Moral justifications in the media debate on globalization in Finland, 1995–2014

Abstract

AbstractThis article presents a methodological tool, Justifications Analysis, and uses it to analyze the debate on globalization in Finnish mass media between 1995 and 2014. Justifications Analysis focuses on the moral principles evoked to justify arguments, something that tends to be overlooked by most established approaches to media content analysis. Regarding the frequency of coverage, it is found that the debate in Finland deviates from the global issue attention cycle and lasts longer, driven by national key events. Concerning the groups of speakers, the Global Justice Movement is found to have initiated the debate; the elites are divided into two groups, one defending and the other opposing the movement. Moral justifications are used extensively. All parties to the debate justify their arguments by referring to the common good, but disagree over whether it should be defined in terms of market worth, equality and democracy, national values, or some combination of these.