Intellectual Property As A National Security Concern:Frame Contestation In US And Chinese Media

There has been a notable escalation of tension between China and the US in recent years,accompanied by a resurgence of geopolitics.This trend has been especially pronounced since the Trump administration took office and initiated the world’s largest trade war under the pretext of trade protectionism,with intellectual property rights(IPR)serving as a key issue.Drawing upon the securitization theory advanced by the Copenhagen School as a conceptual framework,this article analyzes the media’s construction of the securitization of IPR issues in China and the United States from the standpoint of international communication.The paper selects The New York Times and China Daily as representative media outlets,focuses on coverage related to IPR disputes in the context of the Sino-US trade conflict,adopts a framing analysis method based on clustering analysis,and categorizes and codes the framing elements to summarize the media’s framing of the issue.Statistical data reveals that the New York Times predominantly employs the "Security Threats" and "Sanctions" frames in its coverage of IPR issues,whereas China Daily employs three primary frames: "economic-technical prospects," "economic and trade risks," and "institutional reforms." A discourse analysis based on these framing elements reveals that the US media constructs two types of "existential threats" through the securitization of IPRs.One type follows the traditional security discourse logic,portraying China as a technologically hegemonic state and utilizing war metaphors to mobilize US policy resources and impose technological restrictions on China through the mechanism of war.The other type adopts a non-traditional security discourse logic,emphasizing the need for international cooperation rather than bilateral relations,but falls short in providing feasible solutions to neutralize the threat,leaving the narrative of threat response unfinished.China Daily,on the other hand,employs a politicized "divergent" discourse to challenge the "threat" discourse of securitization and aims to de-securitize the issue through a return to open competition.Nevertheless,despite adopting a national perspective,the media’s approach to IPR remains consistent.The media’s perspective on IPR issues remains open and globalist,emphasizing institutional optimization and global potential,but lacks practical solutions to the fundamental problems.In light of the above analysis,this study argues that Chinese media should be cautious when engaging in international communication,given the proliferation of the "China threat theory" and the Western nations’ perception of Chinese hegemony as a pan-securitization discourse.In this regard,the strategy can be optimized in three aspects: a discourse strategy emphasizing consensus,media assuming the main responsibility to address core concerns,and the development of "new public diplomacy" to guide public opinion.