ABSTRACT
Chapter 6 provides a synthesis of the project’s findings by comparing the similarities and differences among the three cases, implications for how media ecologies construct and legitimize strategic narratives more broadly, elements of what makes narratives compelling, and the implications for US soft power and the global order. While issue level narratives were primarily informational, providing detailed explanations of the US electoral and debate process and candidates’ campaign and debate rhetoric, these narratives contributed to national and international level narratives defining US values and challenges to US global leadership. Arabic narratives were most supportive of democracy, while criticizing US policy; Russian narratives overtly challenged US democracy and the US-led liberal order; Chinese media largely affirmed the international system, while contesting the universality of US democracy. Chinese and Russian narratives were especially “strong” relative to Arab media narratives, providing clearer visions for their community’s own political identity and future aspirations, resonating with their local political myths. All three regions’ narratives were legitimized through widespread inclusion of Western media reporting on the US election, aiding in their credibility as not state-driven or biased, but rather accurately transmitting what US media reported about its own nation. Finally, the chapter summarizes the contributions of this study for our understanding of strategic narratives, global media, and soft power.
