Who Shapes Mediated Conversations Among Rising Global Powers? Examining News Geography, Authorship, and Media Sources Within the BRICS Framework

3Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This study investigates how news flows have shaped the mediated conversations among BRICS countries by examining aspects such as news geography, underlying topics, authorship attribution, and references to media sources. The authors conducted a quantitative manual content analysis of 3,945 discursive articles that were published between 2011 and 2019 by leading newspapers in BRICS countries, which covered ten dailies in four languages. The findings reveal that the most discussed countries reflected the traditional structure of international news, which includes trade partners, neighboring countries, and elite nations. Among the BRICS member states, China and Russia received the most media attention. China-related issues often intersected with economic topics, while articles on Russia predominantly centered around violent conflicts and security. Conversely, Brazil, India, and South Africa had limited visibility, with Brazil and South Africa often being discussed within the BRICS framework. Notably, South Africa led with the highest share of articles on the BRICS states altogether (19%), surpassing the share of U.S.-related articles (13.41%). Correspondent-authored articles on BRICS countries were comparatively recurrent in Chinese and Russian newspapers. Moreover, Chinese and Russian media footprints were scarce. More balanced coverage and denser news flow across BRICS media systems remain necessary to boost South–South communication and convey BRICS as more than a Chinese-Russian alliance “plus others.”

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Santos, A., & Cazzamatta, R. (2025). Who Shapes Mediated Conversations Among Rising Global Powers? Examining News Geography, Authorship, and Media Sources Within the BRICS Framework. International Journal of Press/Politics, 30(2), 524–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612241269835

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free