1 GRADUATE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION
MASTER'S PROGRAMME COMMUNICATION SCIENCE ERASMUS MUNDUS MASTERS
JOURNALISM, MEDIA AND GLOBALISATION (JOINT DEGREE)
Master's Thesis
VIETNAMESE DIASPORIC MEDIA'S COVERAGE OF TRINH XUAN THANH ISSUE
By
TRANG-NHUNG PHAM STUDENT ID: 11896558
Supervisor/Examiner: dhr. dr. Rachid Azrout Date of completion: May 31, 2018
2 Abstract
Current literature on diasporic media often focuses on the migration characteristics of these media while paying less attention to their pattern of coverage. This thesis tries to fill in the gap by examining how diasporic media differ from each other and from the media in their respective home country when reporting a debatable issue. The thesis argues that journalistic operation of diasporic media is subjected to two forces of influence: media system of the host country in which they operate and preferences of the diasporic community they address. Through content analysis (N=395) of news coverage of Trinh Xuan Thanh issue by Vietnamese news outlets in Vietnam, Germany and the US, this thesis finds that public service mentality towards diasporic community is a powerful force guiding diasporic media's journalistic choices. Diasporic media coverage tends to reflect dominant narratives in host countries or sentiments of the
diasporic community and be critical of negative issues related to their home country. This essentially proves that the connection diasporic media maintain with their homeland can be one of critical rather than complimentary nature.
Introduction
With cross-border political and cultural connections, diasporic minority groups select and consume media to satisfy their needs of diverse representation and expression from different communities (Georgiou, 2013). Diasporic media serving these communities present values from both home and host countries, contributing to the establishment of "a dialogue between different realities" (Bailey, Cammaerts, & Carpentier, 2007, p. 71).
While this is commonly agreed on, there is little further analysis into diasporic media's journalistic practices (Sahin, 2015, p. 69), especially how they negotiate and maintain values that can be different or even contrasting in their own products. Where available, most analyses focus
3 on depiction of the migrant community diasporic media serve. Diasporic media are also often overlooked in media research of journalistic coverage due to their usually modest sizes. This situation applies to Vietnamese diasporic media, a blind spot in academia to which insufficient scholarship is paid attention. As the limited scholarship devoted to diasporic media often fail to delve into professionality, it is challenging to predict what coverage by diasporic media would be like, especially in the case of debatable issues.
This thesis examines similarities and differences between media in Vietnam and that of the diaspora when covering a disputed case linked to their home country. Multifaceted aspects of an unsolved case can exhibit how diasporic media accommodate different values from homeland and host countries in their journalistic professionalism.
The case selected is related to Trinh Xuan Thanh, a businessperson and former high-ranking official of the Vietnamese government. After several allegations of causing massive losses to the state-owned company he formerly headed, corruption, and unlawful promotion, Thanh allegedly ran away from Vietnam in September 2016 and later filed for asylum status in Germany. In early August 2017, the public were astounded by German government's accusation that Vietnam's government kidnapped Trinh Xuan Thanh from Berlin, which the Vietnamese government denied. Following was such extreme diplomatic hostility that Germany suspended bilateral strategic relationship. Later, Thanh stood the so-called "Vietnam's biggest corruption trial" that sent its first Politburo's member to prison in decades.
Their coverage of Trinh Xuan Thanh issue presents how diasporic media operate under influences from their home and host countries as well as reflect distinctions among the diasporic communities they serve. This analysis examines journalistic products by Vietnamese diasporic media in Germany and in the US, two countries where Vietnamese communities differ greatly.
4 The thesis seeks answers for the following research question: How do Vietnamese
diasporic media in Germany and in the US resemble and differ from each other and from
media in Vietnam in covering the issue of Trinh Xuan Thanh.
The results will highlight what the dominant forces driving journalistic decisions at diasporic media are, partly filling the current academic gap in the production process of diasporic media as well as exposing meaningful reality on the activity of non-mainstream media. These findings are of great significance considering Skjerdal (2011)'s argument that diasporic media can contribute to changes in their homeland.
Theoretical framework
Before delving into an in-depth analysis, it is essential to understand the current knowledge and literature in the field regarding diasporic media and how they work.
"Diaspora" is defined with three core elements: dispersion in space, homeland orientation, and boundary-maintenance within the host society (Brubaker, 2005, pp.5-6). From homeland's perspective, emigrant groups are considered diasporas (Brubaker, 2005, p.3). As a "specific subset of ethnic minorities", diaspora definition and characteristics possess overlapping with those of ethnic minorities (Tölölyan, 2007, p.649).
Diasporic identity that is "dispersal from an original homeland" (Christiansen, 2004, p. 189) makes diasporic minority groups with sustained cross-border connections use the media correspondingly to their "sense of cultural and political belonging", to seek representation and expression "as citizens, as individuals and as members of different communities" (Georgiou, 2013). This diverse media need drive them to form their own media (Christiansen, 2004, p. 191),
5 which are different from traditional media in "form, function, and raison d'etre" (Skjerdal, 2011, p.734).
As one of the most important characteristics of diasporic media, cross-cultural nature, especially the connection that these media create between the diasporic community and home and host countries, makes it reasonable to expect that diasporic media would produce diverse
products not only in accordance with different combinations of experience diasporic communities receive in their host countries but also in line with their respective sentiments towards the home country. The hierarchy of influences is a useful tool to study factors influencing news production of diasporic media.
Shoemaker and Reese (1996) proposed the hierarchy of influences model to explain effects of factors at different levels, namely the personal, routine, organizational, extra-media, and ideological ones, on media production. Each level of influences has distinct power.
Comparatively, social or national media context poses much more significant impacts on media products than personal factors could matter, organizational factors also have great effect over journalists' professional viewpoints (Hanitzsch et al., 2010). Within the framework of this thesis, influences on two outermost levels are taken into consideration. At the extra-media level, the relationship between media institutions and other social institutions affects media production. At the ideological level, the media follow general rules of the social system that at the present time span across national border (Reese & Shoemaker, 2016).
Diasporic media are subjected to two sources of influence: diasporic context and media system in host countries. Diasporic context and relation with diasporic community project ideological and institutional influence over diasporic media. Similarly, these media operate in accordance with rules of the media systems and overall socio-political environment they are
6 working in (Avraham, 2002, p.70). These two sources of influence are discussed in the following section.
Diasporic media
Diasporic media are perceived as "the media that are produced by and for migrants and deal with issues that are of specific interest for the members of diasporic communities" (Bozdag, Hepp, & Suna, 2012, p. 97). This definition overlaps with Matsaganis, Katz and Ball-Rokeach (2011)'s concept of ethnic media as "media produced by and for ethnic, racial and linguistic minorities, dispersed or immigrant groups" (pp. 1-10). As discussed above that diasporas share similarities with emigrant groups and ethnic minorities, this analysis would consider diasporic media and ethnic media interchangeable concepts for discussion of media by and for overseas Vietnamese.
Discussing their significance, scholars have agreed that diasporic media help migrants with their transnational experience, serving as a "home-making tool" for its migrant audiences (Bonini, 2011, p. 870). Diasporic media "prioritizes elements of continuous development, of being in between places, of similarity of experience, but not necessarily of nostalgia for a
homeland" (Siapera, 2010, p. 96), providing "orientation and connective roles" (Ogunyemi, 2012), supporting immigrants in integration into host countries and maintaining their tie with homeland (Zou, 2014, pp. 42-43).
This kind of media products provides diasporas with "culturally relevant and locally vital" information necessary for their life in the host country (Yin, 2015, p. 558). In the meantime, ethnic media journalists take into consideration interests of both the diasporic community and the host country (Matsaganis et al., 2011, p. 237). Public-service mentality (Sahin, 2015, p. 73) towards the diasporic community therefore is an essential characteristic of diasporic media.
7 The argument holds true when looking particularly at the Vietnamese diasporic
community. With a need of preserving cultural heritage in negotiating with and engaging in the mainstreamed culture in their host countries, overseas Vietnamese tend to consume more of their own media (Cunningham & Nguyen, 1991).
Vietnamese diasporic community
Given the importance of the diasporic community to diasporic media, understanding of the Vietnamese diasporic population is critical in studying Vietnamese diasporic media.
Overseas Vietnamese, often officially referred to as 'Vietnamese people living in foreign countries', do not only include Vietnamese citizens living outside the country. Vietnamese diasporic community in this context is understood as wide as the term Viet Kieu (overseas Vietnamese, literally Vietnamese sojourners) is defined by Vietnam's government: “Vietnamese people who used to have Vietnamese nationality which had been determined at the time of their birth on the consanguinity principle and their offspring’s and grandchildren are permanently residing foreign countries.” (Vietnam's National Assembly, 2008).
Vietnamese diasporic population is also not a united community. Scholars generally agree that there are five categories of overseas Vietnamese with distinct characteristics (Ember, Ember, & Skoggard, 2004; Ha, 2003; International Organization for Migration, 2003; Ivarsson, 2008; Miller, 2015; Zong & Batalova, 2016):
The first category consists of people who had been living in foreign countries, usually neighbouring states and France, prior to 1975.
8
The second category are those fleeing Vietnam as refugees after Vietnam War ended and
their descendants. They usually reside in Western industrialized countries, mostly in the US and Australia.
The third category consists of Vietnamese who worked and studied in the former Soviet
bloc in Central and Eastern Europe and stayed there after the Soviet collapse.
The fourth category includes recent economic migrant workers or brides living in
developed Asian countries.
The most recent group consists of naturally born Vietnamese going abroad for education
and later staying there as permanent residents.
Regardless of their characteristics, Vietnamese diasporic communities mostly maintain their connection, especially economic connection, with people in the home country. Despite chronic political differences, the 21st century witnesses increasing diasporic philanthropy (Sidel, 2007) as well as exchange of investment and knowledge, contributing to Vietnam’s economic growth (Pham, 2010).
Among five groups of immigrants mentioned, the second and third ones are the typical Vietnamese diasporic communities for two reasons: Firstly, unlike the first group, they are composed of large communities exhibiting strong connections to home country. Secondly, unlike the two last groups, they are established communities whose members have lived in host
countries for a long time and often have second citizenship. These two groups also represent the most apparent distinction among overseas Vietnamese.
The Vietnamese diasporic community in the US represents the second group of immigrants (Ong & Meyer, 2004). These people maintain political differences with the ruling
9 government in Vietnam (Sidel, 2007). On the one hand, strong anti-communist mentality within the group accounts for apparent resentment against the ruling government back home (Valverde, 2012). On the other hand, political discrepancy drives them away from political concerns about Vietnam. Though part of the community still considers issues relevant to Vietnam important, domestic issues are their major consideration (Collet, 2000), especially for younger generation (Ong & Meyer, 2004).
Overseas Vietnamese in Eastern and Central Europe represented by Vietnamese in Germany are different. Though part of them belongs to the second group, Vietnamese main migration to Germany was conducted on the "socialist pathways of migration", implying the exchange of labour among socialist countries during the Cold War (Hillmann, 2007). The mass number of Vietnamese migrants who went to eastern Germany during this time and stayed after the Cold War includes mostly youngsters from cadre families with connections to socialist organizations of Vietnam and tend to maintain less negative sentiment toward their homeland (Huwelmeier, 2013, pp.80-81).
Regarding diasporic context, communities of overseas Vietnamese in the US and Germany represent the most significant disparity among diasporic Vietnamese communities. Media system
Besides diasporic context, media conditions in the host countries also influence operation of diasporic media. It is important to distinguish how media systems in Germany and in the US differ from each other and from media conditions in Vietnam.
There have been several efforts to categorise media systems around the world, which involve consideration of not only the media dimension of the system but also the political and
10 cultural aspects (Mellado & Lagos, 2013, pp.19-20). Very early, Siebert, Schramm, and Peterson (1956) proposed four models of media system, namely Authoritarian, Libertarian, Social
Responsibility, and Soviet Communist, focusing on political aspect of media. Among the most popular is Hallin and Mancini (2004)'s proposal of three different models of Western media system: Mediterranean/Polarized Pluralist Model, North-Central Europe/Democratic Corporatist Model, and North Atlantic/Liberal Model. While Siebert et al. (1956)'s classification is outdated and Hallin and Mancini (2004)'s one is Western-centric, Blum (2005) introduces a more inclusive typology with six models: the Atlantic-Pacific liberal model, the Southern European clientelism model, the Northern European public service model, the Eastern European shock model, the Arab-Asian patriot model, and the Asian-Caribbean command model (cited in Mellado & Lagos, 2013, p. 5). Whatever typology is concerned, media systems of Germany, the US and Vietnam are of different characteristics.
The German media system belongs to Hallin and Mancini (2004)'s democratic corporatist model and Blum (2005)'s public service model. Accordingly, it is characterised with external pluralist; historically strong party press shifting toward neutral commercial press; considerable autonomy of the media, strong professionalisation; institutionalised self-regulation, strong state protection for press freedom and press subsidies. Meanwhile, the American media system is classified as a liberal model whose features include early development of mass-circulation commercial press, strong professionalisation, neutral commercial and information-oriented journalism with internal pluralism and formally autonomous system as well as
non-institutionalised self-regulation (Hallin & Mancini, 2004). The American media system is also dependent on market forces with little interference of the state (Curran, Iyengar, Brink Lund, & Salovaara-Moring, 2009, p. 6). Overtime, the German market has developed rich and diverse
11 supply together with a commercialisation trend that resembles media development in the US, though the tendency of negativity is much less apparent in Germany (Schulz, Zeh, & Quiring, 2005).
Importantly, these differences signify a discrepancy between media in the US and Germany considering the relationship between news and the public. In general media in the US attach more significance to satisfying the audience as customers while German media are more likely to treat audience as the public. While the media in Germany follow a stronger public logic aimed at providing news that the public need to know, the media in the US are more likely to publish news that people want to know as a sellable product.
As a command model, media system in Vietnam is strongly guided by Marxist ideology that refutes press freedom as the press is believed to inevitably serve the dominating class due to corporate ownership (Herman & Chomsky, 2010), leading to overall control of press rights and ownership (Hopkins, 1965, pp. 524-525) with the Communist Party largely in charge of
journalistic products (Grant, 2013, p. 6; Vietnam's National Assembly, 2016). Recently, de facto privatisation of press are commonplace (McKinley, 2011, p. 96), governmental control over content is loosening, and journalism can partly serve its watchdog role (Dang, 2012, p. 57). Wells-Dang (2010) described this as toleration "as long as they do not attack the rule of the Party" (cited in Cain, 2014, p. 91) while Abuza (2015, p. 7) attributed it to the government's incapability to control Internet content. The co-existence of state censorship and market competition forms a "two tier system" (McKinley, 2011, p. 89), a "mixed market socialism" model in which journalistic products are both "commodities in the market and apparatuses of ideologies" (Dang, 2012, pp. 57-60). Operating partially free but also facing "erratic" censorship
12 (Cain, 2014, p. 18), the media in Vietnam are likely to avoid publishing news unfavourable by the government.
Products of Vietnamese media are subjected to influences of the media system presiding in their host countries. Media systems in the US, Germany, and Vietnam pose different tasks for media to follow, with different rationales for news making. While media in Germany publish what the public need to know, those in the US publish what the public want to know, media in Vietnam publish what the government think people should know. These motives lay their weight on two outer levels of the hierarchy, affecting the content production of diasporic media.
Hypotheses
From above discussion, it is reasonable to predict that coverage by Vietnamese diasporic media in Germany and the US are different from each other and from that by media in Vietnam in several aspects.
Firstly, as "news values are related to audience and accessibility" (Sahin, 2015, pp. 74-75) diasporic media's coverage is more likely to include issues relevant to the diasporic community they serve. While Trinh Xuan Thanh issue was covered thoroughly by media in Vietnam due to the infamous reputation of his corruption case, it only attracted the attention of diasporic media after the alleged "kidnap" of him from Berlin, which had immense effect on relations between Vietnam and Germany as well as the "image" of Vietnam and Vietnamese. Hence Hypothesis 1:
The "kidnap" event increased attention to the issue of Trinh Xuan Thanh and this effect was stronger with diasporic media, especially in Germany, than media in Vietnam.
Considering news selection, diasporic media would naturally take dominant issues and arguments in the host countries into their coverage. Without censorship and state control in
13 production, diasporic media would be more likely to report sensitive information that is often put aside by media in Vietnam. Also importantly, community-serving mentality would make
diasporic media devote more coverage to the diasporic community (Deuze, 2006) and also avoid reporting inner problems of the diasporic community (Shi, 2009). Sourcing patterns of diasporic media also resemble that of mainstream ones (Ngomba, 2015, p. 118). This therefore leads to,
Hypothesis 2a: Visibility of certain news items related to the issue on diasporic media was different from that on media in Vietnam.
Hypothesis 2b: Diasporic media were more likely to use sources of information from their host countries and diasporic community than media in Vietnam in coverage of Trinh Xuan Thanh's case.
As Bennett (2006)'s indexing theory proposes, it is likely that news media utilise frames proposed by political leaders. Applying this to news coverage of Trinh Xuan Thanh issue, it is expected that media coverage in Vietnam is more likely to contain frames favoured by Vietnam's government, which refers to the issue as a self-turning in of a corrupt official who will face lawful sentence, than diasporic media's coverage. In contrast, German government considered it a kidnap of an asylum seeker who later had to face an unfair trial. Diasporic media are expected to use these frames that are unfavourable to the Vietnamese government more often for different reasons: diasporic media in Germany tend to be influenced by frames favourable by their host government while audience of Vietnamese media in the US have deep resentment towards Vietnam's government.
Hypothesis 3: Media in Vietnam were more likely to use frames favourable to Vietnam's government while diasporic media were more likely to use frames unfavourable to Vietnam's government.
14 When it comes to sensitive and debatable news related to their home country, the
combination of media system and sentiment towards Vietnam generates different coverage. As political factors have stronger effect on journalistic orientation compared to cultural ones (Hanitzsch et al., 2010), political sentiment of a specific diasporic community play a significant role in media production of Vietnamese media serving that community. Diasporic media can also be highly politicised and express critical attitudes towards home country's government (Skjerdal, 2011, p.727). Diasporic media in the US, which operate in an audience-oriented environment of a community unfriendly to the ruling government in Vietnam, are more likely to produce negative coverage. In contrast, media in Vietnam is assumed to publish supporting coverage of the government. Vietnamese media in Germany address a community that is comparatively less hostile toward the Vietnamese government, therefore their coverage is predicted to be less negative than that by Vietnamese media in the US. Given the centre issue involves the conflict between Vietnam's government and Trinh Xuan Thanh, it is expected that evaluation of Trinh Xuan Thanh is likely to be opposite to that of Vietnam's government.
Hypothesis 4a: Diasporic media were more likely to have negative evaluation of
Vietnam's government than media in Vietnam, with media in the US projecting the most negative evaluation.
Hypothesis 4b: Media in Vietnam were more likely to have negative evaluation of Trinh Xuan Thanh than diasporic media, and media in the US had the least negative evaluation.
Methodology
To test above hypotheses, quantitative content analysis of journalistic articles was conducted through manual coding. As a rather systematic and objective method to analysis communication texts (Rourke & Anderson, 2004), content analysis facilitates the comparative
15 approach necessary to examine differences and similarities among media in different countries (Zou, 2014, p. 45).
Though without close reading and thorough examination of the text, quantitative analysis runs the risk of overlooking deep meanings communicated by media products as well as non-objectivity (Matthes & Kohring, 2008; Scheufele & Scheufele, 2010), it satisfies the purpose of this analysis as description and comparison of media coverage.
Sampling
To examine news coverage by media in Vietnam and Vietnamese diasporic media in Germany and the US, six online news outlets were chosen to simplify the sample collection process. Two Vietnam's media selected were Tuoi Tre (tuoitre.vn), whose print version is the most circulated newspaper in Vietnam and VnExpress (vnexpress.net), the mostly read
Vietnamese online news outlet, both outlets are considered quite innovative among Vietnamese media; in Germany, Thoi bao (thoibao.de) was chosen as it is the only recognisable Vietnamese news outlet there. Three Vietnamese news websites in the US analysed were: Vien Dong Daily (viendongdaily.com), Tin nuoc My (tinnuocmy.com), and Nguoi Viet (nguoi-viet.com), which self-claims as the first Vietnamese daily in the US.
News coverage related to the issue published by these news outlets in two periods from September 2016 to April 2017 and from July 2017 till March 2018 were collected. The timeframe runs from the day news of Trinh Xuan Thanh's escape broke out till after the conclusion of the trial he stood, covering both the peak times when key events occurred and the time in between, so that articles collected would contain not only reporting of hard facts but also analysis and
16 Articles were searched for from the online archives of news outlets using search term "Trinh Xuan Thanh". As this analysis focus on the issue that Trinh Xuan Thanh is at the centre, using his name as the key search term resulted in the most relevant articles. Articles containing the term in the title or the lead were collected and included in the analysis. In total, there were 395 articles: 122 articles from Vietnamese media in Germany, 116 articles from Vietnamese media in the US and 157 articles from media in Vietnam. This sample size is sufficient to gain reliable results with precision.
Operationalisation
Article was used as the unit of analysis in this thesis. The main independent variable of this analysis was country. As discussed in theoretical section, different media systems and diasporic contexts have different effects on news coverage of diasporic media, making their media products different from each other and from those published in Vietnam. Comparison was only conducted among country groups while there was no examination of difference among outlets operating in the same country.
Another intervening variable analysed was time period. Whether the article was published before or after the "kidnap" influences how the coverage would be like. In this study, the time variable was measured by defining whether the articles were published before or after the kidnap.
Hypothesis 1 was tested in two ways: comparing changes of proportions of articles and of average number of articles published per day among three groups and between two time periods that are quite equal: the "before" period runs from August 2016 till April 2017 and the "after" from August 2017 till March 2018. For statistical analysis, chi-square and ANOVA were used, respectively.
17 Hypothesis 2 was tested by comparing among groups two aspects: visibility of sub-issues and parties' opinions (H2a) and sources of information (H2b). Statistical tests were conducted with chi-square.
Sub-issues examined in Hypothesis 2a include the crimes Trinh Xuan Thanh was accused of committing, his escape, the "kidnap" event, and the trial of Trinh Xuan Thanh. Visibility of opinions of different sides to the issues including Trinh Xuan Thanh and people of his side, Vietnam's government, German government and the public including both Vietnamese and non-Vietnamese were also examined.
Sources (H2b) are defined as "some person, group or entity …identified by attribution or reference through which information was gathered" (Voakes, Ka, Kurpius, & Chem, 2015, p.586). Use of different sources of information including sides to the issues (Vietnam's government, German government, Trinh Xuan Thanh), Vietnamese in Vietnam and overseas, independent observers and media in different countries (Vietnam, Germany, host countries of diasporic media, and international media) were analysed by coding whether the articles used these
above-mentioned as sources of information.
Hypothesis 3 was tested by comparing the presence of different frames assigned to the "kidnap" event, Trinh Xuan Thanh, Vietnam's government, and the trial of Trinh Xuan Thanh. Chi-square was used for statistical evaluations. The framing of the "kidnap" event was measured by coding whether the articles referred to the event as kidnap like German government's opinion, self-turning in as Vietnam's government claimed, or mentioned both sides' views. Framing of Trinh Xuan Thanh was measured by coding the presence or absence of descriptions of him as an asylum seeker, a corrupt former official, a defendant standing a trial, a politician who became a scapegoat in political struggle, or other frames not thought of before coding. Framing of
18 Vietnam's government was measured by coding whether the articles described Vietnam's
government as fair and working effectively, neutral or undemocratic, unfair, working ineffectively. Similarly, framing of the trial Trinh Xuan Thanh stood was also measured by coding if the articles denoted the trial as fair, unfair or neutral.
Evaluation of Trinh Xuan Thanh and Vietnam's government (Hypothesis 4) were coded on a 5-point Likert scale and statistically tested with two-way ANOVA to see effects of country and time variables. Crosstabulation and chi-square were used to analyse the use of supporting or opposing arguments devoted to these two sides.
The codebook1 includes 48 questions: 5 descriptive questions to record articles'
characteristics, 12 questions to measure visibility, 15 questions about sources of information, 8 questions on framing, and 8 questions to measure evaluation.
Only one coder conducted the coding procedure. However, 10% of the sample (40 articles) was analysed by another coder for calculation of inter-coder reliability by ReCal, a popular and efficient online reliability calculation service (Freelon, 2010). Krippendorff’s alpha coefficient was computed for each of the variables in the codebook. Krippendorff's alpha varies from 0.789 to 1 with 91.1% of variables having Krippendorff's alpha higher than 0.8, making them reliable (Krippendorff, 2004). Though four variables had Krippendorff alpha below 0.8 (0.789), their degree of agreements was high (97.5%), thus they were accepted as reliable.
Results
Hypothesis 1 expected the kidnap to draw more attention to Trinh Xuan Thanh's issue with strongest effect at diasporic media in Germany. Comparisons show that articles published after the "kidnap" account for the majority of the sample, as displayed in Figure 1a. Diasporic
19 media in Germany projected the greatest disparity between two periods: only 17.2% of articles were published before the "kidnap" while media in the US (32.8%) and in Vietnam (39.5%) paid more attention to the issue at the same time (2(2)=16.383, p-value<.001, Cramer's V=.204). Proportions of articles published after the event by media in Germany was significantly higher than other groups.
Figure 1a: Proportions of articles published by country
Figure 1b: Average number of article published per day by country
Average number of articles published per day increased in all groups and general figure rose from .15 (SD=.560) before the "kidnap" to .4 (SD=.859) after it. The significant effect of time variable (F(1,1458)=41.044, p-value< .001, partial 2= .027) was reflected most apparently by
diasporic media in Germany with the biggest increase in daily average from .08 (SD=.297) to .44 (SD=.718), as is shown in Figure 1b. Media in Vietnam published the most frequently (M=.32, SD=.942) but country variable did not have a significant effect on average number of articles.
39,50% 17,20% 32,80% 60,50% 82,80% 67,20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Vietnam Germany US Before After 0,24 0,08 0,14 0,41 0,44 0,34 0 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2 0,25 0,3 0,35 0,4 0,45 0,5 Vietnam Germany US Before After
20 Interaction between country and time variables only generated marginally significant effect (F(2,1458)=2.655, p-value= .71, partial 2= .004) on number of articles published.
While Hypothesis 1 did not have strong supports, the borderline significant result suggests that it should be tested with a larger sample rather than immediately rejected. Visibility of news items
Hypothesis 2a proposed that diasporic media presented particular news items including sub-issues and opinions of sides differently from media in Vietnam.
Considering visibility of crimes Trinh Xuan Thanh is accused of committing: media in Vietnam (86.6%) and the US (73.3%) both devoted prominently more attention to the issue than
diasporic media in Germany (28.7%) did (2(2)=106.199, p-value<.001, Cramer's V=.519). Test
of between-group difference shows that proportion of visibility by each group differed
significantly from others'. The same pattern applied to mentioning of Trinh Xuan Thanh's trial (2(2)=12.175, p-value= .002, Cramer's V=.176) and the percentage of mentioning the trial by media in Vietnam was significantly higher than that by diasporic media in Germany, as is shown in Figure 2a.
A similar pattern happened with mentioning of Trinh Xuan Thanh's escape: diasporic media in Germany mentioned it the least while media in the US was the most likely to do so (2(2)=50.247, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .357), as detailed in Figure 2a. Percentage of
21 Figure 2a: Percentages of articles mentioning Trinh Xuan Thanh's crimes, his escape, "arrest", and trial by country.
In contrast, the "arrest" or "kidnap" of Trinh Xuan Thanh in Berlin (articles published before the event were filtered out) was rarely mentioned by media in Vietnam (24.2%) while a majority of articles published by diasporic media in Germany (85.1%) and in the US (79.5%) included it (2(2)=91.044, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .576). Percentage of inclusion by media in Vietnam was significantly lower than by diasporic media.
Considering the inclusion of different sides' opinions in news coverage, two opposing patterns were witnessed. Regarding German government's opinion: diasporic media in Germany mentioned it in nearly half (49.2%) of the articles, followed by those in the US (37.1%) while media in Vietnam in general (96.8%) didn’t make mention of it (2
(2)=80.932, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .453). Percentage of mentioning by media in Vietnam was significantly lower than that by diasporic media. In contrast, Vietnamese government's opinion was most prominently used by media in Vietnam (86%), followed by those in the US (67.2%) and least (33.6%) by
86,6% 41,4% 24,2% 42,7% 28,7% 10,7% 85,1% 23,0% 73,3% 52,6% 79,5% 31,9% 0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0% 70,0% 80,0% 90,0% 100,0%
Crimes Escape Arrest Trial
22 diasporic media in Germany (2(2)=82.679, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .458). Percentage of visibility in each country group was significantly different from others.
Inclusion of opinions of Trinh Xuan Thanh's side or the public in general was not remarkably different among groups. Exceptions were mentioning of Vietnamese in Germany's opinion (2(2)=33.229, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .290) and of Vietnamese in the same country with the media studied (2(2)=14.925, p-value= .001, Cramer's V= .194): In both cases,
diasporic media in Germany displayed these opinions much more often (18%) than media in
Vietnam and the US2
.
Hypothesis 2a had supports in visibility of Trinh Xuan Thanh's crimes, escape, kidnap, trial, opinions of German government, Vietnamese government, Vietnamese in Germany and Vietnamese in the same country as the media but did not in use of Trinh Xuan Thanh's opinions and other groups of public.
Sources
Hypothesis 2b expected diasporic media to use more sources of information from their host countries and diasporic media than media in Vietnam.
Considering the use of information from governments: As can be seen from Figure 2b, while Vietnam's government was sourced constantly by media in Vietnam and mainly by media
in the US (80.2%), it was much less used (29.5%) by those in Germany (2(2)=175.699,
p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .667). In contrast, diasporic media in Germany used German government as a source of information the most often (50%), followed by media in the US (34.5%) while media in Vietnam rarely (3.2%) used it as a source of information (2(2)=81.526,
23 p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .454). In both cases percentages of sourcing by each country groups were significantly different from others. Unlike diasporic media in the US, diasporic media in Germany used information from the host country more often than Vietnam's government.
Though there was not much difference among groups in use of Trinh Xuan Thanh's side, groups differed significantly in use of the public or independent observers as sources of
information, as shown in Figure 2b. Media in the US used Vietnamese observers as a source significantly more often (26.7%) than the other two (2(2)=38.354, p-value<.001, Cramer's V= .312). Media in Germany used overseas Vietnamese the most often (23%), followed by those in the US (8.6%) while media in Vietnam didn’t use at all (2
(2)=41.779, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .325). Percentage of sourcing from overseas Vietnamese in each group was significantly different from others.
Figure 2b: Percentage of articles using different sources by country 100% 3,20% 0% 4,50% 8,30% 8,30% 0% 29,50% 50% 23% 5,70% 26,20% 18,90% 3,30% 80,20% 34,50% 8,60% 26,70% 16,40% 49,10% 18,10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Vietnam government German government Overseas Vietnamese Vietnamese observers Same country media Media in Vietnam Diasporic media
Vietnam Germany US
24 In terms of sourcing from other media (also displayed in Figure 2b), media in Vietnam was the least likely to do so in all types of media examined. Diasporic media in Germany (26.2%) used media in the host country the most often (2(2)=16.294, p-value<.001, Cramer's V= .203)
while media in the US was the most willing to use media in Vietnam (49.1%; 2(2)=64.024,
p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .403), diasporic media (18.1%; 2(2)=39.649, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .317), and other international media (11.2%; 2(2)=11.104, p-value= .004, Cramer's V= .168) as sources of information3.
Hypothesis 2b therefore found supports in sourcing from Vietnam's government, German government, overseas Vietnamese, Vietnamese observers, media in host country, media in Vietnam, diasporic media, and international media.
Framing
Hypothesis 3 proposed that opposite to media in Vietnam, diasporic media were more likely to use frames unfavourable to Vietnam's government.
The "kidnap" event was framed differently among groups, as shown in Figure 3a (only articles mentioning the event included). Media in Vietnam mostly framed it as self-turning in (82.6%) while diasporic media mainly framed the event as kidnap, especially media in Germany (94.2%). Media in the US mentioned both sides' arguments (24.2%) the most, followed by media in Vietnam (2(4)=126.831, p-value< .001, Cramer's V=.609). Percentage differences among groups in use of either "kidnap" or "self-turning in" frame were all significant while in
mentioning of both frames only the proportion difference between media in Germany and in the
25 US was significant. However, as 22.2% of cells in the crosstab had lower count than expected, this result might be not trustworthy.
Figure 3: Proportions of frames used for the "kidnap" event by country.
There were also differences in framing of Trinh Xuan Thanh4
. He was often framed as criminal of corruption by Vietnam media (58%), followed by media in US (39.7%), while media in Germany were the least likely (17.2%) to do so (2(2)=47.506, p-value<.001, Cramer's V=.347). Proportions of criminal framing in each country group was significantly different from others. In contrast, while media in Vietnam didn’t frame him as an asylum seeker at all, diasporic media were significantly more likely (14.8% in Germany, 12.9% in US) to use this frame
(2(2)=24.011, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .247). In all three groups, criminal of corruption frame was used more often than asylum seeker frame.
Media in Vietnam rarely framed the government negatively (1.3%) while were more likely to refer to it as working effectively (36.3%) or neutral (23.6%). In contrast, media in the US framed Vietnam's government as incapable or corrupt (58.6%) the most often, followed by
4 Results for defendant and scapegoat frames are provided in Appendix 2.
0,0% 94,2% 69,4% 17,4% 5,8% 24,2% 82,6% 0,0% 6,5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Vietnam Germany US
26 media in Germany (27.9%). Diasporic media in Germany (30.3%) used neutral frame more than other groups (2(6)=150.063, p-value<.001, Cramer's V=.436). Percentages of positive and negative framing for Vietnam's government in each group were significantly different from others while percentages of neutral framing by media in Germany was significantly higher than that by media in the US.
Considering framing of Trinh Xuan Thanh's trial (only articles mentioning the trial included), media in Vietnam were much more likely to frame it as fair (44.8%) than diasporic media (Germany: 10.7%; the US: 2.7%). In opposite, media in Germany were the most likely to frame the trial as unfair (50%), followed by those in the US (45.9%) while media in Vietnam did not do so (2(4)=52.561, p-value< .001, Cramer's V= .446). Proportion differences between media in Vietnam and diasporic media in use of fair and unfair frame were significant while there was no significant difference in percentage of neutral frame.
Above results show that hypothesis 3was supported. Evaluation
Hypothesis 4a and 4b expected diasporic media to be more critical of the Vietnamese government and less of Trinh Xuan Thanh, especially those in the US.
Overall media in Vietnam presented the most negative evaluation towards Trinh Xuan Thanh (M= -.75, SD=.609), followed by media in the US (M= -.46, SD=.624) while diasporic media in Germany's evaluation was more balanced (M= .02, SD=.643). Country had significant effect on evaluation (F(2,389)=22.476, p-value<.001, partial 2= .104). Tukey test showed that
mean differences between any two country groups were all significant. Evaluation of Trinh Xuan Thanh significantly increased after "kidnap" event in all groups (F(1,389)=16.992, p-value< .001,
27 partial 2= .042) and media in Germany witnessed the greatest rise of mean evaluation from -.43 (SD=.926) to 0.11 (SD=.527), as shown in Figure 4. Interaction between country and time
variables also resulted in significant effect on evaluation of Trinh Xuan Thanh (F(2,389)=4.031,
p-value= .019, partial 2= .020).
Figure 4: Evaluation of Trinh Xuan Thanh and of Vietnam's government by country before and after the "kidnap" event.
Regarding evaluation of the Vietnamese government: diasporic media in the US was the most negative (M= -1.04, SD=.773), followed by those in Germany (M= -.63, SD=.718) while media in Vietnam presented quite balanced evaluation (M=.13, SD=.528). Country had
significant effect on evaluation (F(2,389)=100.431, p-value< .001, partial 2= .341) and Tukey test
showed that each country group was significantly different from others in mean evaluation. Evaluation before the "kidnap" event was more positive than after it in all groups (F(1,389)=12.196,
p-value= .001, partial 2= .030). Again, media in Germany went through the greatest increase in -0,77 -0,73 -0,43 0,11 -0,66 -0,36 0,19 0,08 -0,05 -0,75 -1,05 -1,04 -1,20 -1,00 -0,80 -0,60 -0,40 -0,20 0,00 0,20 0,40
Before After Before After Before After
Vietnam Germany US
28 mean evaluation from -.05 (SD=.218) to -.75 (SD=.727) and the interaction between country and time variables generated significant differences among groups in evaluation of Vietnam's
government (F(2,389)=6.945, p-value= .001, partial 2= .034).
In both cases there were no remarkable changes in direction of evaluation by media in Vietnam and in the US. The same pattern applied to the tone of articles and use of supporting and
opposing arguments towards both sides5
.
Above results showed that Hypothesis 4a was supported. However, Hypothesis 4b was not as order of Trinh Xuan Thanh evaluation is not totally opposite to that of Vietnam's
government.
Discussion and conclusion
In finding answers to the research question "How do Vietnamese diasporic media in Germany and in the US resemble and differ from each other and from media in Vietnam in covering the issue of Trinh Xuan Thanh", comparisons on publishing pattern, news selections, framing and evaluation in coverage by diasporic media and media in Vietnam has been done.
Analyses showed that when reporting Trinh Xuan Thanh's issue, diasporic media in Germany tended to take in and present news items and narratives from their host country. Having little direct connection to the issue from host country, diasporic media in the US depended more on information from home country – Vietnam. Noteworthily, in both cases, diasporic media maintained their critical stand towards the homeland and displayed news items, frames, and evaluation unfavourable to the homeland's government. The "kidnap" event played an important role in affecting the direction of coverage.
29 Covering this sensitive issue, media in Vietnam did not deviate from the government-favoured pattern of coverage. Perversely, diasporic media were more likely to publish news unfavourable to Vietnam's government thanks to the less censorship and self-censorship they enjoy in their host countries. At the same time, dominant narratives in the host country affect how diasporic media cover the issue, as proved by the closeness of diasporic media in Germany's coverage to narration by German media and German government's opinions. This is reasonable considering diasporic media's purpose to serve the diasporic community (Sahin, 2015, p. 73) with befitting and essential information (Yin, 2015, p. 558) these people need and want for their life in the host country. While prioritising host government in sourcing similarly to mainstream media (Ngomba, 2015), diasporic media in Germany also used more public opinion, especially opinions of overseas Vietnamese, as a source of information in their coverage, demonstrating their stronger effort of offering visibility to the diasporic community, a usual practice by diasporic media (Deuze, 2006, p.275).
That diasporic media in the US tended to resemble media in Vietnam in selection of news items and used more sources from Vietnam can be explained as resulting from limitations of resources. On the one hand, they do not have direct connection to the issue in their host country. One the one hand, diasporic media have limited resources at their disposal (Mandell, 2015, p. 18). The situation makes sources from Vietnam an available and effortless option. However, it did not make their coverage similar to that of media in Vietnam. When framing debatable sub-issues like the "kidnap" event, diasporic media in the US were more likely to report on both sides. The dependence on Vietnamese sources also did not assuage their condemnatory viewpoint to the government, proven by the most negative framing and evaluation of Vietnam's government. Their consistent critical attitude to Vietnam's government could be a journalistic choice based on
30 consideration of their audience's references (Sahin, 2015), the awareness of negative viewpoint the community they are addressing maintain about Vietnam's government (Valverde, 2012). Their sourcing from Vietnamese observers also reflect this censorious standpoint as independent observers often hold opinions differing from the Vietnamese government's.
Though media from both countries provide public service to the diasporic community by producing coverage based on their ideas about their audience's nature and expectation (Sahin, 2015, pp. 73-74), this service is offered in different ways: diasporic media in Germany reflect the dominant stories told in the host country while diasporic media in the US reflect the general sentiment of the community. Coming back to earlier discussion on difference between media systems in Germany and in the US, media in the US is more likely to provide news that their audience want to know.
Coverage of diasporic media in Germany and the US exhibits their standpoint choices: information from home country can be an important source for diasporic media, narratives from home can affect diasporic coverage but the more decisive forces are from the host country, especially within the diasporic community.
The "kidnap" event enabled a critical turn in coverage of this issue, especially for
diasporic media in Germany. Despite its profound imputation in Vietnam, the corruption case of Trinh Xuan Thanh didn’t play an important role in diasporic life of overseas Vietnamese and therefore was not considered newsworthy. However, the "kidnap" had so immense effects that diasporic media there paid much more attention to the case and projected more negative attitude towards the Vietnamese government in the later period. Even though diasporic community have interest in homeland politics (Sriskandarajah, 2004, p.496) attention is often paid to relevant events. It also changed direction of coverage by media in Germany to be closer to that of media
31 in the US. While their tendency to frame Vietnam's government neutrally before the event
somehow reflects the overall sentiments of the community they serve towards homeland, the veering of framing and evaluation after it is noteworthy. For diasporic media in the US, smaller changes in the volume of coverage and attitude can be explained as either a lesser concern over the case in general or a more consistent sentiment towards Vietnam.
Notably, unlike arguments that diasporic media often hesitate to cover sensitive topics such as cultural taboos or bad news that can harm the image of the community (Ogunyemi, 2015, p. 65; Sahin, 2015, p. 75), Vietnamese diasporic media paid much attention to this controversial issue in a critical light. Linking this to (Nossek, 2004)'s argument on the influence of national loyalty when news is regarded as domestic, the finding probably proves that this issue is not considered a domestic issue, signalling an awareness of discrepancy between the diasporic community and the homeland.
The connection with homeland diasporic media provided in this case is not only about heritage maintaining or home making (Bonini, 2011) but also a critical connection, projecting censure to negative issues in their homeland. This connection is beyond active economic relations (Cohen, 2008, p.143), frequent communication, return migration, and participation in shaping nationalism and nationhood (Chan & Tran, 2011) observed in Vietnamese diasporas. While scholars have argued that diasporic community could play important role in issues at home
(Sriskandarajah, 2004, p.496) and diasporic media as "agents of changes for homeland" (Skjerdal, 2011, p.729) could affect political life in their homelands (Kperogi, 2008), observation of
Vietnamese diasporic media shows that their interest in homeland issues is still limited to those relevant to their diasporic life. Further study into audience and reception of Vietnamese diasporic media is needed to see if they have such influential power on their homeland. Essentially, while
32 Vietnam's government has consistently implemented the policy of welcoming and promoting relations with diasporas (Vietnam's Politburo, 2004), whether it appreciates a greater role of diasporas is unknown.
This analysis is not devoid of drawbacks. Firstly, diasporic context's influence in production of diasporic media should be further studied from the perspectives of the audience receiving their coverage as well as of news workers to see how diasporic media define news preference and need of their audience. Secondly, in examination of the influence of diasporic context on media products, it did not consider cultural and economic aspects though news selection of diasporic media can be influenced by cultural ideologies (Ogunyemi, 2015, p. 54) and by viewpoints of elite and business groups having ownership or economic relationship with diasporic media (Sahin, 2015, p. 79). Finally, it only compared Vietnamese diasporic media with media in Vietnam while neglecting mainstream media in host countries. Therefore, while the analysis exhibited the distance between diasporic media and media in home country, the interspace between diasporic media and media in host countries remains unknown. Further study to address these weaknesses is needed to project a full picture of diasporic media's operation.
Through examination of Vietnamese diasporic media's coverage of a debatable case, this analysis shows how diasporic media work differently from each other and from media in their home country. Working in democratic media system allows diasporic media to published more sensitive and critical coverage and maintain great distance from narrative favoured by Vietnam's government. Diasporic contexts, in particular consideration of audience preferences, influence of viewpoints in host countries, accessibility to sources of information and community-serving attitude, have impacts on diasporic media workers' news selection, framing and evaluation. Apparently, diasporic media operate with a strong community service mentality, which prioritises
33 narratives from host country and sentiment of the diasporic community towards homeland. Their coverage also connects to homeland in a critical and progressive mode rather than appraisal.
References
Abuza, Z. (2015). Stifling the public sphere: Media and Civil Society in Vietnam. National Endowment for Democracy, International Forum for Democratic Studies.
Avraham, E. (2002). Social-political environment, journalism practice and coverage of minorities: The case of the marginal cities in Israel. Media, Culture & Society, 24(200202), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/016344370202400104
Bailey, O., Cammaerts, B., & Carpentier, N. (2007). Understanding Alternative Media. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Bonini. (2011). The Media as "Home-making" Tools: Life Story of a Filipino Migrant in Milan Media. Media Culture & Society, 33 (6), 869-883.
Bozdag, C., Hepp, A., & Suna, L. (2012). Diasporic Media as the "Focus" of Communicative Networking Among Migrants. In I. Rigoni, & E. Saitta, Mediating Cultural Diversity in a Globalized Public Space (pp. 96-115). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Brubaker, R. (2005). The “diaspora” diaspora. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141987042000289997
Cain, G. (2014). Kill One to Warn One Hundred: The Politics of Press Censorship in Vietnam. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19(1), 85-107.
Chan, Y. W., & Tran, T. L. T. (2011). Recycling migration and changing nationalisms: The vietnamese return diaspora and reconstruction of vietnamese nationhood. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37(7), 1101–1117. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2011.572486 Christiansen, C. C. (2004). News Media Consumption Among Immigrants in Europe: The
Relevance of Diaspora. Ethnicities, 4 (2), 185-207.
Cohen, R. (1997). Global Diasporas: An Introduction (second). Oxon: Routledge.
Collet, C. (2000). The Determinants of Vietnamese American Political Participation: Findings from the January 2000 Orange County Register Poll. Paper prepared for the 2000 Annual Meeting of the Association of Asian American. Scottsdale, Arizona.
Cunningham, S., & Nguyen, T. (1991). Popular Media of the Vietnamese Diaspora. The Public, 6(1), 71-92.
Curran, J., Iyengar, S., Brink Lund, A., & Salovaara-Moring, I. (2009). Media System, Public Knowledge and Democracy. European Journal of Communication, 24(1), 5–26.
34 https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323108098943
Dang, T. T. (2012). Vietnamese Model of Journalism in the Age of Integration and its Effects to the Civil Society and Democracy in Vietnam. VNU Journalism of Social Sciences and Humanities, 28(5), 57-64.
Deuze, M. (2006). Ethnic media, community media and participatory culture. Journalism, 7(3), 262–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884906065512
Ember, M., Ember, C. R., & Skoggard, I. (2004). (2004). Encyclopedia of Diasporas: Immigrant and Refugee Cultures Around the World. Volume II: Diaspora Communities. Springer Science & Business Media.
Freelon, D. G. (2010). ReCal : Intercoder Reliability Calculation as a Web Service. International Journal of Internet Science, 5(1), 20–33.
Georgiou, M. (2013). Diaspora in the Digital Era: Minorities and Media Representation. Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 12 (4), 80-99.
Grant, C. (2013). Written Journalism in Vietnam. Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection, Paper 1723.
Ha, M.-P. (2003). Vietnamese Diaspora in France. Contemporary French Civilization, 27 (2), 253-276. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3828/cfc.2003.27.2.005
Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hanitzsch, T., Anikina, M., Berganza, R., Cangoz, I., Mellado, C., Moreira, S. V., … Yuen, K. W. (2010). Modeling Perceived Influences on Journalism: Evidence from a Cross-National Survey of Journalists. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 87(1), 5–22. Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (2010). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the
Mass Media. Random House.
Hillmann, F. (2007). Riders on the Storm: Vietnamese in Germany’s Two Migration Systems. In E. Spaan, F. Hillmann, & T. van Naerssen, Asian Migrants and European Labour Markets (pp. 100-120). Routledge.
Hopkins, M. W. (1965). Lenin, Stalin, Khrushev: Three Concepts of the Press. Journalism Quarterly, 523-531.
Huwelmeier, G. (2013). Bazaar Pagodas–Transnational Religion, Postsocialist Marketplaces and Vietnamese Migrant Women in Berlin. Religion and Gender, 3(1), 76–89. Retrieved from https://www.religionandgender.org/index.php/rg/article/view/URN:NBN:NL:UI:10-1-101621
International Organization for Migration. (2003). Labour Migration: Trends, Challenges and Policy Responses in Country of Origin. Geneva: International Organization for Migration.
35 Ivarsson, S. (2008). Creating Laos: The making of a Lao space between Indochina and Siam,
1860-1945 (Vol. 112). Copenhagen: NIAS Press.
Kperogi, F. A. (2008). Guerrillas in Cyberia: The Transnational Alternative Online Journalism of the Nigerian Diasporic Public Sphere. Journal of Global Mass Communication (Vol. 1). Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in Content Analysis : Some Common Misconceptions and
Recommendations Reliability in Content Analysis : Some Common Misconceptions and. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 411–433.
Mandell, H. (2015). Imagine What the Gentiles Must Think: Editors of the US Jewish Press Reflect on Covering the Bernard Madoff Scandal. In O. Ogunyemi, Journalism, Audiences and Diaspora (pp. 17-33). Palgrave Macmillan.
Matsaganis, M., Katz, V., & Ball-Rokeach, S. (2011). Understanding Ethnic Media: Producers, Consumers, and Societies. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage.
Matthes, J., & Kohring, M. (2008). The Content Analysis of Media Frames: Toward Improving Reliability and Validity. Journal of Communication, 58, 258-279. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00384.x
McKinley, C. (2011). Financially Viable Media in Emerging and Developing Markets: Vietnam's Country Report. World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers.
Mellado, C., & Lagos, C. (2013). Redefining Comparative Analyses of Media Systems from the Perspective of New Democracies. Communication & Society, 26(4), 1–24.
Miller, K. (2015, April 29). From Humanitarian to Economic: The Changing Face of Vietnamese Migration. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from Migration Information Source:
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/humanitarian-economic-changing-face-vietnamese-migration
Ngomba, T. (2015). The Voice of the International Community: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Immigration Reports in the Copenhagen Post. In O. (. Ogunyemi, Journalism, Audiences and Diaspora (pp. 104-120). Palgrave Macmillan.
Nossek, H. (2004). Our news and their news: The role of national identity in the coverage of foreign news. Journalism, 5(3), 343–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884904044941 Ogunyemi, O. (2012). What Newspapers, Film, and Television Do Africans Living in Britain See
and Read? The Media of the African Diaspora. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press.
Ogunyemi, O. (2015). Negotiating Cultural Taboos in News Reporting: A Case Study of the African Diasporic Media in the UK. In O. (. Ogunyemi, Journalism, Audiences and Diaspora (pp. 53-67). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ong, N.-N. T., & Meyer, D. S. (2004, April 01). Protest and Political Incorporation: Vietnamese American Protests, 1975-2001. CSD Working Papers. Irvine, California, United States of America: Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD).
36 Pham, A. T. (2010, November 27). The Returning Diaspora: Analyzing Overseas Vietnamese
(Viet Kieu) Contributions Towards Vietnam's Economic Growth. DEPOCEN Working Paper Series. Hanoi, Vietnam: Development & Policies Research Center (DEPOCEN). Reese, S. D., & Shoemaker, P. J. (2016). A Media Sociology for the Networked Public Sphere:
The Hierarchy of Influences Model. Mass Communication and Society, 19(4), 389–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2016.1174268
Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in Quantitative Content Analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52 (1), 5-18.
Sahin, S. (2015). Journalism of Turkish-Language Newspapers in the UK. In O. Ogunyemi, Journalism, Audiences and Diaspora (pp. 68-83). Palgrave Macmillan.
Schulz, W., Zeh, R., & Quiring, O. (2005). Voters in a changing media environment a data-based retrospective on consequences of media change in Germany. European Journal of
Communication, 20(1), 55–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323105047670
Shi, Y. (2009). Re-evaluating the “alternative” role of ethnic media in the US: The case of Chinese-language press and working-class women readers. Media, Culture and Society, 31(4), 597–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443709335219
Shoemaker, P., & Reese, S. (1996). Mediating the Message: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content. New York: Longman.
Siapera, E. (2010). Cultural Diversity and Global Media: The Mediation of Difference. Chichester, Malden: MA: Miley-Blackwell.
Sidel, M. (2007). Vietnamese-American Diaspora Philanthropy to Vietnam.
Skjerdal, T. S. (2011). Journalists or activists? Self-identity in the Ethiopian diaspora online community. Journalism, 12(6), 727–744. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911405471
Sriskandarajah, D. (2004). Tamil Diaspora Politics. “The World’s Knowledge,” (1999), 492–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-29904-4_50
Tölölyan, K. (2007). The Contemporary Discourse of Diaspora Studies. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa, & the Middle East, 27(3), 647–655. https://doi.org/10.1215/1089201x-2007-040
Valverde, K.-L. C. (2012). Transnationalizing Viet Nam: Community, Culture, and Politics in the Diaspora. Temple University Press.
Vietnam's National Assembly. (2016, April 5). Luat Bao chi (Press Law). Hanoi, Vietnam. Vietnam's National Assemby. (2008, November 13). Law of Vietnamese Nationality. Hanoi,
Vietnam.
Vietnam's Politburo. (2004, March 26). Resolution 36 on Overseas Vietnamese Affairs. Hanoi, Vietnam: Vietnam Communist Party.
37 Voakes, B. P. S., Kapfer, J., Kurpius, D., & Chern, D. S. (2015). Diversity in the News : A
Conceptual and Methodological Framework. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73(3), 582–593.
Yin. (2015). Chinese-Language Cyberspace, Homeland Media and Ethnic Media: A Contested Space for Being Chinese. New Media & Society, 17(4), 556-572.
Zong, J., & Batalova, J. (2016, June 8). Vietnamese Immigrants in the United States. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from Immigration Information Source:
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/vietnamese-immigrants-united-states
Zou, S. (2014). US-based Chinese Diasporic Media and Social Myth: A Comparative Critical Discourse Analysis. Global Media Journal: Canadian Edition, 7 (2), 41-56.
38
Appendix 1: Codebook
Unit of data collection:news articles retrieved from websites of 6 news outlets: tuoitre.com, vnexpress.net, thoibao.de, tinnuocmy.com, viendongdaily.com, nguoi-viet.com
1. Description 1.1. Source
Choose the country from which the news story was published: 1= Vietnam (VN)
2= Germany (GE) 3= the US (US) 1.2. Outlet
Please specify the name of the outlet that published the article: 1.3. Length of articles
Please specify the word length of the article: _____________ words 1.4. Published time
Please specify the date when the article was published as the following format: dd/mm/yyyy 1.5. Was the article published before or after the "kidnap" event?
0=Before 1=After
2. Visibility of news items
2.1. Does the article make any reference to the crimes Trinh Xuan Thanh is accused of committing?
Note: Only crimes related to Trinh Xuan Thanh's corruption case count 0=No
1=Yes
2.2. Does the article make any reference to the “escape“ of Trinh Xuan Thanh?
Note: the "escape" refers to the event when Trinh Xuan Thanh was reported to disappear after news of the corruption case he is involved in broke out.
0=No 1=Yes
2.3. Does the article make any reference to the “arrest“ of Trinh Xuan Thanh?
Note: the "arrest" refers to the event that German government called a "kidnap" of Trinh Xuan Thanh from Berlin.
39 0=No
1=Yes
2.4. Does the article make any reference to the trial of Trinh Xuan Thanh?
Note: the "trial" refers to the trial related to the corruption case Trinh Xuan Thanh is involved in 0=No
1=Yes
2.5. Does the article make any reference to the opinion of German government? 0=No
1=Yes
2.6. Does the article make any reference to the opinion of Vietnamese government on the issue? 0=No
1=Yes
2.7. Does the article make any reference to the opinion of Trinh Xuan Thanh, his family, representatives, or his lawyer?
0=No 1=Yes
2.8. Does the article make any reference to the opinion of Vietnamese in Germany about the issue? 0=No
1=Yes
2.9. Does the article make any reference to the opinion of Vietnamese in Vietnam about the issue? 0=No
1=Yes
2.10. Does the article make any reference to the opinion of overseas Vietnamese (except for those in Germany) about the issue?
0=No 1=Yes
2.11. Does the article make any reference to the opinion of Vietnamese in the country it is published about the issue?
0=No 1=Yes
2.12. Does the article make any reference to the opinion of non-Vietnamese about the issue? 0=No
40 1=Yes
3. Sources
3.1. Does the article use information from Vietnamese government as a source? 0=No
1=Yes
3.2. Does the article use information from German government as a source? 0=No
1=Yes
3.3. Does the article use information from Trinh Xuan Thanh, his family, representatives, or his lawyer as a source?
0=No 1=Yes
3.4. Does the article use information from other political/legal organizations other than those mentioned in questions from 3.1. to 3.3. as a source?
0=No 1=Yes
3.5. Does the article use information from Vietnamese in the country it is published as a source? 0=No
1=Yes
3.6. Does the article use information from Vietnamese in Vietnam as a source? 0=No
1=Yes
3.7. Does the article use information from overseas Vietnamese as a source? 0=No
1=Yes
3.8. Information from which group of overseas Vietnamese is used in the article? 1= Overseas Vietnamese in Germany
2= Overseas Vietnamese in other countries
3= Both overseas Vietnamese in Germany and other countries 99= Inapplicable
3.9. Does the article use information from independent Vietnamese observers as a source? Note: Observers refer to scholars/commentators/influencers
