Discursive framing in private and public communication by pro-nuclear corporate, political and regulatory actors following the Fukushima disaster

Abstract

Peer reviewed versionCyswllt i'r cyhoeddiad / Link to publication Dyfyniad o'r fersiwn a gyhoeddwyd / Citation for published version (APA): Beelitz, A., & Merkl-Davies, D. (2019). Discursive framing in private and public communication by pro-nuclear corporate, political and regulatory actors following the Fukushima disaster.1 Discursive framing in private and public communication by pro-nuclear corporate, political and regulatory actors following the Fukushima disaster Purpose -The study examines a case of companies cooperating with the State to prevent a public controversy over nuclear power following the Fukushima disaster and achieve mutually beneficial policy outcomes. It analyses the private and public communication of pro-nuclear corporate, political and regulatory actors.Design/methodology/approach -Drawing on political economy theory, the study examines how actors mobilised power by accessing an existing social network to agree a joint public communication strategy in order to ensure public support for the continuation of nuclear power generation in the UK. It traces discursive frames from their inception in private communication to their reproduction in public communication and their dissemination via the media.Findings -The study provides evidence of pro-nuclear actors cooperating behind the scenes to achieve consistent public pro-nuclear messaging. It finds evidence of four discursive frames:(1) avoiding knee-jerk reactions, (2) lessons learned, (3) safety, and (4) nuclear renaissance.In combination, they guide audiences' evaluation of the consequences of the Fukushima disaster for the UK in favour of continuing the commercial use of nuclear energy.Originality/value -The private e-mail exchange between pro-nuclear actors presents a unique opportunity to examine the mobilisation of less visible forms of power in the form of agenda setting (manipulation) and discursive framing (domination) in order to influence policy outcomes and shape public opinion on nuclear energy. This is problematic because it constitutes a lack of transparency and accountability on part of the State with respect to policy outcomes and restricts the civic space by curtailing the articulation of alternative interests and voices.3 areas in Alaska with their 'frontstage' discourse on environmental protection. In contrast, we examine the 'backstage' corporate political activities in the form of accessing existing pronuclear networks for agenda-setting purposes with the aim of agreeing a joint 'frontstage' public communication strategy on the Fukushima disaster. By tracing discursive frames from their inception in private communication (e-mails) to their reproduction in public communication (corporate, political and regulatory news releases and documents) and their dissemination via the media (newspaper articles), we provide linguistic evidence that pronuclear corporate, political, and regulatory actors cooperated behind the scenes to achieve consistent public pro-nuclear messaging in order to ensure continued public support for the co...

Navigating the Path of Least Resistance to Sustainable, Widespread Adoption of Nuclear Power

“…Nuclear incidents such as Chernobyl and Fukushima have often been followed by a kneejerk political insistence on divestment from nuclear energy as rapidly as possible [93] despite the inherent safety of more modern reactors over those legacy designs that suffered the aforementioned accidents or incidents. This has resulted in, for example, the legally mandated cessation of nuclear generation in Germany during the time of the highest global fossil fuel and energy prices in recent years; these six mothballed reactors [94] could be brought back online with minimal cost and effort to provide >6 GWe of low-carbon power, which would provide ~10% of the nation's use at the time of writing.…”