• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.43
• /
• pp.314-358
• /
• 2008

This study examined how the meaning of news stories covering the split of national opinion was constructed in the media to represent social conflicts. To clarify the function of the term 'split of national opinion' as an ultimate term, this study examined the meaning of the term in the context of both text and society. Ten newspapers were included in the content analysis. The frequency of words used for the purpose of metaphor and equivalent in describing the split of national opinion was calculated to determine their meaning in the textual context. The frequency of incidents and subjects involved in allegedly causing the split of national opinion was calculated to determine their meaning in the social context. The results of this study are summarized as follows: First, the term 'split of national opinion' was coined by the newspapers as a metaphor of disease, disaster, and cost. The attitudes or the ways in which the split of national opinion was dealt with were generally negative and passive. Second, the term 'split of national opinion' was dealt with an equivalent status of such terms as national policy, national loss, societal problems, and ideology. Third, each newspaper reported that the split of national opinion had been caused by certain subjects, which indicates that each newspaper had its own position of viewing who was the key player in splitting the national opinion. The implication was also discussed that the use of the ultimate term would incur the unbalance of power between participants and the existing players, which would make individuals or groups who were involved in the social actions excluded and make the newspapers exercise the rhetorical power as news media.