Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
17
result(s) for
"Bloch-Elkon, Yaeli"
Sort by:
Trends: Preventing Terrorism after the 9/11 Attacks
This article reports the American public's assessment of the U.S. government's post-9/11 efforts to prevent further terrorist attacks. It presents poll data from September 11, 2001 to December 31, 2005 and addresses issues such as the degree of confidence Americans have in their government's ability to protect them from further terrorist strikes; the public's evaluation of the effectiveness of actions at home and abroad as a means to prevent terrorism; and the perception of Americans regarding President Bush's and his administration's performance in the area of homeland security.
Journal Article
Donald Trump
During Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy and presidency political discourse in the United States became more hateful and divisive. Threats and actual violence against groups and individuals singled out and demonized by Trump increased. The targets of his verbal attacks were most of all racial, ethnic, and religious minorities, the news media collectively and individual journalists, and well-known politicians, mostly Democrats. There was a rise in bullying incidents in schools against minority students. Assuming that aggressive rhetoric by influential political leaders affect their supporters’ words and deeds, we examined Trump’s online and offline hate speech, the rhetorical reactions of his followers, and the violent consequences suffered by their declared enemies. We found that contrary to an old children’s rhyme (“Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me”) Trump’s aggressive, divisive, and dehumanizing language was seconded by his followers and inflicted directly or indirectly psychological and physical harm to Trump’s declared enemies.
Journal Article
The Polls—Trends: Public Perceptions and the Threat of International Terrorism after 9/11
This article reports on the American public's perceptions of terrorist threats in the post-9/11 era. It presents poll data from September 11, 2001, to the early months of 2010. The report addresses issues including the importance of terrorism as an issue facing the country; concern about terrorist attacks over different time horizons and in different places; the effect of terrorism on respondents personally; and approval of the President and his administration's handling of terrorism. Adapted from the source document.
Journal Article
Media Framing and Foreign Policy: The Elite Press vis-à-vis US Policy in Bosnia, 1992-95
This study assesses the role of the press in shaping US foreign policy towards an international crisis. It explores the scope of attention, positions, and metaframes used by the Washington Post and New York Times, as well as the US administrations announcements, in relation to the Bosnian crisis in its different stages. It is suggested that by discerning and highlighting core US interests and values threatened by the developments in Bosnia - that is, using mainly critical positions and emphasizing humanitarian and security metaframes - the elite press may have pushed the Clinton administration to a more active policy in this crisis. With respect to the differences between the two newspapers, it is found that while both papers expressed criticism of government policy, the Washington Post was much more critical than the New York Times. The main differences between the two papers were in the divergent positions adopted and the different metaframes employed in presenting their respective positions. The central metaframe used by the Washington Post was humanitarian, while the New York Times used primarily frames linked to security and world order. It appears that these two elite papers took upon themselves a dual role in the Bosnia crisis. On the one hand, they served as watchdog' over the administrations behavior - expressing criticism and recommending policy; on the other hand, by using meaningful and familiar metaphors, they played an important explanatory role in the realm of public opinion. Examining the role of the elite press in the Bosnia crisis from a combined perspective of Communication and International Relations studies points to the possibility that besides its other roles, the press may contribute to transforming a crisis from a macro-systemic crisis, hardly noted by the decisionmakers, into a micro-perceptional crisis, receiving higher priority from them.
Journal Article
TRENDS—PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS AND THE THREAT OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM AFTER 9/11
This article reports on the American public's perceptions of terrorist threats in the post-9/11 era. It presents poll data from September 11,2001, to the early months of 2010. The report addresses issues including the importance of terrorism as an issue facing the country; concern about terrorist attacks over different time horizons and in different places; the effect of terrorism on respondents personally; and approval of the President and his administration's handling of terrorism.
Journal Article
The Polls--Trends: Preventing Terrorism After The 9/11 Attacks
This article reports the American public's assessment of the U.S. government's post-9/11 efforts to prevent further terrorist attacks. It presents poll data from September 11, 2001 to December 31, 2005 and addresses issues such as the degree of confidence Americans have in their government's ability to protect them from further terrorist strikes; the public's evaluation of the effectiveness of actions at home and abroad as a means to prevent terrorism; and the perception of Americans regarding President Bush's and his administration's performance in the area of homeland security. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]
Journal Article
US Media and Post-9/11 Human Rights Violations in the Name of Counterterrorism
This article adds to earlier research revealing that the American news media did not discharge their responsibility as a watchdog press in the post-9/11 years by failing to scrutinize extreme and unlawful government policies and actions, most of all the decision to invade Iraq based on false information about Saddam Hussein’s alleged weapons of mass destruction arsenal. The content analyses presented here demonstrate that leading US news organizations, both television and print, did not expressly refer to human rights violations when they reported on the torturing of foreign detainees during “enhanced interrogations” in US-run prison facilities abroad and the killing of civilians, including children, in US drone strikes overseas and outside theaters of war. Moreover, by framing torture and the “collateral damage” caused by drone-launched missile attacks episodically rather than in the context of human rights, the news media failed to alert the American public to the grave humanitarian violations in the so-called war on terrorism during the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations.
Journal Article
Free Hand Abroad, Divide and Rule at Home
Under unipolarity, the immediate costs and risks of war are more likely to seem manageable for a militarily dominant power like the U.S. This does not necessarily make the use of force cheap or wise, but it means that the costs and risks attendant on its use are comparatively indirect, long term, and thus highly subject to interpretation. Unipolarity, combined with the opportunity created by September 11, opened a space for interpretation that tempted a highly ideological foreign policy cohort to seize on international terrorism as an issue to transform the balance of power both in the international system and in American party politics. This cohort's response to the terrorist attack was grounded in ideological sincerity but also in the routine practice of wedge issue politics, which had been honed on domestic issues during three decades of partisan ideological polarization and then extended into foreign policy.
Journal Article
The Polls-Trends: Preventing Terrorism After The 9/11 Attacks
This article reports the American public's assessment of the U.S. government's post-9/11 efforts to prevent further terrorist attacks. It presents poll data from September 11, 2001 to December 31, 2005 and addresses issues such as the degree of confidence Americans have in their government's ability to protect them from further terrorist strikes; the public's evaluation of the effectiveness of actions at home and abroad as a means to prevent terrorism; and the perception of Americans regarding President Bush's and his administration's performance in the area of homeland security. Adapted from the source document.
Journal Article