The discourse of defeat in Armenian online media

Following the second Karabakh war, a discourse on the reasons for the defeat arose in the Armenian public domain. Online media played a key role in publicizing and reflecting existing polarized opinions. The study of the editorial policy of Armenian online media outlets will make it possible to highlight the dominant narratives and assess the role of media in public discourses.

I conducted a small research project aimed at revealing the framing mechanisms and patterns of narratives from November 10 to December 31, 2020. Specifically, content and frame analysis of three Armenian online media outlets - Tert.am, Armtimes.com, and Hetq.am - were carried out. The research data, however, is not statistically representative. 

Key findings

The total number of news pieces on the issue was 266:

1. Tert.am- 188 articles
2. Armtimes.com- 57 articles
3. Hetq.am- 24 articles

The distribution of thematic content in the selected time period is presented in Graph 1

Graph 1. 

Tert.am maintained an interest in the topic throughout the study period. Armtimes.com had a lot of publications in the first ten days and from December 15 to 20, which coincides with some political events of domestic importance. Hetq.am referred to the topic only in the first stage of our research period.

For the most part, the observed articles (see Graph 2) consisted of opinions, comments, and direct quotes. 

Graph. 2

Tert.am, in comparison, more often presented materials from other platforms. Armtimes.com and Hetq.am made relatively fewer direct quotes, although, in general, they were mainly based on the opinions of third parties.

Graph. 3

Tert.am generally reproduced the thematic articles from other sources. One noticeable difference was that only a few articles on Tert.am had information about the author. Armtimes.com most often quoted official sources. Hetq.am, compared to the other two websites, more often quoted foreign sources.

Graph. 4

The framing of thematic articles differed significantly. Apparently, Tert.am adopted an anti-government editorial policy while Armtimes.com supported the government. Hetq.am had both pro-government and opposition theses with the former dominating.

Graph. 5 Tert.am’s messages

Graph. 6 Armtimes.com’s messages

Graph. 7. Hetq.am’s messages

Conclusion

• Tert.am showed the most interest in the topic during the respective period. Armtimes.com activity coincided with tense domestic political events. Hetq.am was more active in the first part of the study period. 
• Most of the articles in all media outlets were copied from social media posts presenting user’s opinions and comments. Independent analysis was almost non-existent.
• Tert.am and Armtimes.com fully expressed the political views of their owners. Tert.am framed the defeat discourse in such a way that the government was portrayed as having betrayed the country and having failed the negotiation process; and if the war had been stopped earlier, Armenia would have had better results. According to Armtimes.com frames, it was impossible to end the war with better results because of the previous mistakes of former governments.
• Both opposition and pro-government theses were circulated on Hetq.am, but the latter was predominant. The theses "the negotiation process has always been to the detriment of Armenia", "it was impossible to end the war with a different outcome" are from the pro-government field, and the thesis "The authorities betrayed the country" was taken from the opposition discourse

  Davit Matevosyan