Page 229 - Communication Theory and Research

McQuail(EJC)-3281-16.qxd 8/16/2005 12:01 PM Page 214

214 Communication Theory & Research
page and used a lot of graphics on the inside pages, illustrating the military
operations with maps and models of the aeroplanes.

Analysis of the groups

As the graphic representation of the MCA became illegible owing to the large
number of variables considered, a cluster analysis (Jambu and Leboux, 1983)
was performed on the more significant factorial axes identified by MCA.
As is known, each cluster represents a group identified according to the
greater relative weight taken on by several modalities contained in it. In other
words, the various groups are defined by means of the relations between the
13
modalities with the greatest weight. This also explains why the same newspaper
may be found in different groups.
Five distinct groups that characterize the press’s behaviour have emerged.
El Pais and ABC were in the first group, while Die Welt, Frankfurter Rundschau, La
Repubblica, Le Monde and Le Figaro were in the second, Il Corriere della Sera and
The Guardian were in the third, only Il Corriere della Sera was in the fourth, and
finally in the fifth, The Times and The Guardian.

El Pais, ABC

The first group is characterized by a well-outlined narrative scheme, in which
the hero is played by NATO (weight of the modality is 6.5 percent) and the anti-
hero (enemy) by Milosevic (5 percent). The mission was recognized as being that
of guaranteeing international safety/security (3 percent), and the value objects
for the hero were first human rights (7.7 percent), followed by human life
(6.8 percent), independence (4.7 percent) and political independence (3.7 percent).
The dispatcher (to use the linguistic term) of the mission is yet again NATO
with the weight of the modality amounting to 7.8 percent. The aerial bombings
on Serbia by NATO constitute the sanction (6.9 percent) for the anti-hero’s
behaviour.
Neither figures of speech nor persuasive techniques characterize this group.
In both these newspapers the authors of the articles (15.4 percent) express
favourable opinions towards aerial intervention by NATO. The authors consider
intervention as unavoidable (16.5 percent), as necessary (8.1 percent) and as
legitimate (6.8 percent). To a minor extent, other positions appear in which the
authors declare themselves to be against intervention, believing it to be avoidable
(5.4 percent).
Moving on to the opinions expressed by the persons that appear in the articles,
one can see that they are in general also favourable towards intervention, with
percentages that oscillate from 5.5 percent to 3.2 percent. Intervention is con-
sidered as being unavoidable, with the weight of the modality being 10.4 per-
cent, and legitimate, with the weight of the modality being 3.8 percent. Even in