Trust and confidence have been identified as crucial for efforts at solving the conundrum of high-level radioactive waste management (RWM). However, mistrust has its virtues, especially in the form of “civic vigilance”—healthy suspicion towards the powers that be. This article examines civic vigilance in the form of “watchdog journalism,” as practiced by the leading Finnish and French newspapers—Helsingin Sanomat (HS) and Le Monde (LM)—in their RWM reporting. Although both countries are forerunners in RWM, Finland constitutes a Nordic “high-trust society” while France has been characterized as a “society of mistrust.” Employing the methods of frame analysis, key RWM-related news frames were identified, consisting of varying combinations of confidence, skepticism, trust, and mistrust. LM's mistrust-skepticism-oriented framings reflect the classical watchdog role, in sharp contrast with the confidence oriented framings of HS, which tends to reproduce government and industry framings. Explanations for the observed differences can be sought in historically constituted political and media cultures, as well as national nuclear “regimes”. For further research, we suggest two alternative hypotheses concerning the implications that these distinct models of civic vigilance have for democracy.

中文翻译：

---

健康的不信任还是自满的自信？芬兰和法国主要报纸对核废料处理的报道中的公民警惕

信任和信心已被确定为努力解决高放废物管理 (RWM) 难题的关键。然而，不信任也有其优点，特别是在“公民警惕”的形式——对权力的健康怀疑。本文以“看门狗新闻”的形式考察了公民警惕性，正如芬兰和法国的主要报纸赫尔辛金圣诺玛 (HS) 和世界报 (LM) 在他们的 RWM 报道中所实践的那样。尽管两国都是 RWM 的先行者，但芬兰构成了北欧的“高度信任社会”，而法国则被描述为“不信任社会”。采用框架分析方法，确定了与 RWM 相关的关键新闻框架，包括信心、怀疑、信任和不信任的不同组合。LM' 不信任-怀疑主义导向的框架反映了经典的看门狗角色，与 HS 的信心导向框架形成鲜明对比，后者倾向于复制政府和行业框架。可以在历史构成的政治和媒体文化以及国家核“政权”中寻找对观察到的差异的解释。为了进一步研究，我们提出了两种不同的假设，这些假设涉及这些不同的公民警惕模型对民主的影响。