Nord Streami torujuhtme representatsioon Eesti päevalehtedes 2007. ja 2008. aastal
Date
2009
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Tartu Ülikool
Abstract
Description
The purpose of this bachelor thesis (Representation of the Nord Stream Gas Pipeline in
Estonian Daily Newspapers in 2007 and in 2008) is to analyze if two major Estonian daily
newspapers Postimees and Eesti Päevaleht shaped public opinion about the Nord Stream gas
pipeline in 2007 and in 2008. The general purpose of this bachelor thesis is to analyze the
representation of the Nord Stream gas pipeline in Estonian daily newspapers. One of the main
aims of this thesis is to examine when was this topic most actively talked about and when it
lost its role. But this thesis also concentrates on finding out what was the dominant attitude of
the newspapers towards this topic, who were the main spokespersons and what arguments
they used when expressing their support or resistance towards the development of the
Russian-German gas pipeline. This thesis is trying to find out what kind of public opinion
about Nord Steam was constructed in the opinion articles and in the editorials of daily
newspapers.
Different source materials and documents have been used as sources for the theoretical
framework of this thesis. D. McQuail’s „Mass Communication Theory“, J. W. Daring’s and
E. M. Roger’s „Agenda-Setting“, R. Waldhal’s „The Development of Public Opinion“ and
other theoretical works have been used in this thesis. In order to analyze this topic the
quantitative and qualitative content survey methods have been used.
In order to find answers to hypotheses and questions raised all the articles, which were
published in Postimees and in Eesti Päevaleht in 2007 and in 2008 and that talked about Nord
Stream were considered as part of the general selection. 101 articles that discussed the Nord
Steam topic were published in 2007 and in 2008. 34 of these articles were opinion articles or
editorials. Opinion articles and editorials have been taken under closer examination and have
been more thoroughly analyzed in this thesis.
The background information of the Nord Steam gas pipeline topic and the connection of this
pipeline with Estonia are presented in the theoretical overview chapter. This chapter also
explains what is the role of media in a society and talks about the construction and essence of
agenda-setting and public opinion.
Results of the analysis indicate that 101 articles were published in Postimees and in Eesti
Päevaleht that discussed the Nord Stream gas pipeline topic during the period of 1st January
2007 to 31st December 2008. The topic was most actively talked about in September 2007
when 36 articles were published. Articles that discussed issues related to the Nord Steam gas
pipeline were also popular in October and in April 2007. During 2008 the topic lost its appeal
and it was not anymore actively talked about in daily newspapers.
More than half of the media texts published were news. 25 opinion articles, nine editorials
and eight articles on the opinion pages were published during the period under examination.
During those months when most of the media texts were published, the greatest number of
stories appeared also on the opinion pages.
As it appeared during the analysis only three authors wrote more than one story. But it is
possible to bring out spokespersons according to spheres of activity. Journalists or columnists
wrote the greatest number of opinion articles. They published ten articles. Nine articles were
written by scientists, experts or analytics. Politicians as well as the representatives of the
category “other” wrote both three articles. 19 opinion articles were written by Estonians and
in the case of six articles the author represented some other nationality.
All together 15 articles, which is 60% of the total number of articles under examination,
expressed resistance towards the Nord Stream pipeline. Only five articles or 20% were in
favour of the pipeline and in five articles the clear attitude towards the pipeline was not
pointed out. It also appeared that mostly Estonians expressed opposition towards the Nord
Stream gas pipeline and more foreigners were in favour of the pipeline.
Three editorials supported the Nord Stream gas pipeline and only two editorials were against
the pipeline. In four cases a clear attitude towards the topic was not expressed in the
editorials. Although more editorials were in favour of the gas pipeline than against it the
qualitative analysis of the editorials showed that negative argument are more frequently used
and these negative comparisons and arguments are stronger than favourable statements. For
several times the Nord Stream gas pipeline is portrayed in negative colours. For example it is
compared to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, connected to lobbying, to political strife and to
unanswered questions. Main positive aspects brought out when talking positively about the
gas pipeline were the opportunity to express opinions about the questions that concern the
building of the pipeline and the aspect that the pipeline will save Europe from energy hunger.
The increase in Europe’s energy security was mentioned four times as an argument by those
in favour of the gas pipeline. The argument of saying no and by that losing all opportunities to
have a say in the matters that concern the building of the pipeline was mentioned thrice. Even
if the pipeline is not in Estonian waters the fact that it is in the Baltic Sea does not eliminate
possible dangers it might cause. Russia is a risk to security with or without the pipeline, thus
the gas pipeline does not make matters worse. All together supportive arguments can be found
in nine different subject fields.
The argument according to which the Russian battle fleet is going to guard the pipeline and
thereby Russia’s military presence at the Baltic Seal will increase and this in turn will give an
intelligence advantage to Russia was used five times. The argument, which stated that Europe
is too dependent on Russia’s energy supply and this dependence should be decreased, was
also mentioned five times. The argument referring to the fact that Nord Stream is not a
common European project and it will divide the European Union and the Baltic Sea region
was also mentioned. All together counterarguments representing 17 different subject fields
were used, hence it can be concluded that arguments against the gas pipeline prevailed in
Estonian daily newspapers.
In the chapter where discussion and conclusions are presented some possibilities how to
develop this work further are also offered. One possibility is use the same hypothesis as in
this thesis and to compare according to them media texts that have been published in other
countries connected to this project. Another possibility is to enlarge the selection of the
articles by adding texts published in 2009 and by interviewing the editors-in-chief of the
opinion pages with the purpose to find out how editorials and opinion articles are written.
In conclusion it can be said that mainly negative opinions about the Nord Stream project were
constructed in Estonian daily newspapers. Certainly in a way this influenced the decision
made by Estonian government to forbid the Nord Stream project research in Estonian
economic zone. Thus it can be said that Estonian daily newspapers still participate in
influencing and developing public opinion and in agenda-setting.
Keywords
bakalaureusetööd