The Korean Society for Journalism & Communication (KSJCS)

[ Theory Method ]

Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 62, No. 4, pp.125-158

ISSN: 2586-7369 (Online)

Print publication date 31 Aug 2018

Received 15 Jun 2018 Revised 13 Jul 2018 Accepted 02 Aug 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2018.62.4.004

미세먼지 재해 보도의 프레임 분석 : 구조적 주제모형(Structural Topic Modeling)의 적용

이준웅^** ; 김성희^***

**서울대학교 언론정보학과 교수, 교신저자 jwrhee@snu.ac.kr
***서울대학교 언론정보학과 박사과정 mynameis.sungheekim@gmail.com

News frames in the coverage of fine-dust disaster : Application of Structural Topic Modeling

June Woong Rhee^** ; Sung-hee Kim^***

**Professor, Seoul National University jwrhee@snu.ac.kr
***Ph. D. Candidate, Seoul National University mynameis.sungheekim@gmail.com

초록

이 연구는 우리나라 중앙일간지의 미세먼지 보도의 특징을 검토하기 위해, 전통적인 내용분석 방법을 사용해서 분석유목을 정해 놓고 뉴스 프레임을 확인한 결과를 ‘자료기반적’ 방법으로 구조적 주제모형(STM)을 적용해서 뉴스 프레임을 추출한 결과와 비교했다. 먼저, 2013년 1월부터 2017년 5월까지 3,636개의 미세먼지 관련 보도를 대상으로 구조적 주제모형을 적용한 결과 30개의 잠재적 주제를 찾아냈는데, 여기에 군집분석을 적용해서 5개의 주제적 뉴스 프레임을 구성했다. 덧붙여 전체 기사 중 300개 미세먼지 기사를 표집해서, 이로부터 재해관련 선행연구에서 검토한 주제적 요소를 분석유목을 삼아 연구자가 직접 코딩하는 방식으로 프레임을 규정했다. 두 가지 프레임 분석 결과를 비교해서 ‘자료기반적’ 뉴스 프레임 추출 방법의 가능성을 검토했다. 최종적으로 구조적 주제모형을 적용한 뉴스 프레임을 이용해서 미세먼지 보도에 나타나는 주제적 프레임의 분포가 언론사에 따라, 그리고 시기별로 다르게 나타났음을 확인했다. 연구결과에 기초해서 한국 언론의 미세먼지 재해 보도가 보이는 ‘파편화된 보도’ 현상의 함의를 논의했다.

Abstract

Employing two different methods of finding news frames in the coverage of fine-dust disaster, this study explored the ways in which major newspapers reported fine-dust from 2013 to 2017 in South Korea. The traditional way of identifying news frames is to conduct content analysis with a pre-defined set of frames considered to be themes and other related textual features. In addition to employing this traditional content analytic method, this study also undertook an algorithmic approach to finding underlying themes of a news corpus using the technique of structural topic modeling (STM), which made it possible to make a comparison between the results from the two approaches. Five different sets of underlying topics, defined as news frames in this study, were identified from a corpus comprising of 3,636 fine-dust related articles. Four different thematic news frames were found using a manual coding of news frames on 300 cases systematically sampled from the 3,636 articles. Similarities and dissimilarities between two sets of frames were examined and accounted for by methodological factors concerning data-driven vs. concept-driven content analysis. The findings of frame distributions across different news media and time periods were discussed in terms of media factors as well as issue characteristics of the fine-dust disaster.

Keywords:

fine-dust, disaster, risk perception, news frames, structural topic modeling (STM)

키워드:

미세먼지, 재난, 위험 인식, 뉴스 프레임, 구조적 주제모형, 토픽모델링

Acknowledgments

이 연구는 서울대학교 언론정보연구소의 연구지원을 일부 받았음을 밝힙니다. 자료분석 초기단계에서 연구방법론과 관련해서 도움을 주신 백영민 교수에게 감사를 표합니다.

References

김영욱·이현승·장유진·이혜진 (2015a). 미세먼지 위험보도 프레임과 정보원 분석. <한국언론학보>, 59권 2호, 121-154.
김영욱·이현승·이혜진·장유진 (2015b). 미세먼지 위험에 대한 수용자의 인식과 의견 형성에 관한 연구. <한국언론정보학보 통권>, 72호, 52-91.
김영욱·이현승·이혜진·장유진 (2016). 미세먼지 위험에 대한 전문가와 일반인의 인식차이와 커뮤니케이션 단서 탐색. <커뮤니케이션 이론>, 12권 1호, 53-117.
김원용·이동운 (2005). 언론보도의 프레임 유형화 연구: 국내 원자력관련 신문보도를 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 49권 6호, 166-197.
문안나 (2016). 한국 사회의 IR (Investor Relations) 개념-1994∼ 2014 년 신문기사 내용분석 및 의미연결망 분석. <홍보학 연구>, 20권 1호, 50-78.
백영민·최문호·장지연 (2014). 한미 정권교체에 따른 주한 미대사관 외교문서의 주제와 감정표현 변화. <언론정보연구>, 51권 1호, 133-179.
서울환경연합 (2017). <9대 대선후보와 차기 정부에 바란다. 서울환경연합, 미세먼지 대책 조사결과 발표>. 서울: 서울환경연합.
안병옥 (2017. 4. 6.). 미세먼지 대처, 중국 탓만 말라. <경향신문>, 30.
이민규·이예리 (2012). 국내 신문의 가축 전염병 위험보도에 대한 프레임 연구. <언론과학연구>, 12권 2호, 378-414.
이상률·이준웅 (2014). 프레임 경쟁에 따른 언론의 보도 전략: 언론의 기사근거 제공과 익명 정보원 사용. <한국언론학보>, 58권 3호, 378-407.
이준웅 (2009). 뉴스 틀 짓기 연구의 두 개의 뿔. <커뮤니케이션 이론>, 5권1호, 123-166.
이준웅 (2001). 갈등적 이슈에 대한 뉴스 프레임 구성 방식이 의견형성에 미치는 영향: 내러티브 해석모형의 경험적 검증을 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 46권 1호, 441-482.
이준웅 (1997). 언론의 틀짓기 기능과 여론의 변화. <언론과 사회>. 17권 가을호, 100-135.
진설아·허고은·정유경·송민 (2013). 트위터 데이터를 이용한 네트워크 기반 토픽 변화 추적 연구. <정보관리학회지>, 30권 1호, 285-302.
한국갤럽 (2017). 미세먼지에 대한 인식조사. <한국갤럽 데일리 오피니언>. 서울: 한국갤럽.
한혁·김영욱·금현섭 (2017). 공중상황이론을 바탕으로 한 PR전략 연구. <한국언론학보>, 61권 3호, 222-254.
Bennet, W. L. (2004). News: The politics of illusion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Blei, D. M., & Lafferty, J. D. (2007). A correlated topic model of science. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 17-35. [https://doi.org/10.1214/07-AOAS114]
Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3(Jan), 993-1022.
Brewer, N. T., Chapman, G. B., Gibbons, F. X., Gerrard, M., McCaul, K. D., & Weinstein, N. D. (2007). Meta-analysis of the relationship between risk perception and health behavior: the example of vaccination. Health Psychology, 26(2), 136. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.26.2.136]
DiMaggio, P., Nag, M., & Blei, D. (2013). Exploiting affinities between topic modeling and the sociological perspective on culture: Application to newspaper coverage of US government arts funding. Poetics, 41(6), 570-606. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2013.08.004]
Dynes, R. R., & Rodriguez, H. (2010). Finding and framing Katrina. The Sociology of Katrina: Perspectives on a Modern Catastrophe. Lanham, MD: Roman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 25-36.
Entman, R. M. (1991). Symposium framing US coverage of international news: Contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran air incidents. Journal of communication, 41(4), 6-27. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1991.tb02328.x]
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x]
Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 163-173. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x]
Friedman, B., & Wenger, D. (1986). Local and national media coverage of disaster: A content analysis of the print media's treatment of disaster myths. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 4(3), 27-50.
Gamson, W. A., & Lasch, K. E. (1981). The political culture of social welfare policy. CRSO Working Paper #221.
Gephart Jr, R. P. (2004). Normal risk: Technology, sense making, and environmental disasters. Organization & Environment, 17(1), 20-26. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026603262030]
Gilbert, C. (2005). Studying disaster: changes in the main conceptual tools. Ed. by Quarantelli, E.L., What is a disaster? (pp. 21-30). London: Routledge.
Goltz, J. D. (1984). Are the news media responsible for the disaster myths?: A content analysis of emergency response imagery. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 2(3), 345-368.
Grimmer, J., & Stewart, B. M. (2013). Text as data: The promise and pitfalls of automatic content analysis methods for political texts. Political Analysis, 21(3), 267-297. [https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mps028]
Guo, L., Vargo, C. J., Pan, Z., Ding, W., & Ishwar, P. (2016). Big social data analytics in journalism and mass communication. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93(2), 332-359. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016639231]
Hanson, J., & Hanson, K. (2006). The blame frame: Justifying (racial) injustice in America. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Reviews, 41, 413.
Holton, A., Weberling, B., Clarke, C. E., & Smith, M. J. (2012). The blame frame: Media attribution of culpability about the MMR–autism vaccination scare. Health Communication, 27(7), 690-701. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.633158]
Hong, L., & Davison, B. D. (2010, July). Empirical study of topic modeling in twitter. In Proceedings of the first workshop on social media analytics (pp. 80-88). ACM. [https://doi.org/10.1145/1964858.1964870]
Houston, J. B., Pfefferbaum, B., & Rosenholtz, C. E. (2012). Disaster news: Framing and frame changing in coverage of major US natural disasters, 2000–2010. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(4), 606-623. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699012456022]
Iyengar, S. (1987). Television news and citizens' explanations of national affairs. American Political Science Review, 81(3), 815-831. [https://doi.org/10.2307/1962678]
Iyengar, S. (1990). Framing responsibility for political issues: The case of poverty. Political Behavior, 12(1), 19-40. [https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992330]
Kitzinger, J. (1999). Researching risk and the media. Health, Risk & Society, 1(1), 55-69. [https://doi.org/10.1080/13698579908407007]
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187. [https://doi.org/10.1086/267990]
Mohr, J. W., & Bogdanov, P. (2013). Introduction-Topic models: What they are and why they matter. Poetics, 41(6), 545-569. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2013.10.001]
Pennington, H. (1999). The media and trust: E coli and other cases. Ed. by Bennett, P. and Calman, K.C., Risk Communication and Public Health (pp. 81-06). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R. E., & Slovic, P. (Eds.). (2003). The social amplification of risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511550461]
Quarantelli, E. L. (1985). What is disaster? The need for clarification in definition and conceptualization in research. Ed. by Barbara Sowder, Disasters and mental health Selected contemporary perspectives (pp. 41-73). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Reese, S. D., & Lewis, S. C. (2009). Framing the War on Terror: The internalization of policy in the US press. Journalism, 10(6), 777-797. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884909344480]
Roberts, M. E., Stewart, B. M., & Airoldi, E. M. (2016). A model of text for experimentation in the social sciences. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 111(515), 988-1003. [https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2016.1141684]
Roberts, M. E., Stewart, B. M., Tingley, D., Lucas, C., Leder‐Luis, J., Gadarian, S. K., Albertson, B., & Rand, D. G. (2014). Structural topic models for open‐ended survey responses. American Journal of Political Science, 58(4), 1064-1082. [https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12103]
Roeser, S., Hillerbrand, R., Sandin, P., & Peterson, M. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of risk theory: Epistemology, decision theory, ethics, and social implications of risk (Vol. 1). London and New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
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]
Semktko, H. A. & Valkenburg, P. M. (2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 93-109. [https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/50.2.93]
Sjöberg, L. (2000). Factors in risk perception. Risk Analysis, 20(1), 1-12. [https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.00001]
Steuter, E., & Wills, D. (2009). At war with metaphor: media, propaganda, and racism in the war on terror. Plymouth: Lexington Books.
Tierney, K., Bevc, C., & Kuligowski, E. (2006). Metaphors matter: Disaster myths, media frames, and their consequences in Hurricane Katrina. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 604(1), 57-81. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716205285589]
Tierney, K. J. (2007). From the margins to the mainstream? Disaster research at the crossroads. Annual Reviews of Sociology, 33, 503-525. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131743]
Trainor, J., Barsky, L., & Torres, M. (2006). Disaster realities in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina: Revisiting the looting myth. Quick Response Report, 184. Natural Hazards Center, University of Delaware.
Vasterman, P., Yzermans, C. J., & Dirkzwager, A. J. (2005). The role of the media and media hypes in the aftermath of disasters. Epidemiologic Reviews, 27(1), 107-114. [https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxi002]
Weinstein, N. D. (1984). Why it won't happen to me: perceptions of risk factors and susceptibility. Health Psychology, 3(5), 431-457. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.3.5.431]
Weinstein, N. D., & Klein, W. M. (1996). Unrealistic optimism: Present and future. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15(1), 1-8. [https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1996.15.1.1]