Framing in Pakistani and Indian Discourse at the United Nations General Assembly: A Political Discourse Analysis

Abstract

Frames as mental structures allow us to understand reality and sometimes to create what we  take to be the truth. Framing refers to the construction of communication, its language, visuals, messengers and the way it indicates to the listener or spectators how to construct and categorize novel information. The present study examines the typology of frames in political discourse and especially it scrutinized how and why particular frames were used by the speakers in their discourse. For this purpose, four speeches delivered by Pakistani and Indian representatives at the United Nations General Assembly from two consecutive years, 2015 & 2016, have been selected and analyzed using the framework given by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000). The frames that were used in this study are based on the five frames identified by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000); the human-interest frame, the conflict frame, the economic consequences frame, the responsibility frame, and the morality frame. Frames were identified and coded concerning designed questions. The analysis showed that the most used frame was human interest frame  while the morality frame was used the least of all. The conflict frame was also among the dominants in which certain issues were highlighted meanwhile a humane view was also presented for the eradication of the cause in harmony with the masses. The proposition of a framework based on generic framing theory and political discourse analysis exposed a dominant use of frames in political discourse.