| Zusammenfassung: | The flood caused by the Buffalo Creek coal mine disaster was one of the worst on record in West Virginia history. This paper examines news coverage of the disaster by two regional newspapers with historically different stances on the coal industry and unions. Specifically, it reviews the dominant frames presented by each newspaper to determine which paper chose to cover the attribution of responsibility/conflict frame most often, and which paper gave it the most prominent placement. This research provides insight into how proximity, ownership, and possible views of a coal company may come into play when covering a disaster involving the most important business industry in the area. It also expands on both disaster coverage and framing scholarship, particularly from a historical perspective. More importantly, it tells the story of those who were affected by the travesty while examining how two key newspapers chose to inform their readers throughout the long road to cleanup and recovery. This is the first known research to review how the media covered the conflict and blame that ensued as tempers flared when residents, media, and others involved searched for answers.
|
|---|