This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Kraidy, M. M. Articles by Goeddertz, T. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Transnational Advertising and International Relations: US Press Discourses on the Benetton ‘We on Death Row’ Campaign

SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL SERVICE, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, DC, USA kraidy{at}american.edu

Tamara Goeddertz

SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE AND NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, USA

This article analyzes Benetton’s 2000 ‘We on Death Row’ advertising campaign as a site of cultural production where ideological differences on capital punishment between the United States and Europe are played out. We examine the massmediated public discourse framing the campaign in the US prestige press. More specifically, we conduct a textual analysis of news stories and editorials about the campaign in the Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Chicago Tribune. Our analysis uncovered three themes, denigration, commodification and othering, that the press uses to discredit the campaign. The discussion focuses on how national hegemonic media frames ‘domesticate’ foreign social ideals.

Key Words: capital punishment • Europe • globalization • hegemony • media framing • transnational advertising

Media, Culture & Society, Vol. 25, No. 2, 147-165 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/01634437030252001


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Morris Interpretability and social power, or, why postmodern advertising works Media Culture Society, September 1, 2005; 27(5): 697 - 718. [Abstract] [PDF]