Mixed messages of solidarity in the Mediterranean: Turkey,the EU and the Spanish press

Abstract

This study examines the portrayal of Turkey as a potential EU member in the media narrative of Spain’s El País from 1999 to 2010. Spain has been a consistent advocate of Turkey’s possible accession on a political level, and, according to survey data, support from the Spanish population is higher than in most other EU countries. The study investigates how newspaper coverage portrays support for and opposition to Turkey’s bid for membership, and the extent to which the newspaper provides coverage of domestic debate on the issue. Using a Critical Discourse Analysis framework, this article examines the selection of topics and speakers, and identifies the referential strategies and metaphors used to refer to Turkey, Turkish leaders and Turkey’s candidature. The analysis reveals that little domestic debate has evolved on the issue and Turkey, despite official support, is still depicted as Europe’s cultural ‘Other’.

Keywords

Critical discourse analysis European Union (EU)EU enlargement identity metaphors news media othering Spanish press Turkey

Introduction

The prospect of Turkey’s accession to the European Union (EU) has been the source of greater contention than any other country aspiring to membership.¹ Despite Turkey’s integration into numerous European political and security fora, its long-standing application for EU membership and the many Turks that are now EU residents or citizens, Turkey continues to be portrayed as Europe’s cultural and geographical ‘Other’ on the eastern border. Public support for Turkey’s integration into the EU is lower than for any other country seeking membership, including Kosovo and Albania (European Commission, 2008b). The news media are the primary channel for public access to the political debate on Turkey’s place in the EU. Media filtering and selective presentation of information contributes to the shaping of public perceptions of individuals, groups and events (Kim et al., 2002; McCombs and Shaw, 1972; Van Dijk, 1989). Spain has been a consistent advocate of Turkey’s possible accession on a political level, and, according to recent survey data from Transatlantic Trends (2010), public support in Spain is higher than in most other EU countries. This study investigates how Spain’s main newspaper, the centre-left El País,² frames Turkey’s potential accession to the EU. Unlike France or Germany, successive Spanish governments have expressed conditional support for Turkey’s potential membership, and, according to EU-wide surveys, Spain has among the highest levels of public support for EU enlargement in general (European Commission, 2009) and for the accession of Turkey (Transatlantic Trends, 2010).

Spanish print media were selected for analysis because of the country’s extensive experience with democratic reform from the end of the dictatorship in 1975, and its cultural and historical connections with the Maghreb. Several studies have noted similarities between Spain’s trajectory to EU membership and that of Turkey (Chislett, 2009a; Escribano and Lorca, 2004; López Garrido, n.d.; Nieto Solís, 2009). Spain has arguably had less contact with Turkey than have many EU countries. Unlike Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, Spain has no history of receiving Turkish migrant workers, and Turkey is not a traditional destination for Spanish holiday makers. With the Spanish cities of Ceuta and Melilla located in North Africa, Spain is, however, one of the few EU countries to share its border with a predominantly Muslim country; the first official state visit by the recently elected Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy was to neighbouring Morocco. Previous studies have noted the prominence of religion in the formulation of arguments against Turkey’s membership bid in the press coverage in selected EU countries (e.g. Christensen, 2005; Negrine et al., 2008; Tekin, 2010). Spain, however, is unique in the EU in that for over 700 years (711–1492) the Islamic world encompassed parts of the Iberian Peninsula, and vestiges of Islamic heritage are still very present in both the urban landscape and the Spanish language.³ Whilst many argue that Turkey lies beyond Europe’s borders, Nieto Solís (2007: 282) reminds us that, until Spain’s return to democracy, it was not unusual to claim that the Pyrenees marked the beginning of Europe. In light of this, it may be posited that the framing of Turkey’s bid for EU membership by the Spanish press may differ from that in the press in EU countries such as the UK, Germany and France.

Purpose

This study explores the rhetorical and linguistic means used by Spain’s leading daily newspaper over a 12-year period to portray Turkey as an aspiring and official EU candidate country. The analysis considers how the following micro-level strategies contribute to the newspaper’s framing of the issue (Richardson, 2007): topic selection, referential or nomination strategies to refer to individuals or groups, the attribution of characteristics or qualities through predication, and metaphors. On the macro-level, the analysis considers the framing of discourse through a reporting perspective and the implicit validation of selected viewpoints through the selection of spokespeople or ‘voices’ whose views are represented. These macro- and micro-level linguistic and rhetorical choices result in a coherent ‘reading’ of the article. The study will also evaluate the extent to which an identifiably ‘Spanish’ perspective is articulated by political elites or representatives of other social sectors, or whether Spanish media coverage of Turkey’s candidature essentially reproduces the views of EU officials and member states.

Background: The road to accession

Data for this study date from the year 1999, when Turkey received long-awaited candidate status at the Helsinki Summit. Vocal in support for Turkey was German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, who had to a certain extent taken on Turkey as a ‘client’ (Müftüler-Baç and McLaren, 2003: 21). Following Turkey’s initial success in passing a raft of political reforms in line with the EU acquis, Turkish membership of the EU started to appear a distinct possibility. The discourse of the EU’s political elite polarized; in 2002 former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing pronounced that admitting Turkey ‘would be the end of the European Union’. Considerations of ‘culture’, understood as societal mores, religion and geography, began to be aired more prominently than political or economic considerations. Events in Turkey such as the attempt to criminalize adultery in September 2004 provided convenient ‘evidence’ of Turkey’s inherent cultural difference. Despite the controversy, the EU agreed to open official negotiations with Turkey in October 2005.

By the end of 2010, Turkey had succeeded in closing just one of the 35 chapters comprising the EU acquis. Many are blocked by the EU or by individual EU countries for political reasons. The European Council has blocked eight since December 2006 due to Turkey’s failure to implement the Ankara Protocol and open its ports and airports to Greek Cyprus. France has blocked an additional five chapters believed to render membership inevitable (Chislett, 2009b: 1). The French government led by Nicolas Sarkozy (together with Germany’s Angela Merkel and Austria’s Wolfgang Schüssel) staunchly defended the alternative to membership of a partnership, and the French and Austrian leaders declared their intention to hold a referendum on Turkey’s admission to the EU.

Methodology

This study adheres to the Critical Discourse Analysis approach formulated by Meyer and Wodak (2001), Van Dijk (2001, 2005) and Richardson (2007). It rests upon the premise that news media do not passively reflect a given reality, but instead are agents in constructing perceptions of reality through their selection and coverage of events or issues. Research has suggested that despite the distrust many people have towards the media on account of perceptions of bias, they remain susceptible to its effects (Bruter, 2009), and media coverage of issues can play an important role in influencing public opinion (De Vreese et al., 2008; Kim et al., 2002; McCombs and Shaw, 1972; Maier and Rittberger, 2008). McCombs and Shaw (1972) argue that the media set agendas: readers tend to associate certain topics with a particular issue and certain attributes with key figures or groups due to the salience these features receive in reporting. In De Vreese and Boomgaarden (2006), the authors establish a correlation between media coverage of EU affairs and shifts in public opinion on EU enlargement; they conclude that the degree of prominence and the consistency of tone of the news items affect the extent of media influence. The media prime readers to think in a certain way, and the most salient issues on a reader’s mind (after exposure to media reporting) will likely affect that individual’s opinions and decision-making (Kim et al., 2002: 10). Recall may be stronger for some topics than for others. Negatively slanted news items about ‘out-group members’ are better recalled by ‘in-group members’ than items with a positive slant (Schuck and De Vreese, 2006: 21; Van Dijk, 1989: 203). Using the out-group concept to frame an issue is likely to result in an increase in public opposition (Azrout et al., 2010). The media thus contribute to the construction of beliefs about people, groups, political affairs and the nature of our social environment, particularly when an individual’s critical reading of ‘news’ is curbed by the restraints imposed by the inevitable limitations of personal experience and inadequate ‘factual’ knowledge or low levels of interest (Schuck and de Vreese, 2006: 21).

The capacity of the media to mould public opinion through the framing of an issue has important political implications. A good example of this is the French (and Austrian) government’s declaration that a public referendum will determine the country’s support for Turkey’s accession. The French media’s negative portrayal of Turkey’s candidature has been the subject of extensive scholarly analysis (Tekin, 2008, 2010) and popular support for Turkey’s candidature in France is among the lowest of all EU member states.⁴ Although there has been no indication that Spain would consider such a move, other EU member states may follow the example of France and Austria.

Earlier work has examined the portrayal of Turkey’s EU candidature in newspapers in the UK, Greece, France, Slovenia, Germany and the USA (Aksoy, 2009; Koenig et al., 2006; Negrine, 2008; Negrine et al., 2008; Schneeberger, 2009; Tekin, 2008, 2010; Walter and Albert, 2009). These studies have shed light on the linguistic resources used to portray Turkey as the embodiment of the EU’s ‘Other’ on the eastern frontier. The data for these studies were usually limited to newspaper editions published around key dates pertaining to the process of Turkey’s attainment of candidate status (December 1999) and the commencement of negotiations (October 2005). Schneeberger (2009) broadens her analysis to compare press coverage over a 12-month period prior and subsequent to the beginning of official negotiations with Turkey. The current study examines the portrayal of Turkey’s potential EU membership in El País over a 12-year period (1999–2010). The extended time frame enables an examination of how political events in Spain and Turkey impacted on press coverage. The corpus comprises texts published over a five-year period during the centre-right government led by Spain’s José María Aznar (1996–2004) and over a six-year period during the subsequent centre-left government led by José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero (2004–2011). Similarly, the corpus comprises coverage of Turkey prior and subsequent to the election victory in 2002 of the incumbent Justice and Development Party (AKP) led by Tayyip Recip Erdoğan.

Previous studies on the representation of Turkey in European media narratives reveal how the debate on Turkey has shaped and been shaped by the wider debate on EU identity formation. Tekin (2008) identifies a pronounced tendency in the French press to frame Turkey as the ‘Other’, as part of a broader political discourse surrounding the ongoing construction of a collective European identity in France. The EU countries’ differing conceptualizations of the EU project emerge in a comparison of responses by the political elite to Turkey’s potential membership and to press coverage in EU countries. Negrine et al. (2008) find that while the UK press acknowledges the potential liberal economic benefits of Turkey’s accession, such topics were absent in the French and German press. Koenig et al. (2006) maintain that while Turkey’s perceived cultural differences are highlighted in many national media, the implication varies. In the UK, for example, the authors conclude that the press portrayal of Turkey’s difference is not conceived as a threat; rather, universal values are perceived to underpin the stability of a multicultural society. This contrasts with the portrayal of Turkey in France and Germany, where a ‘clash-of-civilizations’ narrative is more audible. Similar differences between the media discourse in the UK compared with France and Germany were also discussed by Wimmel (2006) and Negrine et al. (2008). Cultural considerations of identity have not always been so prominent in the media. Analysing the German and British press, Walter and Albert (2009) observe that while current media discourse foregrounds the issue of the EU’s and Turkey’s identity, questions of identity did not arise during political debates on Turkey’s accession to the European Economic Community (EEC) in the 1950s and 1960s.

Analysis and results

To examine how Turkey has been portrayed to the Spanish public over a 12-year period, articles published between the years 1999 and 2010 containing the words ‘Turkey’ and ‘European Union’ or ‘EU’ were located in the electronic version of El País. The search produced a total of 387 articles (comprising news items, editorials, interviews and commentaries). As can be seen from Table 1, the quantity of reporting varied considerably between 1999 and 2010. Dense clusters of reporting occur around certain dates in response to particular political events in Turkey or the EU, such as the election victory of AKP in 2002, and the run-up in 2004 and 2005 to the commencement of official membership negotiations. Subsequent to this, the intensity of coverage abated. Table 2 displays the type of media report published. A particularly high number of opinion or commentary pieces were published in some years; these either addressed the topic of Turkey and the EU exclusively or commented on this within the context of a different topic.

Table 1.

Coverage of Turkey’s EU candidature in El País.

Year	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
No.	29	8	17	81	16	89	52	36	25	6	16	12

Table 2.

Turkey’s EU candidature in El País: Type of coverage.⁶

Year	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
News	20	7	16	52	10	57	37	26	12	6	11	3
Edit.	4	0	0	6	0	4	2	4	3	0	0	1
Comm.	4	1	1	20	4	22	12	6	10	0	4	7
Interv.	1	0	0	3	2	6	1	0	0	0	1	1

All items were manually scanned to locate topics mentioned in discussions on Turkey’s possible EU accession and nomination strategies, attributes and metaphors used for Turkey, Turkish leaders and EU candidature and accession. The examples of nomination strategies, attributes and metaphors identified were then used as key terms for an electronic search using the software Wordsmith Tools 4.0 (Scott, 2004) to locate and extract all occurrences of these examples in the entire corpus. In the case of metaphors, the search was undertaken using a keyword and, sometimes, a synonym. For example, for the metaphor ‘Turkey is a bridge between the East and West’, ‘bridge’ (puente) was used as a search term. In the case of the metaphor ‘Turkey can marry into the EU’, the search terms used were both ‘marry’ (casarse) and ‘wedding’ (boda). Searches were conducted using all conjugations and different parts of speech of each keyword. An analysis of the concordance lines was then undertaken of all tokens identified.

Topics in the news

The frequency of occurrence of topics and the prominence they receive in reporting indicate to readers their relevance to a particular issue (Kim et al., 2002). Topics covered by western media tend to be those with conflictive, divisive, controversial elements, or those which attract attention due to their dramatic or negative nature (Van Dijk, 1989: 203). The absence of certain topics may imply to the reader that such topics are either not relevant or not sufficiently important to warrant discussion (Van Dijk, 1989: 220, 2005: 88). The validation and implied non-validation of topics deemed pertinent to an issue (by virtue of their respective inclusion or exclusion) contribute to the framing or ‘perspectivization’ of an issue.

A total of 922 ‘topics’ were mentioned in connection with Turkey’s bid for EU membership. In this study, ‘topic’ was defined as a particular subject that constitutes part of a broader issue; for example, the religious rights of minority groups are a ‘human rights’ issue. Table 3 displays the most frequent topics cited in defence of the argument that Turkey is not ready or should not join the EU, and Table 4 displays the most frequent topics used in support of Turkey’s potential accession to the EU. The number of times each topic appeared in the corpus is provided numerically and as a percentage. Only topics that were mentioned with a frequency of over 2% in the entire corpus are listed here.

Table 3.

Reasons why Turkey is not ready to join the EU.

General issue	Specific topics (number of occurrences and percentage)
(a) Turkey does not meet the EU benchmark with regard to its economic development, political structures, and human and civic rights.	(i) Turkey needs to continue with its economic reforms 16 (2%)
	(ii) Turkey’s economic problems are serious 16 (2%)
	(iii) Turkey needs to continue with its political reforms 40 (4%)
	(iv) Military involvement in civilian affairs 16 (2%)
	(v) Improvements needed in human rights 64 (7%)
	(vi) The death penalty should be abolished 16 (2%)
	(vii) Freedom of speech is lacking 22 (2%)
	(viii) Improvements needed in Kurdish rights 20 (2%)
	(ix) Improvements needed in minority rights 20 (2%)
(b) Turkey is culturally and geographically different.	(i) Religion is an obstacle 25 (3%)
	(ii) Turkey is culturally different 15 (2%)
	(iii) Geographically, Turkey does not belong in Europe 22 (2%)
(c) Turkey’s large population will be problematic.	(i) Population size 20 (2%)
(d) Turkey has a territorial dispute with another EU country.	(i) Turkey needs to recognize Cyprus 88 (10%)
(e) Other EU countries oppose Turkey’s membership. The USA supports Turkey’s membership.	(i) Other EU countries oppose Turkey 62 (7%)
	(ii) The USA is pressuring the EU to admit Turkey 31 (3%)
(f) EU membership is not the right option.	(i) Turkey should be given an alternative status to membership 30 (3%)

Table 4.

Reasons in support of Turkey’s possible accession.

General issue	Specific topics (number of occurrences and percentage)
(a) Turkey’s membership would be of economic importance to the EU.	(i) Turkey will be important to the EU’s economy 21 (2%)
(b) Turkey’s membership would be of geostrategic importance to the EU.	(i) Turkey should be admitted for strategic reasons 45 (5%)
(c) Turkey’s membership would enrich the EU culturally and could increase the EU’s soft ower in the wider Mediterranean region.	(i) The EU is not a Christian club 31 (3%)
	(ii) Religion provides an opportunity for religious dialogue 15 (2%)
(d) Other EU countries support Turkey’s accession.	(i) Other EU countries support Turkey 64 (7%)
(e) Turkey’s reforms have been convincing and need to be rewarded.	(i) Turkey is making good progress on reform 21 (2%) (ii) Rejecting Turkey’s candidature could stall the reform process 15 (2%) (iii) The long history of Turkey’s application process needs to be rewarded 15 (2%)

With some topics there is an overlap; for example, minority rights, Kurdish rights and Turkey’s human rights record are all listed separately in Table 3, although they could well have been subsumed under the one heading of ‘human rights’. Listing the topics individually enables an insight into the number of times particular topics were mentioned; for example, ‘freedom of speech’ was mentioned more frequently than ‘human rights’, while ‘women’s rights’ was mentioned in fewer than 2% of cases. Finally, some topics fall into more than one category; for example, ‘freedom of speech’ may be placed in either the ‘civic rights’ or ‘democratic reforms’ category.

The following excerpts, extracted from articles published on the same day shortly after Turkey was awarded candidate status, illustrate how information was coded. While an article may be coded for just one topic, it may also contain several topics. In Example 1 (a news item), the single issue discussed with respect to Turkey’s possible EU accession was Turkey’s geographical position; this was coded as the topic ‘Geographically, Turkey does not belong in the EU’. In Example 2 (a commentary), the dominant topic is Turkey’s cultural difference (‘religion is an obstacle to accession’), but it was also coded as ‘Turkey needs to continue political reforms’, as the idea of Turkey’s ‘democratic deficit’ is clearly conveyed, and ‘Turkey is geostrategically important to the EU’.

Example 1. No one responds when Prodi asks ‘If there are no rules, then why can’t South Korea join?’ Of course, South Korea is an exaggeration. But Turkey’s candidature will need reflection. Is it more European than Algeria, Tunisia or Morocco? (…) If Turkey becomes a precedent, Russia could aspire to membership as it also has part of its territory in Europe, although the majority is in Asia. Europe to the Urales? The EU till Vladivostok? (14/12/1999)⁵

Example 2. Not even EU spokespersons spoke candidly because of an ongoing historical-psychological obstacle, as colossal as it is unmentionable. Former president of the European Commission Roy Jenkins alluded to this in the early 1980s: ‘To enter you have to be European and democratic, and Turkey is neither one nor the other’. But when he said European, everyone knew he meant Christian. And there is no rectifying the matter, not even by appealing to the Virgin of Fatima, who doubtlessly had more confidence in the repentance of Communism than Islam. (…) When Turkey joined NATO in 1952, the supposed Soviet threat meant that Turkey’s military might compensated for any democratic deficit. Today, the formalization of Turkey’s candidature assigns Turkey a different mission: to be the European observer in the Caucasus, where Russia is making strategic in-roads starting with Chechnya. (14/12/1999)

With regard to the distribution of topics mentioned in news articles over the 12-year period, some topics appeared in all (or nearly all) years, such as Cyprus, political reforms, human rights, freedom of speech, the EU’s religious identity, Turkey’s geostrategic quality, and opposition (or support) from other EU states. Other topics were mentioned only within a very limited range of years, such as the death penalty, Turkey’s population size, Turkey’s economic problems, the need for EU institutional reform, Kurdish rights, and the threat that other (‘non-European’) states might apply to join. This, in some cases, is due to particular events. Turkey abolished the death penalty in 2002 and passed a raft of reforms during 2002 and 2003 that gave greater legal support to minority rights. While the abolition of the death penalty was implemented immediately (and henceforth disappeared from news reporting), reforms affecting cultural and political rights occurred over a longer time frame and continued to be reported on, albeit to a lesser degree, in subsequent years. The perception that Turkey was different for religious and other cultural reasons appears to be stronger between 2002 and 2005, with scant reference to religion as a potential problem area before the election victory of AKP (2002) and no reference to this (or to the EU being ‘a Christian club’) after 2007. Reporting on perceived US pressure on the EU to admit Turkey was particularly high around 2002, shortly before the invasion of Iraq (2003), which the centre-right Aznar government (but not the opposition) supported, and prior to the Turkish parliament’s vote against the use of its territory by the USA for a land invasion of Iraq.

The topics discussed in relation to Turkey’s potential EU membership recall those found in the national press of other EU countries (see Koenig et al., 2006; Negrine et al., 2008), although the frequency of particular topics inevitably differs. Other EU countries’ positioning on Turkey’s integration is a recurrent theme in El País, but any US advocacy for Turkey is received critically and is reported on primarily around the date of the invasion of Iraq (2003). The need to ‘reward’ Turkey for its patience and endeavours appears to be an important reason to support Turkey’s accession and the various sub-topics related to this represent 6% of all topics raised. The economic benefits from Turkey’s accession receive surprisingly little coverage beyond the context of the EU’s ageing population. Despite Spain’s advocacy of Turkey’s accession bid, press coverage continues to highlight differences between Turkey and the EU; this goes beyond cultural differences to include perceptions of Turkey’s economic shortcomings and its democratic deficit. This discrepancy was also identified by Negrine (2008) and Schneeberger (2009) in their analysis of the British press. Similar to the findings in Negrine (2008), no attempt was made to report on Spanish public opinion or any internal debate in Spain on the relative merits of Turkey’s accession.

Nomination strategies: Reference terms and attributes for Turkey and Turkish leaders

The use of particular terms to refer to individuals or groups in news media and the reiteration of selected attributes encourage the association of particular qualities with the target entity. Although these qualities are frequently unnecessary for identification purposes, such attributes contribute to the formation of attitudes towards the object of reference (Kim et al., 2002: 11; Van Dijk, 1995: 275). This sub-section undertakes an analysis of how Turkey and Turkey’s political leaders are referred to in the newspaper corpus. Two types of terms of reference were examined; the first type comprised examples in which the entity in question was referred to by a different term (e.g. ‘the Muslim country’ or ‘the NATO member’ rather than ‘Turkey’); the second type consisted of the attribution of particular qualities through predication (e.g. ‘Turkey is a country of 70 million Muslims’) or apposition (‘Turkey, an ally in NATO’). In many examples, multiple attributes appear in one example (e.g. ‘such an enormous and underdeveloped country’). As seen in Table 5, the majority of reference terms and attributes identified occur between 2002 (when the AKP assumed power) and 2009, with few pre-dating this period. In the following discussion, examples of reference terms and attributes will be given from the year in which the highest number occurs.

Table 5.

Reference terms and attributes for Turkey.

	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
Turkey is a Muslim country	2			5	1	21	11	7	10		1
The Turkish state is secular				35	8	33	1	21	37	5	1	3
Turkey is a large country (geographically and/or demographically)	2	2	5	7	5	28	8	5	2		4
Geographic references	3	2		3	2	16	4	5	4		6
Turkey’s neighbourhood	1			3	1	6
Turkey is poor and/or underdeveloped	2	2				1	5				13
Turkey is a strategic country	1	1				1	4				4
Turkey is a member of NATO	7		3	12		8	3	5	3
Turkey is an ally	3		1	8	3	8	11					1
References to Turkey’s Ottoman past				1		4			2

References to Turkey

Religious orientation (whether Islam or secularism) becomes an important attribute of ‘Turkey’ after the accession to power of AKP in 2002. Although prior to this Turkey was a predominantly Muslim country with a secular state, ruled by a mostly Muslim political elite, religion was rarely used to describe either the country or Turkish political leaders in the corpus. Post-2002, frequent references to Turkey as ‘the Muslim country’ appear. Alternatively, Turkey is depicted as being Muslim but ‘nevertheless’ ‘Western’, ‘secular’ or European’, for example: ‘Turkey, a Muslim country with a secular state’; ‘the most pro-western country of Islamic culture.’

Turkey’s size (whether demographic or geographic) is an important referential term: Turkey is ‘a demographic giant’ and a frequent attribute is the number of inhabitants (‘the Euro-Asiatic giant with around 70 million inhabitants’); this often appears with a reference to the country’s main religion – that is, Turkey is referred to as having a certain number of ‘Muslims’ rather than ‘inhabitants’, such as ‘a country of 80 million Muslims’. On occasions, the writer uses the attributes ‘poor’ or ‘underdeveloped’, together with a reference to the country’s demographic or geographic size – for example, ‘Turkey, a large country, poor but dynamic, with close to 70 million inhabitants’; ‘such an enormous and underdeveloped country’; ‘so large, too poor and, without a doubt, very Muslim’. The inevitable (but erroneous) implication is that all inhabitants of Turkey are poor, practising Muslims. A variation on Turkey’s or the Turks’ state of being ‘poor’ is the reference to Turkey’s ‘65 million Muslims’ all ‘seeking work’, with the implication that this resents a threat to EU stability.

References to Turkey’s Ottoman history occasionally appear as reference terms for Turkey. For example, instead of the neutral terms of ‘Turkey’, ‘Turks’ and ‘the Turkish leader’, the historical lexicalizations of ‘the Ottoman country’, ‘the Ottomans’ and ‘the Ottoman leader’ are used:

The Arabs view the Ottomans with distrust. (20 December 2004)

He referred to the Ottoman country as an emerging market. (13 January 2007)

Attributes were often very positive; Turkey is described as ‘young and dynamic’, ‘a strategic country’, ‘a friend’ and ‘a people with a strong personality’. In the run up to the invasion of Iraq (2003), Turkey’s geostrategic importance is underscored and its membership in NATO (and status as an ally of the USA or the West) becomes a recurring attribute: ‘Turkey, NATO member and privileged associate of the US’; ‘Turkey, NATO member and fundamental ally of the US and the West’; ‘the NATO member; decisive ally of the US’; ‘Turkey, an immense friend of the West’. Turkey’s religious adherence is also invoked in the context of NATO membership: ‘the only Muslim member of NATO’; ‘an Islamic republic in NATO is a grave risk’.

Finally, Turkey is referred to in terms of its geographical location. The emphasis is usually on Turkey’s ‘eastern’ location, although the ‘western’ nature of Turkey is also occasionally invoked, especially when the message conveyed is that Turkey is of geostrategic use to the EU. When Turkey’s neighbourhood is referred to, the focus is placed almost exclusively on Turkey’s eastern borders (‘Turkey, with most of its territory in Asia, and neighbours like Iran and Iraq’; ‘Turkey, over 800,000 km² in size, with 70 million inhabitants and 2,627 km of border with Syria, Iraq, Iran, Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan’). Acknowledgement that Turkey also borders on EU countries Greece and Bulgaria is rare (‘Turkey shares a short border with its two European neighbours Greece and Bulgaria, and a very long border with Syria and Iraq’).

References to the Turkish prime minister and the governing party

Descriptive references to the Turkish prime minister and the ruling political party begin from the election victory of the AKP led by Tayyip Erdoğan in 2002 (see Table 6). Attributes used for the ruling party centre almost exclusively on its religious orientation; 123 such attributes occur, the most frequent being ‘Islamist’, followed by ‘Islamic’ and ‘Muslim’. These two attributes are usually modified by ‘moderate’; the name of the ruling party may also be modified by the phrase ‘of an Islamic tendency’ or ‘orientation’. Although the AKP perceives itself as the Turkish equivalent of a Christian Democrat Party (as stated in interviews by El País with the Turkish prime minister and the Turkish Minister of Religion in 2003 and 2004 respectively) and has had observer member status of the European People’s Party since 2005, this is not reflected in press references. The religious orientation of a Christian Democrat does not warrant comment in European media, and, in this corpus, prior to the election victory of AKP in 2002, the religious orientation of the Turkish ruling class likewise did not elicit comment. This additional semantic layer, arguably irrelevant to the topic of most news items, reveals ideologically based stereotypes and prejudices (Van Dijk, 1995: 275).

Table 6.

References to Turkey’s ruling party and leader.

	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010
Turkey’s ruling party has an Islamic orientation	51	12	11	8	12	14	8	2	5
Turkey’s prime minister is ‘Muslim’	8	8	5	4	3	8			1
Turkey’s prime minister is ‘the leader’	49	1	4	1	2

The references to Prime Minister Erdoğan’s religious orientation describe him as an ‘Islamist’ or ‘Muslim’ on 37 occasions in the corpus; in some cases the term is modified by ‘moderate’, ‘of a moderate Islamist orientation’ or ‘supposedly moderate’, and in one example Erdoğan is referred to as an ‘ex-Islamist’. In the year of his election, however, Erdoğan is most frequently referred to neutrally as just ‘the leader’ of the AKP or of the country. Single occurrences of positive evaluative attributes such as ‘charismatic’, ‘elegant’, ‘former sportsman’ or ‘incorruptible’ can be found. Factual references to his former position as mayor of Istanbul appear 11 times.

Metaphors

The use of metaphors in political discourse and in newspaper reporting of political events to manipulate meaning, invoke images and convey indirect messages is well documented (Chilton and Ilyin, 1993; Drulak, 2006; Hülsse, 2006; Tekin, 2008). They are a commonly used linguistic resource to construct representations of group membership and ‘otherness’. The metaphors identified here reinforce the findings of previous studies; metaphors are used to create essentialist categories of belonging and exclusion, imbue cultural practices with particular connotations, and selectively use historical imagery to convey (usually) negative representations of contemporary society.

Metaphoric expressions referring to Turkey or Turkey’s candidature were used with the following frequency: 1999 (18); 2000 (2); 2001 (5); 2002 (34); 2003 (8); 2004 (57); 2005 (23); 2006 (10); 2007 (10); 2008 (0); 2009 (1); 2010 (3). Differences can be found in the type of metaphor used over this period. Metaphors referring to Europe as a ‘house’ which Turkey is seeking to enter through the ‘door’ occur throughout most of the 12-year period. The use of the metaphor ‘janissaries’ for Turks and a ‘marriage’ for Turkey’s accession to the EU is limited to the dates surrounding the invasion of Iraq (2003) and Turkey’s commencement of official membership negotiations with the EU (2005), respectively.

The metaphoric expressions in the text can be grouped as follows:

Turkey is ‘at the doors’ of the EU ‘house’: 1999 (8); 2001 (3); 2002 (21); 2003 (6); 2004 (37); 2005 (17); 2006 (5); 2007 (6); 2009 (1); 2010 (2)

The EU will ‘close the door’ to Turkey: 1999 (3); 2002 (6); 2004 (5); 2005 (1); 2006 (2); 2007 (1)

The EU is a ‘family’: 1999 (1); 2000 (1); 2003 (1); 2004 (1); 2005 (2); 2007 (1)

Turkey will ‘marry into’ the EU: 2004 (4); 2005 (1)

Turkey is a ‘bridge’ between East and West: 2002 (1); 2004 (6); 2005 (1); 2006(3)

Turkey is a ‘hinge’ between East and West: 1999 (1); 2002 (1)

Turks are ‘janissaries’ or ‘mercenaries’: 2002 (2); 2003 (1)

Other metaphors from the military domain: 1999 (1); 2002 (1); 2010 (1)

Turkey is ‘the sick man of Europe’: 1999 (5); 2000 (1); 2001 (2); 2002 (3); 2004 (3); 2005 (1); 2007 (2)

Metaphors from the domain of religion: 2004 (1)

The most common metaphor used to refer to the EU is ‘the EU is a house’; the most common realization of this is the metaphor of Turkey ‘knocking on the door of the EU house’ (Turquía está llamando a la puerta) or ‘waiting at the doors of Europe’ (espera a las puertas de Europa). Europe may ‘open the door’ or ‘leave the door open’ (abre la puerta, deja la puerta abierta). Variations of this metaphor include ‘to slam the door shut in Turkey’s face’ (dar un portazo, dar con la puerta en las narices) or simply ‘to shut the door’ (cerrar la puerta). Europe is also portrayed as a ‘family’. Although Turkey does not seem to be a ‘family member’ (Hülsse (2006) notes that eastern European countries were described as ‘returning to the family’ upon their accession in 2004), Turkey can ‘marry into the EU’, as the following examples illustrate:

The marriage, planned for sometime in the next 10 to 15 years, is not certain. (18 December 2004)

If the EU is successful with the Turkish wedding, it will disprove the clash of civilizations hypothesis. (18 December 2004)

Allusion is made to the Ottoman Empire through historical lexicalizations that refer to contemporary Turkey. The most common historical reference is ‘the sick man of Europe’ (el gran enfermo del Bósforo; el hombre enfermo de Europa; el otrora enfermo de Europa). In a reinterpretation of history, the Turks become ‘janissaries’ or ‘mercenaries’ in NATO. Referring to the Ottoman Empire’s military past, Turkey is called the EU’s ‘gate-keeper’ (el cancerbero) in the face of religious fundamentalism and Russian aggression. The military metaphor also appears in the context of migration, with the current population of Turkish origin in Germany referred to as the primera avanzadilla (‘the first outpost’), implying large numbers will follow, even an ‘invasion’. Metaphors referring explicitly to religion are limited to the representation of Turkey as ‘a river of Islam’ which is supposed to enter Europe’s ‘secular current’ (el rio de islam entra en el rio de laicismo) and the representation of conservative Turks as ‘old men with turbans’ (los viejos turbantes). Recognition of Turkey’s hybrid identity and the geostrategic benefit this may have to the EU is implied by the ‘bridge’ and ‘hinge’ (gozne) metaphor. Turkey is viewed as ‘a bridge to the Muslim world’, ‘an essential bridge for dialogue between the Muslim and Christian world’, ‘a perfect bridge between civilizations’ and ‘a hinge between Asia and Europe’.

To examine the distribution of metaphors and nomination strategies described here in different newspaper texts (editorials, commentaries and news items), a sample of texts was taken from the corpus. All editorials from a particular year were examined together with one news item on the same topic appearing just prior to each editorial. The years 1999 and 2002 were selected due to the high level of international media attention that Turkey received as a consequence of receiving EU candidate status and the AKP’s election victory. In 1999, three of the four editorials contained examples of metaphors or nomination strategies, while only one of the four news items selected contained such language. In 2002, all six editorials, but only three of the accompanying news items, contained such examples. While the frequency of such examples in a news item was low (often a single example was present, at times only in the headline), the editorial was more likely to contain a variety of examples. For example, the editorial entitled ‘Hurricane in Turkey’ (5 November 2002) contained the following reference terms for Turkey, the AKP and the prime minster respectively: ‘the Eurasian country’,‘a NATO member and EU applicant’, ‘decisive ally of the US’, ‘secular Turkey’; ‘a party with Islamist roots’, ‘the AKP, a moderate branch of the banned Islamist movement’; ‘Tayyip Recip Erdoğan, the former mayor of Istanbul, famed to be incorruptible’. Like the editorials, the commentaries also tended to use metaphors and a variety of nomination strategies. All four such texts published in 1999 contained examples of this language, as did two-thirds (14 out of 20 texts) of those published in 2002. On the basis of this sample, it appears that news items are less likely than editorials and commentaries to use metaphors to depict Turkey’s candidature or alternative denominations for Turkey and Turkish leaders, or use attributes when referring to these.

Finally, a comparison was made between the results from 1999 and 2002 with 11 texts published in 2010 (three news items, one editorial and seven commentaries). Here, the purpose was to ascertain whether any change over time may be observed in the language used. In this sub-corpus an interesting observation may be made: the editorial ‘Turkish Paradox’ (14 September 2010) contains three references to the AKP and the Turkish prime minister as ‘Islamist’ and a fourth reference to the AKP as ‘a party without any equivalent in the EU’; the commentaries and news items contain only two references to religion and these, avoiding the more emotive term ‘Islamist’, have been carefully phrased as ‘a conservative party with an Islamic base’. More varied, inclusive depictions of Turkey and its leaders are used: Turkey is ‘the largest emerging economy’, a ‘member of the G20’; and the Turkish foreign minister is ‘from the world of academia’. This analysis suggests that whilst the conceptualization of Turkey by journalists and commentators contributing to El País has diversified over time, little change can be observed in the practice of the newspaper’s editorial board, which continues to present Turkey as Europe’s cultural and religious ‘Other’. The topics raised in the editorial offer no clarification as to why the newspaper’s editorial board continues, after six years of AKP government, not only to foreground the religious orientation of Turkey and its leaders but also to use the ideologically charged term (for a western readership) ‘Islamist’. This style of reporting encourages El País readers to view Turkey through the lens of cultural difference and tacit threat, thus cognitively shaping the social representation of Turkey and Turks as a foreign entity ‘at the door’ of the EU (Van Dijk, 1995: 248).

Participants in the news

In the construction of a newspaper article’s narrative, statements from some sources may be relayed through quotes. Access to the media is often restricted to privileged institutions and individuals. Elite figures (institutions or even countries) are usually the source of viewpoints expressed and information cited in news items; the mere fact of their inclusion lends authority to their statements (Van Dijk, 1989: 219). This section will discuss the degree to which the newspaper enables the voice of Turkish representatives to be heard. It also examines whether it engages with domestic Spanish public and political opinion on the topic of Turkey or, conversely, whether the newspaper presents topics as originating with and concerning representatives of EU institutions and other EU countries. Examples of quotes from representatives of Spain are given in Tables 8 and 9.

Table 7 displays the number of quotes (and the percentage this represents) from representatives of Turkey, Spain and other EU countries. These quotes appeared primarily in news items, although occasionally also in commentary articles. The years 2002, 2003 and 2006 were the only years in which quotes from representatives of Spain constituted over 10% of the total number of quotes in newspaper items on Turkey for each respective year. The inclusion of direct quotes from Spaniards decreased sharply after this. These years in which Spaniards are quoted directly in the press coincide with the second term of the centre-right José María Aznar government (2000–2004). The majority of speakers quoted directly in newspaper articles were representatives of other EU countries or representatives of EU institutions. The article engages more with representatives from the EU (whether politicians or bureaucrats) in the construction of a news item, and the topic of Turkey’s accession thus appears as primarily one of EU rather than domestic interest. The percentage of news items containing quotes from representatives of Turkey was relatively high, and in some years (2001 and 2010) it surpassed the number of quotes from other sources.

Table 7.

Number of quotes from representatives of Turkey, Spain and other EU countries.⁷

	1999 (24)	2000 (8)	2001 (17)	2002 (85)	2003 (17)	2004 (89)	2005 (55)	2006 (38)	2007 (26)	2008 (6)	2009 (16)	2010 (12)
Turkey	3 (13%)	0 (0%)	10 (60%)	25 (29%)	3 (18%)	15 (17%)	12 (22%)	7 (18%)	3 (12%)	1 (2%)	4 (25%)	5 (42%)
Spain	1 (4%)	0 (0%)	1 (6%)	15 (18%)	4 (21%)	2 (2%)	5 (9%)	6 (16%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
EU countries	7 (30%)	3 (40%)	3 (18%)	28 (33%)	6 (35%)	32 (36%)	23 (42%)	20 (53%)	7 (19%)	4 (7%)	5 (31%)	2 (15%)

The topics mentioned in quotes from representatives of each group differ, as do their position on Turkey’s accession. Predictably, Turkish representatives highlight the neoliberal economic, political and strategic arguments that support Turkey’s bid. Their support is unanimous, regardless of their individual political orientation; thus representatives of Turkey’s intelligentsia (not aligned with the AKP), such as Orhan Pamuk, support Turkey’s bid for accession in similar terms to government representatives. Spokespeople from EU institutions reiterate the requirements of the Copenhagen criteria, or mention the institutional challenges that they expect to arise through the integration of Turkey; representatives of EU states such as current and former heads of state express a broader range of views.

During the period 2002 to 2003, quotes from representatives of Spain in El País focused mainly on the agreement of a date for Turkey to begin negotiations, and referred to the debate on whether a religious orientation underpinned the EU project. As illustrated in Table 8, the news media position Spain’s leadership at the forefront of Turkey’s support base in the EU. The topics mentioned by Prime Minister José María Aznar and Foreign Minister Ana Palacio do not address domestic Spanish interests, but rather represent topics discussed at an EU level.

Table 8.

Selected quotes from Spain’s political elite, 2002–2003.

Year/Speaker	Quotes
2002
Aznar	‘Turkey has every right to join the EU, as long as it improves its human rights record.’
Palacio	‘Turkey should be given a date to begin negotiations.’
	‘The victory of moderate Islamists is no obstacle to Turkey’s possible EU accession (…) the EU is not a Christian club but a secular club; Turkey’s accession depends on the fulfilment of the Copenhagen criteria.’
	‘Spain is a pioneer country in insisting that Turkey be given a negotiation date, provided it fulfils its obligations.’
	‘Spain has long supported giving Turkey a date to begin negotiations, and other countries have now come round to this view.’
2003
Aznar	‘Turkey’s political project is commendable.’
Palacio	‘The EU is not a Christian club.’
	‘Reference in the EU constitution to the Union’s Judeo–Christian roots does not mean that the importance of the Muslim legacy in Europe is ignored; it is just less important than the Christian component.’

In October 2005, negotiations with Turkey officially began. As seen in Table 9, the range of political figures whose views on Turkey were represented in El País in the run-up to the official commencement broadened. Spokespeople included Spain’s State Secretary for European Affairs Alberto Navarro and Catalan President of the Generalitat Pasqual Maragall (on the occasion of his official visit to Turkey). The quotes included from Spain’s Foreign Minister Miguel Moratinos and Spain’s Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero illustrate the level of consistency in Spain’s bipartisan conditional support for Turkey’s accession bid. According to Spain’s ruling elite, Turkey will succeed in joining once it becomes ‘more European’. This strategy of positive self-presentation in such contexts has been previously noted in the discourse of elites in other EU countries (Tekin, 2008).

Table 9.

Selected quotes from Spain’s political elite, 2005–2006.

Year/Speaker	Quotes
2005
Navarro	‘Turkey needs to comes closer to European values; this is important for the stability of a region linked to the EU.’
	‘The result at the end of the negotiation process will be a more European Turkey.’
Moratinos	‘Turkey has my full support and the support of all Spanish political parties.’
Maragall	‘Turkey’s accession as brings costs but also benefits; the balance is totally advantageous for Catalonia so we should support Turkey’s bid.’
	‘The incorporation of Turkey is key to creating a strategic centre in the Mediterranean that can overcome the influence of the northern and newly-joined Eastern countries (…) the recent enlargements have left Spain and Catalonia distant from the centre of power.’
	‘It will make the south an important centre of economic activity.’
	‘EU Christian Democrats should stop seeing EU enlargement through a religious lens.’
	‘Turkey still needs about 10 years to join. The negotiations have created a climate of change comparable to what Spain once experienced.’
2006
Zapatero	‘Turkey’s accession is a priority for Spain and the decision to be taken soon (…) Turkey plays a very important international role and it should also do so within the EU (…) the difficulties that Turkey has in joining were experienced in previous accession negotiations.’
Moratinos	‘Spain has always been a faithful supporter of the accession of Turkey because we want a modern Turkey.’

Despite the perceived similarities noted by Spanish scholars in Spain’s and Turkey’s path to EU accession, Maragall is the only political figure to acknowledge this. Rather than echo official EU positions on civil liberties typical of Spain’s central government, his discourse foregrounds Spain’s (or Catalonia’s) economic and strategic interests. His views reflect the perception in Spain that the 2005 enlargement shifted the Union’s political focus away from the Mediterranean to the north-east. Spain’s endeavours to strengthen political linkages with Mediterranean states neighbouring the EU were previously evidenced by the joint sponsoring by Spain and Turkey of the Alliance of Civilizations in 2005. Turkey is also one of Spain’s largest non-EU trading partners. An editorial from 2006 (‘Turkey Rebuked’) also makes this point, albeit fleetingly. Despite these clear interests, Spain’s central government is not quoted directly or indirectly on such matters, although occasionally commentary pieces authored by El País journalists acknowledge the strategic value that Turkey’s economic and demographic weight would bring to the Mediterranean region, establish points of comparison between Spain’s and Turkey’s road to accession or identify the two countries’ cultural similarities. For example, in the 11 November 2002 edition, journalist Xavier Ribera Cruzada claims that a Valencian would ‘feel at home’ in Turkey, and finds parallels between Turkey’s and Spain’s Mediterranean market culture. Arguably, such insights would resonate with the Spanish populace, but the acknowledgement of similarities and common interests remains the exception.

Interviews are a specific form of incorporating the views of an individual or a collective. In this corpus, 15 interviews were held with representatives from the EU and Turkish political and cultural spheres which included questions on the interviewee’s views on the possible accession of Turkey. Over this period, Turkish political leaders were interviewed on six occasions: two with the Minister of Religious Affairs (Mehmet Şimşek) and four with Prime Minister Erdoğan. Two interviews were given to representatives from Greece and Cyprus, five were given to EU technocrats and Sweden’s Foreign Minister Carl Bildt (during the period when Sweden held the presidency of the EU Commission), and two interviews were held with representatives from the European cultural sphere (Swiss academic Tarik Ramadan and Italian author Claudio Magris). The interviewees articulated views that can be classified as supportive or conditionally supportive of Turkey’s accession. In the latter case, the interviewees’ support was tempered by a stipulation that certain conditions should be met (such as the recognition of Cyprus and the fulfilment of the Copenhagen criteria). Two aspects in particular can be noted: first, no interview with a figure opposed to Turkey’s accession appeared (i.e. coverage of predominantly negative viewpoints was absent); and second, the voice of EU representatives was balanced with views from Turkey’s political elite. While the views of representatives of the cultural sphere were sought, the newspaper’s main engagement was with political figures from the EU. There was no engagement with domestic figures in interviews or with members of the Spanish public.

Conclusion

Whilst Turkey’s progress on the path towards accession is essentially determined at an EU institutional level, in some countries the intensity of the domestic debate on Turkey’s candidature has swayed governing elites to declare that Turkey’s eventual integration will be decided through a national referendum. This may not only introduce an additional layer of complexity to centralized EU decision-making, but also lend a subjective element to the evaluation of Turkey’s progress in fulfilling the membership criteria. Appraisals by voters in France or Germany on the ‘worthiness’ or ‘suitability’ of Turkey as an EU member will inevitably be influenced by domestic political agendas and the domestic news media.

Although Spain’s political elite consider Turkey’s EU membership to be a realistic prospect and a laudable objective, references to Turkey’s democratic and socioeconomic deficits, Turkey’s eastern neighbourhood and the perception of Turkey’s inherent cultural differences are frequent in the news reporting of Spain’s most respected newspaper, El País. In this corpus, editorials and commentaries in particular make repeated reference to the place of religion in Turkish society, with the effect of situating Turkey in an essentialist category of the EU’s cultural ‘Other’. Conversely, the denominations of ‘friend’ or ‘ally’ are used in reporting to underscore the strategic importance of Turkey’s co-operation in the US- and UK-led invasion of Iraq. The interpretative framework through which Turkey’s EU candidature was perceived involved sufficient flexibility to allow the social representation of Turkey in accordance with in-group (i.e. EU member) priorities (Van Dijk, 1995). Perceptions of Turkey’s geostrategic utility to the EU at particular points throughout the 12-year period, for instance, affected the assignment of in-group and out-group status. Relative stability was found with respect to the reporting of issues relating to the Copenhagen criteria, such as the recognition of Cyprus and the improvement of civil rights, but greater variation was found in frequency topics such as Turkey’s geographic position and demography. Although these were less frequent as topics in news items after 2005, they appeared with relative uniform frequency as attributes when referring to Turkey throughout the corpus.

This analysis of the portrayal of Turkey’s EU accession bid has revealed that despite energetic debate in both commentaries and editorials, little attempt was made to inject discussions with a recognizably Spanish perspective; seldom was reference made to Spain’s own path to EU accession or to how Turkey’s eventual accession may impact on Spanish political or economic interests. (This echoes findings from Negrine’s (2008) analysis of the UK press.) Likewise, the main topics raised in news items (such as the recognition of Cyprus, the fulfillment of the Copenhagen criteria or the EU’s religious orientation) and in quotes from Spanish politicians in connection with Turkey’s candidature were primarily adopted from EU officials and policy papers. While official statements by Spanish leadership present Spain as a tireless, ‘pioneering’ advocate of Turkey’s membership, little effort is expended in informing the newspaper’s domestic readership of the anticipated benefits to Spain. Spanish media coverage may, however, move to increasingly ‘domesticize’ the issue if more EU countries declare their intention to hold a popular referendum on Turkey’s accession.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

I gratefully acknowledge constructive comments from John Rosenbaum and Joseph Rega on an earlier draft and I thank an anonymous reviewer for very useful suggestions.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Notes

Author biography

Louisa Buckingham graduated with a doctoral degree in linguistics from the University of Granada, Spain, with a thesis on Spanish phraseology (a corpus study of light verb constructions). She currently teaches at the Department of Foreign Languages, University of Nizwa, Oman. She previously worked at universities in Bosnia and Turkey and has also been a senior research analyst for Europe and Latin America in the New Zealand government sector.

References

Aksoy

(2009) The prospect of Turkey’s EU membership as represented in the British newspapers The Times and The Guardian, 2002–2005. Journal of European Studies 39(4): 469–506.

Albarran

(2009) The Handbook of Spanish Language Media. Oxon: Routledge.

Azrout

Van Spanje

de Vreese

(2011) Talking Turkey: Anti-immigrant attitudes and their effect on support for Turkish membership of the EU. European Union Politics 12(3): 3–19.

Bruter

(2009) Time bomb? The dynamic effect of news and symbols on the political identity of European citizens. Comparative Political Studies 42(12): 1498–1536.

Chilton

Ilyin

(1993) Metaphor in political discourse: The case of the common European House. Discourse & Society 4: 7–31.

Chislett

(2009a) Spanish Trajectory: A Source of Inspiration for Turkey? Istanbul, Turkey: Open Society Foundation.

Chislett

(2009b) The EU’s progress report on Turkey’s accession: Sluggish steps forward. Working Paper No. 145/2009, October, Real Instituto Elcano, Spain.

Christensen

(2005) Pocketbooks or prayerbeads? US/UK newspaper coverage of the 2002 Turkish elections. Press/Politics 10(1): 109–128.

De Vreese

Boomgaarden

(2006) Media effects on public opinion about the enlargement of the European Union. Journal of Common Market Studies 44(2): 419–436.

10.

De Vreese

Boomgaarden

Semetko

(2008) Hard and soft: Public support for Turkish membership in the EU. European Union Politics 9(4): 511–530.

11.

Drulak

(2006) Motion, container and equilibrium: Metaphors in the discourse about European integration. European Journal of International Relations 12(4): 499–531.

12.

Escribano

Lorca

(2004) The ups and downs of Europeanization in external relations: Insights from the Spanish experience. Perceptions 9(4): 131–158.

13.

European Commission (2008a) Eurobarometer Report 68. Available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/index_en.htm (accessed January 2012).

14.

European Commission (2008b) Eurobarometer Report 69. Available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/index_en.htm (accessed January 2012).

15.

European Commission (2009) Eurobarometer Report 72. Available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/index_en.htm (accessed January 2012).

16.

Hülsse

(2006) Imagine the EU: The metaphorical construction of a supra-nationalist identity. Journal of International Relations and Development 9: 396–421.

17.

Kim

Scheufele

Shanahan

(2002) Think about it this way: Attribute agenda-setting function of the press and the public’s evaluation of a local issue. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 79(1): 7–25.

18.

Koenig

Mihelj

Downey

. (2006) Media framing of the issue of Turkish accession to the EU: A European or national process? Innovations 19(2): 149–169.

19.

López Garrido

(n.d.) The Momentum of the Relations between Spain and Turkey. Barcelona: European Institute of the Mediterranean (IEMed), pp. 47–49.

20.

McCombs

Shaw

(1972) The agenda-setting function of the mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36(2): 176–187.

21.

Maier

Rittberger

(2008) Shifting Europe’s boundaries: Mass media, public opinion and the enlargement of the EU. European Union Politics 9(2): 243–267.

22.

Meyer

Wodak

(eds) (2001) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE.

23.

Müftüler-Baç

McLaren

(2003) Enlargement preferences and policy making in the European Union: Impacts on Turkey. Journal of European Integration 25(1): 17–30.

24.

Negrine

(2008) Imagining Turkey: British press coverage of Turkey’s bid for accession to the European Union in 2004. Journalism 9(5): 624–645.

25.

Negrine

Kejanlioglu

Aissaoui

. (2008) Turkey and the European Union: An analysis of how the press in four countries covered Turkey’s bid for accession in 2004. European Journal of Communication 23(1): 47–68.

26.

Nieto Solís

(2007) Europa en la modernización económica de España, 1985–2005 [Europe in economic modernization of Spain, 1985–2005]. In: Forner

(ed.) La construcción de Europa: De las guerras civiles a la unificación [The construcción of Europe: From civil wars to reunification]. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva, Instituto Alicantino de Cultura Juan Gil-Albert, pp. 281–303.

27.

Nieto Solís

(2009) Fin del dilema ampliación versus profundación de la integración europea: el caso de Turquía [The end of the dilema of enlargement versus a deepening of European integration: The case of Turkey]. Revista de economía mundial 22: 101–126.

28.

Richardson

(2007) Analysing Newspapers: An Approach from Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

29.

Schneeberger

(2009) Constructing European identity through mediated difference: A content analysis of Turkey’s EU accession process in the British press. Journal of Media and Communication 1: 83–102.

30.

Schuck

ART

de Vreese

(2006) Between risk and opportunity: News framing and its effects on public support for EU enlargement. European Journal of Communication 21(1): 5–32.

31.

Scott

(2004) Wordsmith Tools 4.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available at: http://www.lexically.net/wordsmith (accessed 25 November 2008).

32.

Tekin

(2008) The construction of Turkey’s possible EU membership in French political discourse. Discourse & Society 19(6): 727–763.

33.

Tekin

(2010) Representations and Othering in Discourse: The Construction of Turkey in the EU Context. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.

34.

Transatlantic Trends (2010) Available at: http://trends.gmfus.org/archives/transatlantic-trends/transatlantic-trends-2010 (accessed 25 November 2011).

35.

Transatlantic Trends (2011) Available at: http://www.gmfus.org/publications_/TT/TT2011_final_web.pdf (accessed March 2011).

36.

Van Dijk

(1989) Mediating racism: The role of the media in the reproduction of racism. In: Wodak

(ed.) Language, Power and Ideology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 199–226.

37.

Van Dijk

(1995) Discourse semantics and ideology. Discourse & Society 6(2): 243–289.

38.

Van Dijk

(2001) Multidisciplinarity in critical discourse analysis: A plea for diversity. In: Meyer

Wodak

(eds) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE, pp. 95–120.

39.

Van Dijk

(2005) Contextual knowledge management in discourse production: A CDA perspective. In: Wodak

Chilton

(eds) A New Agenda in Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Interdisciplinarity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 71–100.

40.

Walter

Albert

(2009) Turkey on the European doorstep: British and German debates about Turkey in the European Communities. Journal of International Relations and Development 12: 223–250.

41.

Wimmel

(2006) Beyond the Bosphorus? Comparing German, French and British discourses on Turkey’s application to join the European Union. IHS Political Science Series Paper no. 111, December. Vienna: IHS.