Robert Entman (PhD 1977, Political Science), the Shapiro Professor of Media and Public Affairs and professor of international affairs at George Washington University, has won an Alexander von Humboldt Research Award for his ground-breaking contributions to the field of political communication. He is the world’s first political communication scholar to receive this award.
Entman’s research focuses on media framing and bias and the media’s influence on foreign policy, race relations, and other aspects of American politics. His conceptualization of “framing” has been cited in thousands of scholarly works. In his forthcoming book, Scandal and Silence: Media Responses to Presidential Misconduct (Wiley, 2012), he challenges the conventional wisdom that the media actively seek out and publicize scandals, arguing that media actually neglect most instances of corruption, providing too little, not too much coverage. Occasionally, bad behavior stimulates an avalanche of media attention with demonstrable political consequences, but often equally shoddy conduct receives little notice. Entman advances a theoretical model to explain these differences, revealing an underlying logic to what might otherwise seem to be arbitrary and capricious journalism.
Entman’s previous book, Projections of Power: Framing News, Public Opinion and U.S. Foreign Policy, won the 2011 Doris Graber Book Award from the political communication section of the American Political Science Association (APSA). In November, he received the 2011 Wayne A. Danielson Award for Distinguished Contributions to Communication Scholarship, given annually by the Jesse H. Jones College of Communication at the University of Texas. His other honors include the Woolbert Research Prize and Distinguished Scholar award from the National Communication Association and the Murray Edelman Distinguished Career Achievement Award in Political Communication from the APSA.
Amy Chazkel (PhD 2002, History), associate professor of history at Queens College of the City University of New York and the CUNY Graduate Center, is author of a new book, Laws of Chance: Brazil’s Clandestine Lottery and the Making of Urban Public Life (Duke University Press, 2011). The book is a study of petty crime, urban culture, and the historical roots of an informal economy in Brazil.
“In the late nineteenth century, a wealthy urban developer invented a raffle game to rescue the Rio de Janeiro zoo out of insolvency,” she explains. “This so-called ‘animal game’ quickly evolved from a licensed amusement at the zoo into an unlicensed lottery that was illegal despite its broad popularity. Shopkeepers and street vendors sold tickets secretly but in plain sight, and players bet small sums of money on animals and numbers. Nearly 120 years old, this clandestine lottery still exists today.”
Tracing the origins of the animal game during a period of dramatic urban change in what was then Brazil’s capital city, the book considers how this seemingly innocuous lottery developed into both a crime and a defiant cultural practice. Chazkel sheds new light on the development of the modern city in Latin America and the deep historical roots of the urban informal economy.
Chazkel was recently appointed to the Doctoral Faculty in History at the CUNY Graduate Center. A faculty fellow of CUNY’s Bildner Center for Western Hemisphere Studies, she has held postdoctoral and faculty fellowships and visiting scholar positions at the Gilder Lehrman Center for the Study of Slavery, Resistance and Abolition at Yale; the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard; the Institute for Latin American Studies/Center for Brazilian Studies at Columbia; and the Center for the Humanities and the Center for Place, Culture and Politics at CUNY. In addition, she has served as a Portuguese-English interpreter for the Yale Law School Immigration Law Clinic and various human rights organizations and is co-chair of the Radical History Review editorial collective.
Tonio Andrade (Ph.D. 2000, History), associate professor of history at Emory University, is helping establish a new field in historical studies known as “global history,” which focuses on commonalities and connections between societies rather than on traditionally-defined political or cultural units. His core geographical area of expertise is China, specifically Taiwan, with an emphasis on maritime interconnections in the early modern period (1500-1800).
“The main question of my research is why did western Europeans, who sat on the far edge of Eurasia and were backward by Asian standards, suddenly rise to global prominence starting in the 1500s, establishing durable maritime empires that spanned the seas?” he says.
This fall, Andrade’s latest book, Lost Colony: The Untold Story of China’s First Great Victory over the West, was published by Princeton University Press. Lost Colony examines the Sino-Dutch War of 1661-1668, the first military clash between Chinese and western European forces and the only one preceding the more famous Opium War of the nineteenth century. Although the Chinese lost the Opium War, they won the Sino-Dutch War, thanks to the strategies of a warlord named Koxinga. Part samurai, part pirate, he led his generals to victory over the Dutch and captured one of their largest and richest colonies — Taiwan. In the book, Andrade takes up a scholarly discussion that has raged since Kenneth Pomeranz (Ph.D. 1988, History) published his landmark book, The Great Divergence (2001), analyzing why sustained industrial growth began in Western Europe and not East Asia, despite surprising similarities between both regions.
Andrade recently coordinated an international conference funded by a major grant from the American Council of Learned Societies. The conference, “Sea Rovers, Silk, and Samurai: Maritime China in World History,” coincided with the 350th anniversary of the Chinese conquest of Taiwan, which occurred in the winter of 1661–62.
Andrade’s first book, How Taiwan Became Chinese (Columbia University Press, 2007), won the American Historical Association’s Gutenberg-e Prize. In it, he examines how Dutch, Spanish, and Chinese colonization met and competed in the Far East and asks why the Chinese prevailed over the Europeans rather than the other way around, suggesting that “political will — that is to say state support for expansion — was a key variable.”