FEAR IN THE INDONESIAN ONLINE NEWS COVERAGE OF DISASTERS : A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Construction of Fear in the Selected Kompas.com and Detik.com Disasters News Articles.

Bibliography

Allan, S. (2006). Online News : Journalism and The Internet. New York: Open University Press. Altheide, D. L. (2006). Terorism and The Politics of Fear. Lanham: Altamira Press.

Altheide, D. L. (2009). The Columbine Shootings and The Discourse of Fear. American Behavioral Scientist Journal , 1354-1370.

Altheide, D. L. (2006). The Mass MEdia, Crime and Terorimsm. The Journal of International Criminal Justice , 982-997.

Altheide, D. L., Gray, B., Janisch, R., Korbin, L., Maratea, R., Neill, D., et al. (2001). News Contructions of Fear and Victim: An Exploration through triangulated qualitative dociment analysis. Qualitative Inquiry , 304-322.

Alwasilah, A. C. (2008). Pokoknya Kualitatif. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya.

Barry, G. (2010). The Culture of Fear : Why Americans are Afraid of the Wron Things. New York: Basic Book.

Boczkowk, P. J. (2004). Digitizing The News : Innoovation in Online News Paper. Massachusetts : Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.

Boczkowski, P. J. (2004). Digitizing the News. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

BPBN. (2012). Definisi Bencana. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from BNBP: http://www.bnpb.go.id/website/asp/content.asp?id=30

BPBN. (2012). gempa bumi. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from BPBN: http://www.bnpb.go.id/website/asp/benc.asp?p=6

BPBN. (2012). potensi ancaman bencana. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from BPBN: http://www.bnpb.go.id/website/asp/content.asp?id=31

BPBN. (2012). sistem penanggulangan bencana. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from BPBN: http://www.bnpb.go.id/website/asp/content.asp?id=32

BPBN. (2012). tanah longsor. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from BPBN: http://www.bnpb.go.id/website/asp/benc.asp?p=9

BPBN. (2012). tsunami. Retrieved April 1, 2012, from BPBN: http://www.bnpb.go.id/website/asp/benc.asp?p=7

Brian, M. (1993). The Politics of Everyday Fear. London: University of Minnesota Press.

Chiru, I. (2001). THE CYCLE OF IDENTITIES WITHIN THE SOCIAL PRACTICE OF ELECTIONS. Dialogos , 42-47.

Davies, R. C. (2003). The Definition of Natural Disasters. Retrieved February 22, 2012, from http://www.clearlyexplained.com/naturaldisaster

Doveling, K., Scheve, C. V., & Konjin, E. A. (2010). The Roultledge Handbook of Emotions and Mass Media. New York: Taylor and Francis.

Emilia, E. (2009). Menulis Tesis dan Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. New York: Longman.

Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and Power. New York: Longman Inc. Furedi, F. (2006). Culture of Fear Revisited. London: Continuum Press.

Gagah, W. (2009, 30 9). Gempa 7,6 SR di Padang: Kebakaran, Bangunan Runtuh, dan Mobil

Remuk . Retrieved April 1, 2012, from Detik.com:

http://news.detik.com/read/2009/09/30/220139/1212284/10/kebakaran-bang Gane, N. (2004). The Future of Social Theory. London: Continuum.

Gerot, L., & Wignel, P. (1994). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Cammeray: Antipodean Educational Enterprises (AEE).

gunung api. (2012). Retrieved April 1, 2012, from BPBN:

http://www.bnpb.go.id/website/asp/benc.asp?p=8

Hall, S. (1997). Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. London: The Open University.

Halliday, M. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M. (2002). On Grammar. London: Continuum.

Hawkes, D. (2003). Ideology, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

Hawkins, B. (2001). Language and Ideology, Volume II: Descriptive Cognitive Approaches. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Hitipeuw, J. (2010, October 6). BANJIR WASIOR Bagaikan Tsunami Menyapu Rumah Warga.

Retrieved April 1, 2012, from Kompas.com:

http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2010/10/04/09374124/Wasior.Banjir.Pulu

Ince, D. (2001). Online Newspaper. Retrieved January 31, 2012, from A Dictionary of the Internet: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1012-onlinenewspaper.html

Jim, A. M. (2008). A Discourse of Fear: DARR : 37 Conversations. News Republic Digital. Joye, S. (2005). News Discourses on Distant Suffering : A Critical Discourse Analysis ofthe 2003 SARS outbreak. Discourse and Society , 586-601.

Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading Images : The Grammar of Visual Design. New York: Routledge.

Larue, G. A. (1975). Ancient Myth and Modern Man. New Jersey: Englewood Cliff.

Ling, L. K., & Zuraidah, M. D. (2009). Fear Factors in Malaysian Slimming Advertisememts. Global Interdisciplinary Research Studies Journals .

ODABAS, Y. Z., & ERTONG, G. (2011). Social Effects of Disasters as Actants: A Comparison of 1999 Marmara Earthquake, Turkey and 2004 Tsunami, Indonesia. Ankara Üniversitesi Çevrebilimleri Dergisi , 47-54.

Paltridge, B. (2006). Discourse Analysis An Introduction. London: Continuum. PERATURAN PEMERINTAH REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 93. (2010).

Ramadhan, A. (2009, September 30).

http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2009/09/30/22495990/Padang.Mencekam. Retrieved April 1,

2012, from Kompas.com:

http://nasional.kompas.com/read/2009/09/30/22495990/Padang.Mencekam

Read, C. (2009). The Fear Factor : What Happens When Fear Grips Wall Street . New York: Palgrave Macmillian.

Salwen, M. B., Garisson, B., & Griscoll, P. D. (2005). Online News and the Public. New Jersey: Lawrenence Elbaum Associate .

Sinduk, E. (2010, April 4). Bantuan Belum Ada, Aktivitas Warga dan Pemerintahan Lumpuh.

Retrieved April 1, 2012, from Detik.com:

http://news.detik.com/read/2010/10/04/154338/1455004/10/bantuan-belum- Sunstein, C. R. (2005). Lasw of Fear. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Trckova, D. (2012). Metaphorical Representations of a Natural Phenomenon in News Discourse on Natural Catasthropes. CADAAD , 137-151.

Uli, L., & Smith, D. T. (209). Culture of Fear : A Critical Reader. New York: Pluto Press.

van Dijk, T. (1989). Ideology and Discourse : A Multidisciplary Introduction. Barcelona: Pompeu Fabra University.

van Dijk, T. (1998). News as Discourse. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and Practices : New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.

Wirth, W., & Scramm, H. (2005). Media and Emotions. Communication Research Trend Journals .

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publication Ltd.

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The chapter presents an introductory section of the study. It provides the background of the study, research questions, aims of the study, significances of the study, research methodology including data collection and data analysis, clarification of key terms, and organization of the paper.

1.1. Background

Fear as a basic human emotion is pervasive today in popular culture, public discourse and the news media (Jim, 2008). The news coverage of terrorism, crime, disaster in television, newspaper and online news are part of people’s life today. The television reality show such as Fear Factor and Ardan FM Radio horror program Nightmare are other examples of marketing fear in popular culture and public discourse. The previous examples are the evidences that “fear clearly sells” (Jim, 2008:2).

The mass media (newspaper, television, radio and internet) are the major contributors to the recent discourse of fear by marketing it in both news and entertainment (Altheide, 1997). Discourse of fear is then defined by Altheide and Michalowski (1999:3) as “the pervasive communication, symbolic awareness, and expectation that danger and risk that is a central feature of everyday life”. The extensive uses and abuses of discourse of fear by the mass media have created a

belief that danger and risk affect every aspect of culture that may lead to the idea that fear is “acceptable, normal and natural (Altheide, 1997:4)”

In relation to the discourse of fear, there have been studies that discuss how the mass media become the contributor in constructing fear in the society. For example, Altheide et al (2001) revealed the multiple meanings of fear and victim in various news media to explore the substance of the news. The approach used in the study was Triangulated Qualitative Document Analysis (TQDA). The other studies by Altheide (2003, 2009) narrowed down the study of fear into a smaller aspect which is crime. These studies discovered that crime has been utilized by mass media in United States Newspaper and television news report as the source in creating fear and social control in the society.

In other aspect of media, Ling and Don (2010) investigated the fear factors in Malaysian Slimming Advertisements. They examined the fear tactics used in slimming advertisement in textual and visual presentation to represent the fat female body as the other and the skinny female body as the ideal. The visual social semiotics framework by Van Leeuwen and Kress (1996) was employed as the tool of analysis in the research.

To sum up, all these studies revealed that fear is exploited by mass media to achieve certain goals such as the creation of panic and social control (Altheide, 2009, Ling and Don, 2010). As mentioned before, the studies of discourse of fear have been investigated by many scholars. However, as far as the study is concerned, the investigation of fear in Indonesian disaster news articles has not

been explored. Thus, the study is interested in investigating the construction of fear that is contributed by disasters in Indonesian online news articles.

The study investigates the construction of fear in selected articles of Kompas.com and Detik.com online news about the most occurring disasters in Indonesia. The most occurring disasters in Indonesia are earthquake, tsunami, volcanic eruption, landslide and flood. The disasters are chosen as the object of the study since they are also the source of fear (Masumi, 1993). Furthermore, the online news websites (Kompas.com and Detik.com) are chosen since they can be a representative as Indonesian online news media. Both Kompas.com and Detik.com online news media are also the leading online news in Indonesia. The advantage of choosing Kompas.com and Detik.com as the source of the data is that their websites allows the readers to track back the news article from 2007. The data retrieved from the websites are also expected to be more various, comprehensive and grounded.

As for its framework for the study, the study draws on Van Leeuwen’s (2008) framework in representing social action and actor. The framework is chosen since in constructing meaning (fear), language operates as the representational system (Hall, 1997). The representational system by Van Leeuwen (2008) is the most suitable since the social actors and action must be involved in constructing meaning (Fear) (Hall (1997), Altheide (2001), Beland(2003). Furthermore, the news which is also regarded as discourse (Van Dijk, 1998) is the recontextualization of the actual social practice (Van Leeuwen, 2008). It means

that the events of disaster are recontextualized and represented in the news. Therefore, by investigating these recontextulizations and representations may reveal how fear is constructed in the news and what the construction signifies. This theoretical view will be discussed later in Chapter II.

1.2. Research Questions

The research is geared toward answering the following research questions 1) How is fear constructed in the selected articles?

a) How are actors represented in the selected articles?

b) What actions are attributed to the actors in the selected articles? 2) What does the construction signify?

1.3. Aims of the Study

Based on the research question stated above, the aims of the study are:

1) To investigate the construction of fear in the selected articles through the representation of the social actors and social actions in the selected articles.

2) To find out the signification of the construction of fear in Indonesian News Articles

1.4. Significances of the study

Socially, this study is expected to make the readers think critically to any news they read since the news is never reported straightforwardly, there always

ideology and power asymmetry in the news (van Dijk, 2005). Theoretically, this study is expected to expand the study of fear from the critical discourse analysis approach. Furthermore, the greater significance of the study is expected to invoke the concept of Critical Language Awareness (CLA). Through CLA, the readers are expected to have critical awareness to the language phenomenon since critical awareness is a requirement to the effective civilization and nationality (Fairclough, 1992 in Lukmana et al, 2006)

1.5. Methodology

1.5.1. Research Method

This study employs descriptive qualitative method with a quantitative method element in the form of percentage of the categorizations of the social actors and actions. It is mainly centered in describing, interpreting, analyzing and criticizing the construction of fear in selected online news articles. Van Leeuwen’s (2008) framework in representing social actor and action has been chosen as the framework of analysis. In addition, Van Leeuwen & Kress (2006) theory on Reading Images is also used to analyze the image texts where they are present accompanying the news.

1.5.2. Data Collection

The data were collected from the online news article texts downloaded from Kompas.com and Detik.com’s website retrieved on April, 10th 2012.

First, the online news articles were downloaded and stored in a hard disk. The selected online news are five online news about catastrophic natural disasters from the Kompas.com and the other fives are obtained from Detik.com Afterward, the online news articles were converted into word text in order to ease the analysis. The unit of analysis of the linguistic text is sentence. Each sentence is, then, counted as a part of data. Additionally, the image texts that accompany the linguistic texts were also downloaded and stored in hard disk. The collected pictures are also counted as part of image texts data. The data Analysis will be described in the next section.

1.5.3. Data Analysis

The data for the study are in the form of news article and pictures accompanying the texts. The data in the form of linguistic text (news) are then categorized based Van Leeuwen’s Networks in representing social actors and action (2008). Additionally, the data in the form of pictures (images text) are analyzed using Van Leeuwen & Kress Theory on Reading Images (2006). The data are analyzed to reveal the construction of fear in the online news. After the construction is revealed, the study then leans on the notions of critique, power and ideology proposed by Van Leeuwen (2008) to make meaning of what the construction signify.

1.6. Clarification of the Terms

To avoid misunderstanding, the following is the clarification of the terms used:

(1) Fear is defined as the basic human emotion to sense the upcoming dangers or threats and also the ability to face or runaway from those dangers and threats (Masumi, 1993, Furedi 2006, Altheide, 2007, Jim, 2008, Albretch, 2008).

(2) Disaster is an event or a chain of events that threaten and disrupt the lives and livelihoods which are caused either by environmental factors and/or non-environmental factors or human factors to human casualties that resulted environmental damage, loss of property, and psychological impact. (Law no. 24, 2007)

(3) Online news: The electronic version of a newspaper stored at website. Usually the newspaper consists of content found in a conventional newspaper supplemented by devices such as mailing list, e-mail, dyamic content, interactive competitions, and banner adverts. (Ince, 2001)

(4) CDA: Paltridge (2006) elaborates Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as the examination of the use of discourse in relation to its socio-cultural phenomena. It examines the way language is used in the discourse and social and cultural situation where it occurs. Distinctively, Van Dijk explains that CDA is a type of discourse analysis which studies “the way

social power abuse, dominance and inequality are enacted, reproduced and resisted by text and talk in the social and political context. (2008:85)”. (5) Social Actors are the participants in the social practices in one of a number

of roles which are as agents (doers of actions), patients (participants to whom actions are done) and beneficiaries (participants who benefit from the action in positive or negative way) (van Leeuwen in Wodak and Meyer, 2009)

(6) Social Actions are the core of social practices which may or may not be performed in specific order (van Leeuwen in Wodak and Meyer, 2009) (7) Visual “Grammar” is the resources for encoding interpretations of

experience and forms of social interaction in visual images / pictures (Kress and van Leeuwen, 2006 )

(8) Image text is one of semiotic mode mediums where meanings are expressed through the choice between the uses of color or different compositional structures (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2006)

1.7. Organization of the Paper

The paper is organized as follows: CHAPTER I

This chapter contains background of the study, research questions, aims of the study, significance of the study, clarification of the terms, and organization of the paper.

CHAPTER II

It consists of theoretical review that provides a basis for conducting the research problems.

CHAPTER III

This section contains the research methodology, discussing the steps and procedures of the study, and the data resources in conducting the study.

CHAPTER IV

In this part the result of the research will be presented. This chapter contains the research findings and discussion.

CHAPTER V

This last chapter contains the interpretation toward the result of the research in a form of conclusion and suggestion for further research.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter elaborates the research methodology which is employed in the present study. It consists of the research problem, research design, data collection, and data analysis.

3.1. Research Problem

The study is geared toward answering the following research questions: 1. How is fear constructed in the selected articles?

a) How are actors represented in the selected articles?

b) What actions are attributed to the actors in the selected articles? 2. What does the construction signify?

3.2. Research Method

This study is a descriptive qualitative study. It employs a descriptive qualitative method since it deals with data which are rich descriptions and contexts to be explored (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The qualitative approach is chosen since the study fulfills the characteristics of qualitative approach which are “natural background, the writer (human) as the instrument and purposive sampling” (Guba and Lincoln 1985, in Alwasilah, 2008)

In answering the research questions, the study employs van Leeuwen’s Framework: Discourse as the Recontextualization of Social Practice (2008). This framework is employed to reveal the construction of fear in online news (mass media) through critical discourse analysis (Altheide, 1999).

Furthermore, Kress and Van Leeuwen (2006) approach in reading images has also been used to analyze the image texts accompanying the news. The focus of analysis is the vector, participants, color and compositional layout of the image texts. All approaches employed in this study are expected to reveal the construction of fear in online disaster news articles.

3.3. Data Collection

The data were collected from the online news article texts downloaded from

Kompas.com and Detik.com’s website retrieved on April, 10th 2012. They have been

chosen since they are viewed to be representative as Indonesian News Media. The Kompas.com website also allows the readers to track back the news article from 2007. The investigation of news articles from 2008-2011 is important since the data are expected to be comprehensive and grounded. The time period is to show threre is kind consistency in the construction of fear

In collecting the data, first, the online news articles were downloaded and stored in a hard disk. The selected online news articles are five online news about disasters from the Kompas.com and the other fives are obtained from Detik.com. Here is the table that presents the 10 selected online news coverage of disasters taken from Kompas.com and Detik.com.

NO Articles from Kompas.com Articles from Detik.com Date of The Articles Published

1 15 Orang Tertimbun Longsor 4 Korban Tewas Ditemukan Saling Berpelukan

November, 14th 2008 2 Padang Mencekam Kebakaran, Bangunan Runtuh, dan

Mobil Remuk September, 30 th ₂₀₀₉ 3 Bagaikan Tsunami Menyapu Rumah

Warga

Korban Tewas Banjir Bandang di

Wasior Papua Jadi 24 Orang October, 4 th ₂₀₁₀ 4 Merapi Meletus, Warga Panik Dievakuasi ke Barak, Warga Lerang

Merapi Panik October, 26 th ₂₀₁₀ 5 Tsunami 2 Meter Terjang Mentawai Korban Tsunami Mentawai: 154 Orang

Tewas, 400 Hilang October, 26 th ₂₀₁₀

The data have been purposively chosen to represent the most occuring disasters (Earthquake, Volcanic Eruption, Flood, Tsunami and Landslide) in Indonesia (BPBN Website – The Most Occuring Disasters Page, 2012).

Afterward, the online news articles (in the form of web pages) were converted into word text in order to ease the analysis. The unit of analysis of the linguistic text is sentences. Each sentence is, then, counted as a part of data. Additionally, the image texts that accompany the linguistic texts were also downloaded and stored in a hard disk. The collected pictures are also counted as part of image texts data. The data Analysis will be described in the next section.

3.4. Data Analysis

The data for the study are in the form of news article and pictures accompanying the texts. The data in the form of linguistic text (news) are then categorized based on van Leeuwen’s Networks in representing social actors and action (2008). Additionally, the data in the form of pictures (images text) are analyzed using van Leeuwen & Kress Theory on Reading Images (2006). The data are analyzed to reveal the construction of fear in the online news. After the construction is revealed, the study then leans on the notions of critique, power and ideology proposed by van Leeuwen (2008) to make meaning of what the construction signifies.

The study, then, applies three steps of analysis. The first step is identifying the social actors and action in the text. This step shows how actors and action are represented in constructing fear in Indonesian online disaster news. The next step is analyzing the social actors and actions in the text. The actors and actions are categorized based on Van Leeuwen’s category which is social actor and action network. This step involves the analysis of the distribution of actors and actions in the text. It reveals the

amount of each category of social actions in the text. The last step is interpreting the finding of the previous steps of analysis. These analyses are essentials to the interpretation of the text under investigation. They are employed to answer the research questions in the present study.

3.5. Data Presentation

The Example of Social Actor Analysis of Kompas.com article’s “Padang Mencekam”

No Realizations Sentences

Generic/ Specific Reference Individuated/ Assimilated Determinate/ Indeterminate, Diff/Indifferent Nominated/ Categorized Type of Categorization Personalized/

Impersonalized ACTIV./PASS ASSO./DISASSO

Det

1 gempa 7,6 SR

setelah gempa 7,6 SR mengguncang Kota Padang

dan sekitarnya

Spec Indv Det

Diff

Categ Inden Class

Pers Activated Asso

2 Gempa karena gempa tidak _{berpotensi tsunami.} Spec Indv Det Indiff Categ Inden Class Pers Activated Asso

3 Tsunami karena gempa tidak _{berpotensi tsunami.} Gen Indv Det Indiff Categ Inden Class Pers Activated Asso

4 gempa ketika gempa mengguncang Spec Indv _Indiff Det

Categ Inden Class

Pers Activated _Asso

5 kekuatan gempa karena kekuatan gempa

tidak berpotensi tsunami. Spec Indv

Det Indiff Categ Iden Class Impers Obj Somatization Activated Asso

Table 2 The Analysis of the Representation of Actors in the text based on van Leeuwen’s Social Actor Network (2008) Legend:

 Gen/Specific=Generic/Specific Reference

 Assim/Indv=Assimilated/Individuated Actor

 Coll/Aggr=Collected/Aggregated Actor

 Det/Indet=Determinate/Indeterminate Actor

 Diff/Indiff=Differentiated/Indifferentiated Actor

 Categ/Nom=Categorized/Nominated Actor

 Class/Funct/Rel Iden=Classification/Functionalization/Relational Identification

 Pers/Imper=Personalized/Impersonalized Actor

 Obj/Abstrct=Objectivated/Abstracted Actor

 Instrum/Utter Auto/Spatial/Som=Instrumntalization/Utterance Automization/Spatizaliation/Somatization

 Asso/Diasasso=Associated/Disassociated actor

 Activ/Pass=Activated/Passivated Actor

The Example of Social Action analysis of Kompas.com article’s “Padang Mencekam”

No REALISATION SENTENCE MATERIAL/

SEMIOTIC TYPE ACTIV. AGENT. ABSTR.

OVER DET.

1 Mengguncang Situasi Kota Padang terasa sangat mencekam sesaat setelah gempa 7,6 SR

mengguncang Kota Padang dan sekitarnya Material

Trans

Instrum Activated Agent Concrete - 2 Mengepul Terlihat asap mengepul ke udara dari arah bangunan yang runtuh," kata Al

Imran, seorang warga Kota Padang kepada Tribun Material Nontrans Activated Agent Concrete - 3 Mengguncang Puluhan rumah permanen dan semipermanen milik mereka dalam sekejap runtuh _{ketika gempa mengguncang} Material _Instrum Trans Activated Agent Concrete - 4 tidak berpotensi Alarm tsunami tidak berbunyi karena kekuatan gempa tidak berpotensi tsunami Material Nontrans Activated Agent Concrete - 5 tidak berpotensi "Alarm tsunami tidak dibunyikan karena gempa tidak berpotensi tsunami Material Nontrans Activated Agent Concrete -

Table 3 The Analysis of the Representation of Actions in the text based on van Leeuwen’s Social Action -ReactionNetwork (2008)

The Example of Reaction analysis of Kompas.com article’s “Padang Mencekam” REPRESENTATION OF REACTIONS

NO. SENTENCE REACTIONS TYPE ACTIV. AGENT. ABSTR. OVERDET. OBSERVATIO N

1

Situasi Kota Padang terasa sangat mencekam sesaat setelah gempa

7,6 SR mengguncang Kota Padang dan sekitarnya

Mencekam Cogn Deactiv Obj

Deagent

Event Astr - Sufferer

2

"Jarak pandang hanya 500 meter saat saya melarikan motor menuju

rumah dari Jalan Proklamasi menuju Jalan Padang Pasir

Jarak pandang Percept Deactiv Obj

Deagent

Event Concrete - Sufferer

3

Terlihat asap mengepul ke udara dari arah bangunan yang runtuh," kata Al Imran, seorang warga

Kota Padang kepada Tribun

Terlihat

Percept Deactiv Obj

Deagent

Event Concrete - Sufferer

4

Ratusan warga Kampung Baru, Kelurahan Sawahan Timur, Kota

Padang, histeris

Histeris

Cogn Deactiv Obj

Deagent

Event Astr - Sufferer

5

Keadaan tambah mencekam karena ketika hari menjelang malam, listrik pun mati

Mencekam

Cogn Deactiv Obj

Deagent

Event Astr - Sufferer

6 Diperkirakan banyak pengunjung

yang terjebak di dalamnya Diperkirakan Cogn

Deactiv Obj

Deagent

Event Astr - Sufferer

7

Kepala Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah Kota Padang Drs

Dedi Henidal kepada Tribun

Mencekam

Cogn Deactiv Obj

Deagent

8

Hingga saat ini pihaknya turun ke jalan untuk menginformasikan

kepada warga untuk tetap waspada dan berada di luar rumah

untuk antisipasi gempa susulan," ujarnya

Waspada

Cogn Deactiv Obj

Deagent

Event Astr - Sufferer

Antisipasi

Cogn Deactiv Obj

Deagent

Event Astr - Sufferer

Table 4 The Analysis of the Representation of Actions in the text based on van Leeuwen’s Social Action-Reaction Network (2008) Legend:

 Trans/Non-trans=Transactive/Non-Transactive

 Trans-Instrum/Trans/Interact=Transactive Instrumental/Transactive Interactive  Agent/Deagent=Agentizalized/Deagentialized

 Obj/Abstr=Objetivated/Abstracted

THE EXAMPLE OF PADANG EARTHQUAKE IMAGE TEXT ANALYSIS The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis

Picture 4.5 The Accompanying Images of “Padang Mencekam” Kompas.com Article

Data Analysis

The picture is an illustration of an earthquake. They are collapsed walls, pillars and roofs, two brown chairs and and a building in the far back. Judged by the elements of the picture, it is probably a collapsed classroom of a school. From the point of representations, the image is an event which means that the vector is oblique and consists only the goal of the process (van

Leeuwen, 2006). We cannot see the earthquake that “harmed” the building, we can only see

the aftermath of the earthquake. The collapsed walls, pillars and roofs of a classroom of a school are the most salient/foregrounded elements in this picture which means that these elements are the most important (van Leeuwen, 2006). The collapsed classroom is also put in

the centre of picture’s composition to present the destructive effect of an earthquake to catch

the interactive participants’ attention (van Leeuwen, 2006). The white color of the pillars and

the walls represents the innocence of the building since white signifies purity (Kay and McDaniel). The “white” destroyed school buildings could signify “innocence” that was hit by

destroy everything, even the “innocent” one. Furthermore, it strengthen the idea that earthquake is frghtening and fearful since the ruins caused by earthquake are the most salient/foregrounded in the composition Leeuwen, 2006).

The Detik.com Image Text Analysis

Picture 4.6 The Accompanying Images in “Kebakaran, Bangunan Runtuh, Mobil Remuk” Detik.com

Article Data

Analysis

The picture is the aftermath of the earthquake that destroyed Padang on September 5th, 2009. There are collapsed buildings, some cars, and some people gathered outside. This photo is a long shot making the people smaller despite foregrounded in comparison to the destroyed building in the far back which is foregrounded. The face of the people is not clear making it hard to identify them. This maybe intentional as the journalist may not want to attribute the devastasing feeling to certain individual but to people in general. These people are put as the

smallest elements in the picture which means they are considered as “distant others” (van

Leeuwen, 2006). It implies that earthquake sufferers are considered as irrelevant and unimportant to the viewers

and consist only the goal of the process (van Leeuwen, 2006). We cannot see the earthquake

that “harmed” the building, we can only see the aftermath of the earthquake. The smoke from

fire behind the buildings also strengthens the image of destruction after the earthquake. The journalist sets the dark brightness to strengthen the fearful and destructive image of Padang earthquake since dark brightness has connotation of evil and cruelty (van Leeuwen, 2006). As

discussed in Kompas.com analysis, the white building signifies the “innocence”. The

destroyed white building by earthquake may symbolize that earthquake also harms

“innocent” people since white is associated “pureness” and “inncocence”. This picture, then,

signifies the fearful and destructive power of Padang earthquake by presenting the destroyed buildings and chaos caused by it.

The chapter has elaborated the research methodology of present study. The findings and discussions of the study are then presented in Chapter IV.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1. Conclusions

The study is conducted to investigate the construction of fear in selected Kompas.com and Detik.com disaster news articles by analyzing the representations of the social actors, the actions and reactions attributed to them and the news’ accompanying images. It is also geared toward answering the signification of the construction of fear in the texts which lead to the main notions of CDA (power asymmetry, ideology and critique).

This study finds that there are seven social actors in the texts. Total representations of social actors are 372 representations with 306 (82,6%) inclusions and 66 exclusion (17,74%). In addition, there are 336 actions and reactions attributed to them with 289 actions (86%) and 47 reactions (14%).

The actors are disasters, sufferers, affected infrastructures, local government, national governments, experts, and journalists. The forces of natural phenomenon that bring destruction, death, loss and chaos such as earthquake, tsunami, landslide, eruption, and flash-flood are referred as “Disasters” in the analysis. In addition, the people who receive direct impact of disasters are referred as “Sufferer” while the infrastructures that receive the direct impact from the disaster are referred as “Affected infrastructures”. The local authoritative power that includes the heads of the government, the local rescue and medical team and their tools to help the disaster

victims are referred as “Local Government”. Meanwhile, if the local government cannot handle the situation after the disaster hits, the higher authoritative (the head of the government, the rescue and medical team and their tools and equipments) will come to help the local governments. It implies that the occurred disaster is considered as a “national disaster”. This higher authoritative is then referred as “National

Government”. There is also a scholar who elaborates his/her scientific details related

to the occurred disaster. This scholar is then referred as “Expert” in the analysis. Finally, the men behind the disaster reporting who are responsible to the information and messages of the news are referred as “Journalist”.

Based on the analyzed data, it is found that “Disasters” tend to be represented as highly activated, specified, individuated, determinate, indifferenciated and associated actors. In addition, the actions are attributed to them are instrumental transactive material, activated, agentialized and concretization actions. Moreover, the sufferers tend to be highly subjected, generic, assimilated (collectivized and aggregated), determinate, indifferenciated, categorized based on ethnics and associated actors. The actions attributed to them are non transactive material, activated, agentialized and concretization actions. The reactions attribute to the sufferers tends to be negative emotions such as “fear” and “panic”.

Furthermore, the local governments tends to be highly activated, specified, individuated (when taking the role of head of government), assimilated (when taking the role as the rescue and medical team), indifferenciated, associated, nominated (when taking the role of head of government), functionalized (when taking the role as

the rescue and medical team). The actions that attributed to them are interactive and instrumental material, quotation non behavioral semiotic, activated, agentialized and concretization. Additionally, the reactions attributed to them tends to be cognitive such as “consider”, “think” and negative emotion such as “fear” and “panic”.

Fear is, then constructed by representing disasters as the mighty entities but fearful and destructive (personalized, highly activated, specified, identified by their mighty and fearful physical appearances). They are attributed to instrumental transactive instrumental material actions that mostly damage the human infrastructures and interactive material actions that cause human death and injury. Moreover, the sufferers are represented by the journalists as the victims of disasters’ “destructive actions” (highly subjected, personalized, categorized based on their origins and ethics). The sufferers are also distanced away from the readers (generalized) meaning that they are only a horde and statistics of disasters victim (collectivized and aggregated).

The scheme to frame disasters as mighty yet dangerous entities are also strengthen by the reactions to sufferers, local and national governments. Most reactions attributed to them are negative reactions such as “fear” and panic. It occurs because “as the power of social actions decrease, the amount of emotive reactions to them increase (van Leeuwen (2008:56)”

The notion to represent disasters as the recognizable and dangerous threats is also supported by the elaboration of scientific facts about the disasters. Experts’

elaborations tend to be semiotic quotation action to enhance the credibility of disaster embedded representations (van Leewen, 2008).

However, when there is evil, there are always good. The ones that play the role as “heroes” in the construction of fear in the texts under investigation are local and national government. They took two roles: a) when they are individuated, nominated (formalization or imformalization) and functionalization as the “the man in charge”, they play as the head government who control the rescue and medical team b) when they are assimilated (collectivized/aggregated), functionalized, they play as the rescue and medical teams that come to disasters sites. Local and governments actions are also instrumental and interactive material actions just like disasters’ actions. However, their actions tend be represented in more positive way since their actions are used to help disaster victims.

5.2. Suggestions for Further Research

The study of fear is a frutitful and fascinating to investigate. For further research, the study suggests three ideas to expand the study of fear. First, the future researchers can enlarge the scopes of the research by utilizing more or different objects such us printed media, advertisements and film about fear. Second, the further investigation of other sources of fear is encouraged such as crime, terrorism, mass-chaos or even the slimming and skin whitening ads. Third, the use of different tools for the analysis is also such as systemic functional linguistics, an appraisal system or

multi modal analysis tool is also possible. All the future research are expected to present the deeper and complete understanding of fear, humans and their society.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE OF APPROVAL ... Error! Bookmark not defined. STATEMENT ... Error! Bookmark not defined. PREFACE ... Error! Bookmark not defined. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... Error! Bookmark not defined. ABSTRACT ... Error! Bookmark not defined. ABSTRACT ... Error! Bookmark not defined. (Bahasa Indonesia version) ... Error! Bookmark not defined. TABLE OF CONTENTS ... Error! Bookmark not defined. LIST OF TABLES ... Error! Bookmark not defined. LIST OF FIGURES ... Error! Bookmark not defined. LIST OF APPENDICES ... 6 CHAPTER I ... Error! Bookmark not defined. INTRODUCTION... Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.1. Background ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.2. Research Questions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.3. Aims of the Study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4. Significances of the study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5. Methodology ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5.1. Research Method ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5.2. Data Collection ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5.3. Data Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.6. Clarification of the Terms ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.7. Organization of the Paper ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

CHAPTER II ... Error! Bookmark not defined. THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.1. Mass Media ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.2. Mass Media and Fear ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.3. The overview of the online news (Kompas.com and Detik.com)Error! Bookmark not

defined.

2.3.1. Kompas Media Online ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.3.2. Detik Media Online ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.4.2. Earthquake ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.3. Tsunami ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.4. Volcano Eruption ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.5. Landslide ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.6. Flood ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.5. Representation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.6. Discourse and Discourse Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.7. Critical Discourse Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.8. Van Leeuwen’s Framework: Discourse as the Recontextualization of Social Practice ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9. Representing Social Actors ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.1. Inclusion and Exclusion... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.2. Role Allocation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.3. Genericisation and Specification ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.4. Assimilation and Individualisation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.5. Association and Dissociation... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.6. Indetermination and Differentiation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.7. Nomination and Categorization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.8. Functionalization and Identification ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.9. Impersonalisation and Personalisation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.10. Overdetermination ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.10. Representing Social Action ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.11 Van Leeuwen’s Social Action Network ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.11.1. Reactions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.2. Material and Semiotic Actions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.3. Objectivation and Descriptivization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.4. Deagentialization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.5. Generalization and Abstraction ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.6. Overdetermination ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.12. Visual Representation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.12.1. Participants ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.12.2. Compositional Layout ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.14. Previous Study of The Representation of Disaster using CDAError! Bookmark not

defined.

2.15. Previous Studies using Van Leeuwen’s FrameworkError! Bookmark not defined. CHAPTER III ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

3.1. Research Problem ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2. Research Method ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.3. Data Collection ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.4. Data Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.5. Data Presentation... Error! Bookmark not defined.

CHAPTER IV... Error! Bookmark not defined. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.1. General Findings ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.1. The Representation of the Social Actors in the Investigated Online NewsError!

Bookmark not defined.

4.1.2. The Exclusions of the Social Actors in the Investigated Online NewsError! Bookmark

not defined.

4.1.3. The Inclusions of the Social Actors in the Investigated Online NewsError! Bookmark

not defined.

4.1.4. The Role allocation of the Social Actors in the Investigated Online NewsError!

Bookmark not defined.

4.1.5. Activation and Passivation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.6. Genericization/Specificifization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.7. Individuation/Assimilation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.8. Indetermination and Differentiation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.9. Nomination and Categorization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.10. Personalization and Impersonalization .... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.11. Association and Disassociation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.12. Overdetermination ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2. The Representations of the Social Actions Attributed to the Social Actors in the Online News Investigated. ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2.1. The Reactions Attributed to The Social Actors in The Investigated Online News. ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2.2. The Actions Attributed to The Social Actors in The Online News Investigated Error!

4.2.4. Semiotic Actions... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.5. Activation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.6 Agentialization... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.7. Concretetizations ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.8. Overdetermination ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.4. The Visual Representations in the Image Accompaying the Selected Online News Error!

Bookmark not defined.

4.3.1 WASIOR FLASH-FLOOD IMAGE TEXTS ANALYSISError! Bookmark not

defined.

The Kompas.com image text analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Detik.com image text analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.3.2 MERAPI ERUPTION IMAGE TEXTS ANALYSISError! Bookmark not defined. The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Detik.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.3 PADANG EARTHQUAKE IMAGE TEXT ANALYSISError! Bookmark not

defined.

The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Detik.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.4 MENTAWAI TSUNAMI COVERAGE .... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Detik.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.5 CIANJUR LANDSLIDE IMAGE TEXTS ANALYSISError! Bookmark not

defined.

The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Detik.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.4. Discussion ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

CHAPTER V ... Error! Bookmark not defined. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

5.1. Conclusions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.2. Suggestions for Further Research ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Bibliography ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Kompas.com Website (1) Error! Bookmark not defined.

Figure 2 Kompas.com Website (2) Error! Bookmark not defined.

Figure 3 Detik.com Website (1) Error! Bookmark not defined.

Figure 4 Detik.com Website (2) Error! Bookmark not defined.

Figure 5 TheSocial Actor Network (Van Leeuwen, 2008:52)Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 6 The Social Action Network: The Representation of Actions and Reactions (Van

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 The Online News Reports

Appendix 2 The Accompanying Online News Images Appendix 3 The Social Actors Analysis

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE OF APPROVAL ... Error! Bookmark not defined. STATEMENT ... Error! Bookmark not defined. PREFACE ... Error! Bookmark not defined. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... Error! Bookmark not defined. ABSTRACT ... Error! Bookmark not defined. ABSTRACT ... Error! Bookmark not defined. (Bahasa Indonesia version) ... Error! Bookmark not defined. TABLE OF CONTENTS ... Error! Bookmark not defined. LIST OF TABLES ... Error! Bookmark not defined. LIST OF FIGURES ... Error! Bookmark not defined. LIST OF APPENDICES ... 6 CHAPTER I ... Error! Bookmark not defined. INTRODUCTION... Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.1. Background ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.2. Research Questions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.3. Aims of the Study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4. Significances of the study ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5. Methodology ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5.1. Research Method ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5.2. Data Collection ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.5.3. Data Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.6. Clarification of the Terms ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.7. Organization of the Paper ... Error! Bookmark not defined. CHAPTER II ... Error! Bookmark not defined. THEORETICAL FOUNDATION ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.1. Mass Media ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.2. Mass Media and Fear ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.3. The overview of the online news (Kompas.com and Detik.com)Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.3.1. Kompas Media Online ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.3.2. Detik Media Online ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.4. The Facts about Indonesia and Its Surrounding DisastersError! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.1. Definition of the Disasters... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.4.2. Earthquake ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.3. Tsunami ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.4. Volcano Eruption ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.5. Landslide ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.4.6. Flood ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.5. Representation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.6. Discourse and Discourse Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.7. Critical Discourse Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.8. Van Leeuwen’s Framework: Discourse as the Recontextualization of Social Practice

... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9. Representing Social Actors ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.1. Inclusion and Exclusion... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.2. Role Allocation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.3. Genericisation and Specification ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.4. Assimilation and Individualisation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.5. Association and Dissociation... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.6. Indetermination and Differentiation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.7. Nomination and Categorization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.8. Functionalization and Identification ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.9. Impersonalisation and Personalisation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.9.10. Overdetermination ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.10. Representing Social Action ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.11 Van Leeuwen’s Social Action Network ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.1. Reactions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.2. Material and Semiotic Actions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.3. Objectivation and Descriptivization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.4. Deagentialization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.5. Generalization and Abstraction ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.11.6. Overdetermination ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.12. Visual Representation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.12.1. Participants ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.12.2. Compositional Layout ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.13. Previous Studies on Media and Emotion (Fear, Risk and Mourning)Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.14. Previous Study of The Representation of Disaster using CDAError! Bookmark not defined.

2.15. Previous Studies using Van Leeuwen’s FrameworkError! Bookmark not defined. CHAPTER III ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.1. Research Problem ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.2. Research Method ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.3. Data Collection ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.4. Data Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.5. Data Presentation... Error! Bookmark not defined. CHAPTER IV... Error! Bookmark not defined. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.1. General Findings ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.1. The Representation of the Social Actors in the Investigated Online NewsError! Bookmark not defined.

4.1.2. The Exclusions of the Social Actors in the Investigated Online NewsError! Bookmark not defined.

4.1.3. The Inclusions of the Social Actors in the Investigated Online NewsError! Bookmark not defined.

4.1.4. The Role allocation of the Social Actors in the Investigated Online NewsError! Bookmark not defined.

4.1.5. Activation and Passivation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.6. Genericization/Specificifization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.7. Individuation/Assimilation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.8. Indetermination and Differentiation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.9. Nomination and Categorization ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.10. Personalization and Impersonalization .... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.11. Association and Disassociation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.12. Overdetermination ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2. The Representations of the Social Actions Attributed to the Social Actors in the Online News Investigated. ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2.1. The Reactions Attributed to The Social Actors in The Investigated Online News. ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2.2. The Actions Attributed to The Social Actors in The Online News Investigated Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.2.4. Semiotic Actions... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.5. Activation ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.6 Agentialization... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.7. Concretetizations ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.8. Overdetermination ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.4. The Visual Representations in the Image Accompaying the Selected Online News Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.3.1 WASIOR FLASH-FLOOD IMAGE TEXTS ANALYSISError! Bookmark not defined.

The Kompas.com image text analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Detik.com image text analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

4.3.2 MERAPI ERUPTION IMAGE TEXTS ANALYSISError! Bookmark not defined. The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

The Detik.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.3 PADANG EARTHQUAKE IMAGE TEXT ANALYSISError! Bookmark not defined.

The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Detik.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.4 MENTAWAI TSUNAMI COVERAGE .... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Detik.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.3.5 CIANJUR LANDSLIDE IMAGE TEXTS ANALYSISError! Bookmark not defined.

The Kompas.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. The Detik.com Image Text Analysis ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.4. Discussion ... Error! Bookmark not defined. CHAPTER V ... Error! Bookmark not defined. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

5.1. Conclusions ... Error! Bookmark not defined. 5.2. Suggestions for Further Research ... Error! Bookmark not defined. Bibliography ... Error! Bookmark not defined. Appendices Error! Bookmark not defined.

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Kompas.com Website (1) Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 2 Kompas.com Website (2) Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 3 Detik.com Website (1) Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 4 Detik.com Website (2) Error! Bookmark not defined.

Figure 5 TheSocial Actor Network (Van Leeuwen, 2008:52)Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 6 The Social Action Network: The Representation of Actions and Reactions (Van

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 The Online News Reports

Appendix 2 The Accompanying Online News Images Appendix 3 The Social Actors Analysis