Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Political leaders in the face of a global crisis.: A comparative case study of Boris Johnson’s and Stefan Löfven’s framing of the second outbreak of COVID-19
University West, School of Business, Economics and IT, Divison of Law, Economics, Statistics and Politics.
University West, School of Business, Economics and IT, Divison of Law, Economics, Statistics and Politics.
2021 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

This thesis aims to identify and analyze the manner in which Prime Ministers Boris Johnson (UK) and Stefan Löfven (Sweden) frame the matter of the Covid outbreak in light of its second onset in 2020. By examining these two actors, we wish to contribute to the already existing literature on political leaders’ crisis rhetoric and to add content to the novel subject of pandemic rhetorics. By utilizing critical textual analysis and framing theory, this thesis identifies and examines themes and patterns of rhetorical structure surrounding the subject of Covid-19. The framing analysis is structured by three analytical points; problem definition, suggested causes and remedies, it will also be analyzed through the scope of integrative complexity theory. The three points will be assessed with measures that indicate in what manner the subject is framed; problem definition - positive or dire. Suggested causes - exogenous or endogenous. Remedies - restorative or reformative. The data for this study consists of 26 speeches made by the two political leaders, four from Löfven and 22 from Johnson. The results show that Stefan Löfven and Boris Johnson frame the outbreak through similar concepts, yet show difference in the variety and extent of integrative complexity; Löfven showing significantly higher levels through keeping a neutral and inclusive standpoint in the three variables, whereas Johnson maintains a more inclined approach with lower levels of integrative complexity by presenting less alternatives and variety in his framings.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2021. , p. 90
Keywords [en]
COVID-19, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Framing Theory, Integrative Complexity
National Category
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-17707Local ID: EIS501OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hv-17707DiVA, id: diva2:1609388
Subject / course
Political science
Educational program
International Programme in Politics and Economics
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2021-12-03 Created: 2021-11-08 Last updated: 2021-12-03Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

By organisation
Divison of Law, Economics, Statistics and Politics
Political Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 463 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf