, 221. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/51014/242.pdf.
Gitlin, T. (1980). The Whole World Is Watching. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Goffman, E. (1974/1986). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston: Northeastern University Press. (Original work published 1974).
ICRC Database. (n. d.). Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries, Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977., Article 52 - General protection of civilian objects. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-52?activeTab=1949GCs-APs-and-commentaries.
International Criminal Court. (2021). Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/2024-05/Rome-Statute-eng.pdf.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choice, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39(4), 341–350. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341.
Kofman, M. (11 March 2016). Russian Hybrid Warfare and Other Dark Arts. War on the Rocks. https://warontherocks.com/2016/03/russian-hybrid-warfare-and-other-dark-arts/.
Livingston, S. & Nassetta, J. (2018). Framing and strategic narratives: Synthesis and analytical framework. SAIS Review of International Affairs, 38(2), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1353/sais.2018.0020.
Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522–526. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522
Miskimmon, A., O’Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (2013). Strategic narratives: Communication power and the new world order. New York and London: Routledge.
Morse, J. M. (1995). The Significance of Saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5(2), 147–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239500500201.
Oates, S., & Ramsay, G. N. (2024). Seeing Red: Russian Propaganda and American News. New York: Oxford Academic.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197696422.001.0001.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research. Administration and policy in mental health, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.
Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8.
Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x.
Snigyr, O. (2023). Russian Strategic Narratives, 2022-2023. Orbis, 68(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2023.11.002.
The United States Department of Defense. (2023). DoD Instruction 3000.17. Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response. URL: https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/300017p.pdf.
Tight, M. (2024). Saturation: An Overworked and Misunderstood Concept? Qualitative Inquiry, 30(7), 577–583. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004231183948.
UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine. (September 6, 2024). UN Human Rights Monitors Report Extensive Civilian Harm from Recent Attacks. https://ukraine.ohchr.org/en/UN-Human-Rights-Monitors-Report-Extensive-Civilian-Harm-from-Recent-Attacks.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Hlib Kuzmenko
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors published in this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors reserve the right to author their work and transfer to the journal the right to first publish this work under the CC BY 4.0 license, which allows others to freely distribute the published work with mandatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication in this journal.
b. Authors have the right to enter into independent additional agreements on non-exclusive distribution of the work in the form in which it was published in this journal (for example, to place the work in the electronic repository or publish in a monograph), provided that the link to the first publication in this journal.
c. The journal's policy allows and encourages authors to post manuscripts on the Internet (for example, in repositories or on personal websites) both before the submission of this manuscript and during its editorial processing, as it promotes productive scientific discussion and has a positive impact. on the efficiency and dynamics of citing published work.
