The Different Of Earthquake News Report Between China And Japan From The Discourse Analysis

Increasingly with the modern society rely on the information,disaster research report also become an important issue in the field ofjournalism and communication. In2008, a magnitude8earthquake inWenchuan county, Sichuan province in China; Northeastern Japan2011, amagnitude9.0earthquake. Face the same level of national calamityearthquake, the Japanese media reported that the earthquake, earthquakerelief and post-disaster reconstruction and other areas have played animportant role, but due to different national conditions in China andJapan, media institutions, and other innovative concepts, the two mediareports of the earthquake disaster that it has a significantly different.This article will examine the concrete in front of a huge earthquake,and how the two media news reports, which have their own characteristics,which features behind these factors constrained. By the final analysisof these issues, discuss how to improve the mechanism of the earthquakeand disaster reports, environmental reports, reporting methods, andefforts to explore a more effective dissemination of earthquake disasterstory mode.To research the earthquake reports and the reasons for the differencesreported in the media of the two countries, you must place it in a complexmedia environment and media practice in the province. How the media orreporters reported coverage from the perspective of how the reports andso on, but these are not the final analysis, the news media or newsreporters the decision itself, but determined by the surrounding mediumenvironment. Disaster coverage because of its significance and importancehas been an important field of news reporting, and how to report thecatastrophic events has also been times brought to the attention of thescholars at home and abroad. Earthquake reported in the media not onlybear promptly inform the facts, dissemination of information, the rightto know the mission to meet the audience, but also by providing a lotof information to eliminate social panic, by setting the media agendato guide public opinion. In this process, the choice of what kind of factsto report, how to conduct factual reports, final reports are presentedin the form of actually very different, especially in different countries,these differences between different systems more obvious. Spread practiceis not closed, exist in isolation, it must be placed and inspect in thelocal media communication environment, both affected by the national media environment, but also by a variety of political, economic andcultural, social and other common constraints. Therefore, this paperattempts to describe this difference through the scientific method, andanalyze its causes.The theory of Foucault’s discourse emphasizes the "statement " at thediscourse relations network to inspect and deny the "subject" of theexistence and status of "subject" is just a " position","subject" sayanything,"subject" who is not important, the key is located discoursenetworks. Foucault’s theory of discourse linguistics abandon thetraditional "language"-"Speech" antithetical to the traditionalemphasis on discourse networks in dynamic discourse study to form a newknowledge Power. In Foucault’s discourse theory,"subject"" knowledge"and "power" in the discourse networks are being built out. Such use ofFoucault’s concept of discourse constructed for the analysis of complexmedia environment provides a new perspective. On the "subject" statusdigestion and new rights-view of knowledge also allows us to explorethe power of the truth of the earthquake report pattern in China and Japan.