Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Conference
Location
About APSA
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
How would authoritarian regimes propagandize sovereignty crises to domestic audiences? Previous studies on media representation of separatist movements showed that the state generally adopted two framing strategies: victimizing the state and highlighting ethnic or religious boundaries between “us” and “them”. However, the situation in the Chinese context became trickier with its narrative of a harmonious and powerful state. Previous research on Chinese media representation of Xinjiang, Tibet, Taiwan, and Hong Kong also indicates this complexity by finding that Chinese state-owned media adopt a more inclusive narrative and depict the central government as the head of a large family. Based on the case study of the Chinese National Daily Broadcast’s reports on the 2019 Hong Kong protest, I find that CCP emphasizes the boundaries between “us” and “them” based on differences in political stances rather than demographic factors. Moreover, rather than victimizing itself, China framed itself as a paternalistic, benevolent, and caring regime which tolerates the local chaos and supports the development of Hong Kong. This research contributes to theories on framing strategy and crisis management of authoritarian regimes.