image of pakistan in the us media exploring news framing

8/7/2019 Image of Pakistan in the US Media Exploring News Framing

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/image-of-pakistan-in-the-us-media-exploring-news-framing 1/57

1

Personal data

Name: Dr. Syed Abdul Siraj

Designation: Chairman, Department of Mass Communication

Parent University: Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad

Field of Research: Mass Communication

Title of Research Image of Pakistan in the US Media:Exploring News Framing

Name of the Host University University of Southern IllinoisCarbondale, USA

Date of departure for Fellowship: September 2006

Date of completion of Fellowship: September 2006

E-mail address [email protected]



2

Post Doctorate Dissertation

Image of Pakistan in the US MediaExploring News Framing

University of Southern IllinoisCarbondale, USA

ByDr. Syed Abdul Syed AbdulChairman, Department of Mass Communication

Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad



3

Image of Pakistan in the US MediaExploring News Framing

Abstract

This study looks at the image of Pakistan, which has a military government, in theNew York Times and the Washington Post one-year before and after the 9/11 attack onthe United States. Within the context of the changed relationship between the UnitedStates and Pakistan after this attack, wherein Pakistan became an ally of the United Statesin its War Against Terror, this study is particularly interested in the frames and slant usedto describe Pakistan and its leader.

The literature on content theory (Shoemaker and Reese, 1996) suggests that variousfactors including personal attitudes and orientations of reporters, media routines, extramedia organization and ideological factors influence news coverage, particularly whilecovering another country. These influences are evident in the news coverage in the formof frames journalists use. Frames are encoded in specific phrases journalists use, andonce they are widely accepted, they result in social impact (Entman 1993; Kerr 2002).

The study (N =335) stories selected by using systematic sampling) found that amountof coverage given to Pakistan in the newspapers differed between the pre- and post-9/11periods. The total number as well as the mean length of stories after 9/11 was greater thanbefore.

Also, Pakistan received more favorable and less unfavorable coverage in the post-9/11 period as compared with the pre-9/11 period. Similarly, in the pre-9/11 period, morestories framed Pakistan as foe than as a friend, while in the post 9/11 period more storiesframed Pakistan as friend than as foe.

The type of coverage Pakistan received after 9/11 is in line with the arguments of several authors (Said 1997; Kux, 2001; Obad 2003) that the U.S. media tend to portraypositively those countries that are close to the interests of the United States even whenthey represent non-democratic regimes.

Key words : Pakistan‘s mage/9/11/New York Times/Washington Post/News Framing



4

CHAPTER IINTRODUCTION

This study has been designed to investigate a detailed picture of the Pakistaniportrayal by the New York Times and the Washington Post of one-year each pre and postscenario of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon in theUSA. Since the 9/11 incidents, the US media have extensively been covering theinternational events. The study focuses on the nature and treatment of the of the Pakistanportrayal. The coverage of Pakistan in US media is a topic of considerable currencybecause of the events following 9/11. Contradictory perceptions of Pakistan possiblyexist in the American public‘s mind. Such contradictions might also be present in theAmerican media. Wanta (2004) reported that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001demonstrated to policymakers, the mass media, and the public, the need for a more global

perspective in coverage of international news‖ (p. 365).

There are various factors that influence media content. In this regard, Shoemaker andReese (1991) developed a model of concentric circles/level. They are: personal attitudesand orientations of reporters are in the center of the scheme and surrounded by four otherlevels, or circles: the media routines level, the organization level, the extramedia level,and the ideological level. Following the tradition of critical theory, the authors stress theimportance of media owners in the process of making decisions about the news content,and they view hegemonic values in news as tools of permeating the notio n of ―commonsense‖ in the society. Shoemaker and Reese state that sources can exert a subtle influenceon news content by offering ―the context within which all other information is evaluated,by providing usable information that is easier and cheaper to use than that from othersources‖ (p.150).

While Covering international events, researchers agree that media primarily regardthe national interest, Shoemaker et el. Chang's (1990) survey of American newspapereditors found that the US media primary cover U.S. interests and involvements abroadand threats to world peace. Similarly, Gans (1979) confirms that foreign news in the U.S.media cover stories relevant to Americans interests. Paletz & Entman (1981) argue thatinternational reporting are consistent with U.S. foreign policy because reporters relyalmost on sources sympathetic to the American interest. This research base on theShoemaker and Reeve‘s theory of content effect and particularly focuses on the factors of ideology and government policy that influence news content in the US media in theinternational perspective.

Journalists while working with the news frames can play powerful role in determiningthe success or failure of social movements. One of the major news framing in the USmedia is by and large experienced either sensationalized or marginal the foreign countrycoverage. This study investigates frames that used in the US news media are"Fundamentalists, "Militancy", Pakistan as "Friend" or "Foe‖, and "PejorativeDescription" frame.



5

Objectives of the StudiesThis study has been designed to achieve the following objectives1. To analyze the nature and extent of Pakistani image in the leading American

newspapers.2. To document the policy and sentiments of the American newspapers on the

Pakistan i‘s issues as specified. 3. To investigate different frames given by the US newspapers to the image of

Pakistan4. To find out how far publication of the issues correlate with the American policy

towards Pakistan

Significance of the StudyPakistan and America have closed ties particularly, in combating terrorism in the

world. Being its significant geographical location, America is looking forward towardsPakistan for having close ties particularly, in the sphere of world politics and combatingterrorism Americans help for Pakistan in combating poverty, educational and militarydevelopment, and rehabilitation works in the earth quake zone has significant impact inchanging people‘s perception towards America. This study will have many foldssignificance, specifically, in understanding each other sentiment in the media coverage.The study will find out the nature and treatment of the Americans print media portrayalof the Pakistan‘s socio, political, and it foreign policies on world issues and the Americanmedia perception towards Pakistan.

Methods The study is primarily a content analysis, which examined both qualitatively and

quantitatively the image of Pakistan in The New York Times and the Washington Post . forone year each pre and post of 9/11, 2001 terrorists events in the USA. The studyexamined all the stories during the specified period including hard news and soft news.Classification of all the stories was based on careful qualitative judgment foridentification of the key words/terms as mentioned in the specified hypothesis. The studyexamined topic, slant, frame, wordage, nature of story and byline story as variables.Frames selected for the study are Pakistan being friend, foe, fundamentalist andpejorative description. These Frames were recognized in the entire story from thecontextual point of view. To measure these variables, the entire story was the contextunit, while headline and intro was the coding unit for identifying the topic. Similarly,each paragraph was the recording unit for identifying slant in the story. The entire storywas the recording unit for identifying frames in the story. The story was coded as neuralwhen it places no clear emphasis on either the favorable or unfavorable aspects of thetopic. For example, when a story carried 12 paragraphs in which 6 carried favorable toneswhile the other 6 carried unfavorable tones, such story was most likely coded as neutral.However, in this case, the story was coded as favorable or unfavorable if the headlinecontains such slant.



6

CHAPTER IIBACKGROUND INFORMATION

Brief facts about PakistanPakistan is located in the South East Asia, got independence from the United

Kingdom in 1947. Its total area is 803,940 Sq. Km. (land 778,720 Sq Km. and water25220 Sq. Km.). Pakistan has bordering with India in the East, Iran in the West, China inthe North and Afghanistan in the North-West. The climate is hot, dry desert, moderate inthe North-West and very cold in the North. The main natural resources of the country areagriculture, natural gas, limited petroleum, copper, coal, iron, salt and limestone.Frequent earth quakes in the west-North and flooding in the East during the months of July and August are the natural hazards of Pakistan,(https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pk.html ).

Pakistan is a densely populated country with approximately 15,00,0000 populations.The growth rate is almost 1.28 percent. Male and female population ratio is 48% and52% respectively. Life expectancy is 60 years of both male and female. Punjabi,Pushtoon, Sindhi, Baluchi and Mahajar are the ethnic groups. Urdu is the nationallanguage, however English is the official and lingua franca of the elite,(http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/statistics.html).

Pakistan is dominantly a Muslim country with 97% of the population is Muslim (77% Sunni and 20 % Shia). Christians, Hindus and other are 3 % of the total population.Pakistan‘s literacy rate is about 48%. Out of that, male and female education ratio is 60%and 40% respectively, (Survey of Pakistan, 2005).

Administratively, the country is divided into four provinces (Punjab, NWFP, Sindh,and Baluchistan) a capital territory, Pakistan occupied Kashmir and Northern area.Islamabad is the capital of the country. Legal system of Pakistan is based on the Britishcommon laws. The government type is federal republic with president and PrimeMinister are the executive branches.

According to 2005-06 budget summary of Pakistan, the per capita GDP grew by 4.7percent and per capita income in current dollar term was up by 14.2 percent, reaching $847, with economic growth at 7 percent, (Economic Survey of Pakistan 2005-06).According to the Survey, there are 26% of the populations living below the poverty line.Main industries of the country are textile, clothing, leather, rice, carpet, sports items,surgical items, etc. the country is linked with road, rail, air, highways and motorways.

Media in Pakistan is both privately and government owned. Television is the mostpopular medium with variety of private channels. There is also a state TV channel whichis widely viewed in the country. Besides, there are great number of dailies and FM radios.Media is moderately independent. Advertisement is one of the chief levers with thegovernment that control media content, (http://www.instecdigital.com/1/pakfact4.htm).

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pk.html





7

Pak-US relations before 9/11For a long period of time, Pakistan has been considered a potentially important

American ally in S outh Asia, but the partnership has been unstable since it‘s beginning inthe 1947, the year Pakistan was established. The interest of the United States in Pakistan

has always been moderate. Pakistan‘s domestic scene, marked by the absence of democratic institutions, inhibits its relations with western democracies, (Kux, 2001;Rahman, 1982).

The 1965 war with India soured US-Pakistan relations, because Washington cut off the supply of military spares to Pakistan during the war. After the war, the relationsremained frozen. Now some analysts argue that US geopolitical needs will force India todevelop better understanding with Pakistan (Ijaz, M. The News, June, 25 th 2001).

Pakistan Ambassador Jahangir Karamat (1999) stated that Pak-US relations in past,were manipulated by the Cold War goals. The Soviets came marching into Afghanistan in

1979. Suddenly, Pakistan became America‘s front -line ally and helped prosecute the US-led ‗jihad‘ against the Soviet Union. The economic and military aid to the anti -Sovietmujahideen later turned out to be a major factor in the evolution of the jihadi culture thatnow Pakistan is trying hard to grapple with. Once the Soviets withdrew, the US washedits hands of Pakistan. The US backed Pakistan‘s fight against the USSR in Afgh anistancontributed to the rise of religious militancy in Pakistan in the eighties. This had adisastrous effect on Pakistan‘s domestic scene and which later on became one of a causesof eroding Pak-US relationship — until 9/11 and Taliban brought them together again,

The US never approved of Islamabad‘s close relationship with Beijing. The USGovernment had continuously been condemning Pakistan for import of nuclear andmissiles technology from China and North Korea. In response to that the U.S.government imposed all U.S. military and economic sanctions levied against Pakistansince 1980. The US further isolated Pakistan after its explosion of an atomic bomb inJune 1998, Likewise, Pakistan's safeguards of nuclear technology was also beingquestioned in Washington, (Karamat 1999).

The military coup of General Pervez Musharraf against the Nawaz electedgovernment and appointing himself as president was initially strongly accused by the USGovernment However, all the condemnations were eclipsed when Musharraf announcedas an ally of the US in the war against terrorism.

Pak-US relations aftermath 9/11In the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist incidents, Pakistan obtained a crucial

role in the South Asian region because of its convenient geo-strategic position. Since the9/11 incidents, Pakistan joined the US in the war on terror and is assisting the US in itsefforts in the war and since then the US-Pak relations moved in so many directions:military to military, US helped Pakistan in economic difficulties through debt relief,through access to US markets, and provided opportunity for greater participation in



8

political and economic levels. President George W Bush, in Camp David, June 24, 2003said, ―America has a strong relationship with Pakistan, and we have benefited from theindustry and talents of the Pakistani Americans,‖ (The News, June 24, 2003). In October 2001, President Bush signed legislation which was tantamount to waiving the ban onmilitary sales and economic sanctions. The law eliminates virtually all U.S. military and

economic sanctions levied against Pakistan since 1980; the banned was endorsed througha legislation call Presslare amendment bill. The rapid removal of sanctions andrescheduling of debt by the US government are positive move in fostering the friendship.The present government is projecting that Pakistan is a moderate and peaceful nation,(Pakistan Observer, March 2005).

In March 2004, the United States for the first time acknowledged its desire for a long-term strategic relationship with Pakistan and made it a major non NATO ally (TheNation, March 20, 2004). Amid shocking howling, emanating from earthquake-strickenvicinities of Pakistan in 2006 affected up close to a million people. America has not onlydispatched a number of helicopters to Pakistan for emergency rescue operations in remote

devastated areas, but has also announced initial monetary help to the tune of US $ 40million. (Daily Express, March 28, 2006).

Obad (2003) argues that shortly after the 9/11, the rhetoric of the United Statesgovernment made clear that the world was about to experience the first major politicaldivision since the end of the Cold War in the 1980s. The new political discourse, mainlybuilt upon binary oppositions, was primarily defined through the speeches of PresidentGeorge W. Bush. He defined the War on Terror as a fight of freedom against oppression,and a fight of the democratic against the undemocratic. Against the backdrop of this clearrhetorical division of ―democratic‖ versus ―non -democratic‖ the role of Pakistan andMusharraf as an ally and a strategic partner of the United States in the war againstterrorism is interesting, (Obad 2003).

Pakistan itself has been a major victim of terrorism due to continuing instability in theregion. At the same time, Pakistan's role as a critical ally in the war on terror hardlyrequires any doubts. Pakistan‘s security agencies have apprehended or killed more than700 Al Qaeda operatives. Pakistan has deployed more than 80,000 troops on the borderwith Afghanistan, and the Pakistan security forces suffered more casualties than thecombined losses of the Afghan, US, and NATO forces in the war on terror.

Historical Evolution of “War on Terrorism” On September 11, 2001, two hijacked airplanes manned by Al Qaeda slammed into

New York's World Trade Center and another into the Pentagon in Washington, DC. Afourth plane flew into the earth in Pennsylvania. Thousands of people were killed in anevent. The events were unprecedented. Never before had attacks of similar magnitudebeen launched against civilians in peacetime on the territory of the United States (Gannon2001). Many world leaders, in their initial remarks, described the attacks as no less thanan act of war.



9

These incidents led to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and marked the beginning of the "War on Terrorism", (wikipedia.org 2006). Wanta (2004) reported that a web of terrorhas spun across many different nations of the world. He argues, ―The emergence of theAl-Qaeda and terror organization established the need for a more global perspective‖, (P.45).

The phrase "War on Terrorism" was first widely used by the Western press torefer to the attempts by Russian and European governments, and eventually the U.S.government, to stop attacks by anarchists against international political leaders. Many of the anarchists described themselves as "terrorists," and the term had a positive valence forthem at the time, (wikipedia.org 2006).

The phrase gained currency was its use to describe the efforts by the Britishcolonial government to end a spate of Jewish terrorist attacks in the British Mandate of Palestine in the late 1940s. The British proclaimed a "War on Terrorism" and attemptedto crack down on Irgun, Lehi, (wikipedia.org 2006).

The phrase "War on Terrorism" was used frequently by U.S. President RonaldReagan in the 1980s. In his 1986 speech to the U.N. General Assembly, Reagan said:"…the United States believes that the understandings reached by the seven industrialdemocracies at the Tokyo summit last May made a good start toward international accordin the war on terrorism," (wikipedia.org 2006).

On September 12, 2001, less than 24 hours after the attacks in New York City andWashington, NATO invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty and declared theattacks to be an attack against all 19 NATO member countries, (wikipedia.org 2006).

Kent (2004) argues that the press faced a tremendous task in reporting on the eventsand developments after September 11. He comments the ―t he press of the United Statesalso rushed to fill in all the blank spaces in the national consciousness resulting from thedearth of international news in preceding years ‖. Campbell (2001) argues that foreignnews on terrorism are being questioned both in terms of quantity and quality that comesfrom reporters parachuting in for events without much on-the-ground context.

The Talibanization PhenomenaTaliban ranks consist of local tribesmen, students of religious seminaries and few

foreigners Jihadis who are against the Pakistani government for its support in the war onterror and want Islamic system in the areas of their control. This study takes Taliban asPakistani Taliban who may have resemblance with those who ruled Afghanistan in the1990s. They along with other Afghans and foreigners defeated the then USSR army inAfghanistan. After the Soviets defeat in Afghanistan, the Taliban got control over most of the territory of Afghanistan in 1996 and imposed a combination of Islamic rigid laws andPashto fundamental culture/traditional values. This stringency in governance earned a lotof animosity for them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terrorism













10

However, the spell of Taliban rules was epigrammatic as they were alleged to haveprovided conduit to Al-Qaeda leadership responsible for the September 9, 2001 terroristattack on the US. They were unseated by the mighty superpower USA through its high-tech military hardware with active support from Pakistan. The Pervez Musharraf militarygovernment joined the US led war on terror which provoked the local Taliban in Pakistan

and they started attacks on the security forces with the help of Taliban across the borderin Afghanistan. To quash the local Taliban, Pakistani government started army operationagainst them. Thousands of troops have been deployed in the tribal areas and dozens of operations have been conducted in the areas of Taliban dominance. Hundreds of militarypersonnel, Taliban and civilians have been killed in the fight. A number of peace effortshave been initiative to find out reasonable solution. This study investigates mediaperspective on the issue in the context of war and peace journalism particularly in theslant and frames towards Taliban. The war by now has entered into the sixth year. Thearea once bastion of peace has been turned into a veritable hell (Rustam Shah Mohmand,2008). The number of Taliban has swelled in the recent years and the movement hasgained momentum in other settled parts of the Frontier province.

According to Anwar Syed (2008), the Taliban have two main objectives. First, theywant to expel the Americans from Afghanistan. To this, they attack the US and Afghanforces. They want Pakistan dissociate itself from the terror war. As Pakistan will not dothat, they consider Pakistan a friend of their enemy and hence their enemy. Secondly,they want Islamic and morality ‗as they know them to be implemented in Pakistan.

Ahmad Rashid (Taliban: militant Islam, oil and fundamentalism, 2000) fearsPakistani society is succumbing to Talibanization as the conflict between the moderate(state) and fundamentalists (Taliban) enters into a decisive stage. In this new stage, acultural change is happening, starting from the Frontier province and then spreading inthe whole country. He fears the growing religious militancy will certainly silence thevoice of the liberals.

Taliban are being criticized for entertaining a rigid view of Islam and the fear thatTaliban victory would transport the country into the ephemeral dark ages. Pressured bythe horrific prognosis, the state has often retaliated with force. According to the HumanRights Commission of Pakistan, gross human rights excesses have been made by thesecurity forces in the troubled areas. Attacks on the non-combatants and the collateraldamages are all times high. Hundreds of thousands of ordinary people have beenrendered affected and in total discomfiture.

The present study aims to analyze the media strategy in reporting the tension betweenthe Taliban and the security forces. Taking cue from the original Galtung model of peace

journalism, this study strives to help devise a media strategy to inculcate peace andmoderation between the warring sides.



11

Pak-India Conflict over KashmirIndia and Pakistan were created as a result of the Indian Independence Act of 1947.

Soon after the independence both the countries started differences over the territory of Kashmir. Pakistan claims Kashmir, where the majority of people are Muslim bound toIndia against their will. India claims Kashmir, as agreed under the Indian Independence

Act. Meanwhile, within Kashmir a separatist movement has emerged, seeking anindependent state, which is opposed by both Pakistan and India,http://www.flashpoints.info/countries-conflicts/Kashmir-India_vs_Pakistan.

As a result of the unresolved dispute on Kashmir, India and Pakistan went to war forseveral times. Both India and Pakistan are the world's most populous countries both withnuclear capability have the ominous potential to escalate into threat nuclear war, orbeyond. About 65% of the territory of Kashmir is administered by India, the remaining35% by Pakistan, http://www.flashpoints.info/countries-conflicts/Kashmir-India_vs_Pakistan.

Hindus and Muslims slaughtered each other during the partition of the subcontinentinto India and Pakistan (Malik, 2002). Soon after the independence from British, both thecountries warred over the territory of Kashmir in the Himalayas. The claim over Kashmirgoes to the heart of the identities of these two rivals. According to UN records Kashmir isthe oldest conflict inscribed in the body of UN resolutions and one of the most serious(Burki, 2007).

The troubles began with the British who were eager to quit India and the dillydallyingmaharajah of Jammu and Kashmir — a Hindu ruler, not especially popular with his mostlyMuslim subjects. Against the will of his subjects, maharaja agreed to the annexation of Kashmir by India. Pakistan has never seen the maharajah's decision as legitimate(Rahman, 1996). By Pakistan's logic of partition, Kashmir, with its Muslim majority,belong to Pakistan, (Ganguly, 1994). As Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, then the foreign ministerand later the president of Pakistan declared in 1964, "Kashmir must be liberated if Pakistan is to have its full meaning" (Malik, 2002).

Kashmir has also been essential to India from the start. "Many Indians think something would be diminished in our lives if Kashmir were to go," said Kanti Bajpai, ainternational relations professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. Indiaclaims Kashmir, as agreed under the Indian Independence Act. India's first PrimeMinister, Jawaharlal Nehru, an ardent secularist who vehemently opposed carving thesubcontinent along religious lines, was born to a Brahmin family from Kashmir. Hissentimentality about the place infuses Indian feelings about Kashmir today (Ganguly,1994).

Meanwhile, within Kashmir, a separatist movement emerged. India accuses Pakistanof waging a proxy war in Kashmir by arming and training militants. Pakistan says itprovides only moral and diplomatic support to the Kashmiri freedom struggle(Harrimirza, 2007). About 65% of the territory of Kashmir is administered by India, the

http://www.flashpoints.info/countries-conflicts/Kashmir-India_vs_Pakistan








12

remaining 35% by Pakistan (http://www.flashpoints.info/countries-conflicts/Kashmir-India vs. Pakistan) .

India and Pakistan are the world's most populous countries with nuclear capabilityhave the ominous potential to escalate into threat nuclear war (Hussain, 1998). Human

rights groups have repeatedly raised an outcry about disappearances and extrajudicialkillings in the Indian held Kashmir (Human right commission, 2001).

That first India-Pakistan war on the issue of Kashmir began in 1947 and lasted formore than a year. When it was over, Pakistan had seized a swath of northwesternKashmir. India agreed to hold a plebiscite under international monitoring, to allowKashmiris to choose which nation they wanted to join. The plebiscite never happened. Itbecame the mantra for Pakistani outrage against India (Rahman, 1996). Pakistan- Indiafought another bloody war in 1965 for the claim of Kashmir. In December 1971 Indiahelped East Pakistan (Bangladesh) to secede from Pakistan (Haq, 1997).

The rigged election in 1988 in the Indian held Kashmir caused the Kashmiridiscontent to erupt into guerrilla warfare. The Kashmiri insurgency was radicallytransformed more than a decade ago by the introduction of militancy, (Cohen, 1995).India accused Pakistan of assisting the militant groups; Pakistan denies the accusation(Harrimirza, 2007). In 1998, both India and Pakistan carried out nuclear tests, renewingthe dispute over Kashmir. Efforts for peace bubbled up in 1998. A historic bus route wasopened from Delhi to Lahore, and both sides pledged to talk about Kashmir, (Malik,2002).

In 1999, war broke out for the third time on the cease-fire line at a place calledKargil. More than over 1,500 soldiers on both sides were killed. Afraid that Kargil mightturn into nuclear war, US President Bill Clinton pressured both sides to end the war.President Bill Clinton described the Line of Control (LoC) dividing Kashmir as the mostdangerous place on earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmirconflict) . SIPRI(Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) yearbook 2002 reports that SouthAsia is one of the regions that recorded the strongest growth in defense expenditures.

The end of the Kargil fighting intensified the militancy in Kashmir. The 9/11 attackson the US, resulted in the US government wanting to restrain all kinds of militancy in theworld, including liberation struggles. Due to Indian persuasion on US CongressMembers, the US urged Islamabad to cease help to the kashmiri millitants. In December2001, a terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament linked to Pakistan resulted in war threats,massive deployment and international fears of nuclear war in the subcontinent. Afterintensive diplomatic efforts by other countries, India and Pakistan began to withdrawtroops from the international border June 10, 2002, and negotiations began again(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir conflict) . The competing claims to Kashmir havebeen complicated by the domestic politics on both sides of the Line of Control(Harrimirza, 2007).

http://www.flashpoints.info/countries-conflicts/Kashmir-India%20vs%20Pakistan


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kargil_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_conflict

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamabad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Parliament

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_war

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_10





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_10

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_war

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Parliament


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamabad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kargil_War





13

Pakistan's NuclearPakistan's nuclear weapons program was established in 1972 by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.

Shortly after the loss of East Pakistan in the 1971 war with India, Bhutto initiated theprogram. India's 1974 testing of a nuclear "device" gave Pakistan's nuclear program newmomentum. The 1975 arrival of Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan considerably advanced these

efforts. Dr. Khan is a German-trained metallurgist who brought with him knowledge of gas centrifuge technologies that he had acquired through his position at the classifiedURENCO uranium enrichment plant in the Netherlands. He was put in charge of building, equipping and operating Pakistan's Kahuta facility, which was established in1976. Under Khan's direction, Pakistan employed an extensive clandestine network inorder to obtain the necessary materials and technology for its developing uraniumenrichment capabilities,

In 1985, Pakistan crossed the threshold of weapons-grade uranium production, and by1986 it is thought to have produced enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon.Pakistan continued advancing its uranium enrichment program, and acquired the ability

to carry out a nuclear explosion in 1987, Wisconsin Project (2001) .On May 28, 1998 Pakistan successfully conducted five nuclear tests. The Pakistani

Atomic Energy Commission reported that the five nuclear tests conducted on May 28generated a seismic signal of 5.0 on the Richter scale, with a total yield of up to 40 KT(equivalent TNT). Dr. A.Q. Khan claimed that one device was a boosted fission deviceand that the other four were sub-kiloton nuclear devices. On May 30, 1998 Pakistantested one more nuclear warhead with a reported yield of 12 kilotons. The tests wereconducted at Balochistan, bringing the total number of claimed tests to six, WisconsinProject (2001) . These tests came slightly more than two weeks after India carried out fivenuclear tests of its own on May 11 and 13 1998, Terry C. Wallace. (1998).

Several sources, such as Jane's Intelligence Review and Defense Department reportsmaintain that Pakistan's motive for pursuing a nuclear weapons program is to counter thethreat posed by its principal rival, India, which has superior conventional forces andnuclear weapons.

Pakistan has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or the ComprehensiveTest Ban Treaty (CTBT). According to the US Defense Department sources, "Pakistanremains steadfast in its refusal to sign the NPT, stating that it would do so only after India

joined the Treaty. Consequently, not all of Pakistan's nuclear facilities are under IAEAsafeguards. Pakistani officials have stated that signature of the CTBT is in Pakistan's bestinterest, but that Pakistan will do so only after developing a domestic consensus on theissue, and have disavowed any connection with India's decision", US DefenseDepartment Report (2001).

On several occasions, under the authority of amendments to the Foreign AssistanceAct, the U.S. has imposed sanctions on Pakistan, cutting off economic and military aid asa result of its pursuit of nuclear weapons. However, the U.S. suspended sanctions each

http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/pakistan/pakistan%20nuclear%20update.nf.htm


http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/prolif00.pdf

http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/index.html

http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/ctbt/index.html








http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/index.html






14

time developments in Afghanistan made Pakistan a strategically important "frontlinestate," such as the 1981 Soviet occupation and in the war on terrorism.

President Musharraf — A US ally

Pakistani leader, President Pervez Musharraf, is also a military Chief of Staff, whotook power in a military coup in 1999 from Navaz Sharif. Musharraf discontinued hissupport of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan after the September attacks, which madehim an instant ally of American foreign policy, Obad (2003). During Musharraf visit tothe United States in February 2002, President George W. Bush admired the PakistaniPresident‘s ―courage and vision‖ and described him as the ―key partner in the globalcoalition against terrorism‖ (BBC News, February 14, 2002).

According to the Pakistani News Service, Musharraf was born in Delhi in 1943 assecond of three brothers. Musharraf spent his childhood in Turkey due to his father‘sdeputation in Ankara. He joined the Pakistani Military Academy in 1961. He also served

for seven years in the Special Services Group Commandos. Musharraf studied at theRoyal College of Defense Studies in the United Kingdom. Musharraf military careerpeaked when Prime Minister Navaz Sharif promoted him to the rank of general andappointed him as chief of army staff. In addition to this, Musharraf was given the chargeof Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee in 1999. After the military coup in October1999, he proclaimed himself the Chief Executive of Pakistan and he was sworn in as thePresident of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in June 2001. In response to the militarytakeover, the U.S. government imposed the sanctions legally required in the case of theoverthrow of a democratically elected government, but those had little actual impactsince Pakistan was already under severe sanctions after the explosion of atomic bomb,(Kux, 2001).

Obad (2003) documents that Musharraf after becoming US ally in the war againstterrorism, the US media portray him as courageousness, modern, civilized, pro-Western,

progressive and liberal leader and who deals with the ―Islamic fundamentalists‖ in a pro -Western‖ stance; and whose rule has a lot of characteristics of a true democracy.President George W Bush, in Camp David, June 24, 2003, said, ―President M usharraf is acourageous leader and a friend of the United States, (The News June 24, 2003).

Pakistan and the Western MediaPakistan is covered in the media in terms of an overall frame of West versus Islam, as

explained in the works of Said (1997), Siddiqi (1997) and Karim (1999; 2001). Theyargue that a new binary opposition of West versus Islam replaced the Cold War frame inthe international coverage of news.

Said (1997) dissects the misunderstanding of Islam in the media, starting from themisrepresentation of facts to deliberate examples of cultural prejudice. According to Said,Islam is subject to the stereotypical portrayals and malicious generalizations in thewestern media. Such portrayal has excessively been observed in the Western media



15

particularly after 9/11 and the gap between Western and Islamic countries has becomewiden. Said (1997) arguers on the superficial layer in the U.S. media about the coverageof Islam are produced because of the lack of journalists‘ knowledge and education. Said (1997) claims that the Western, and particularly American media, tend to cover Islam inan orthodox, canonical way, which mirrors long-standing cultural prejudices of the West

towards Islam. Karim (2001) comments that one of the greatest problems of Westernmedia coverage of Islam is that Muslims as a whole are presented as dangerous toWestern interests. Karim (2001) argues that throughout a long period of misusage, the―Islamicness‖ of certain actions became a self -explanatory denominator that denotes amilitant religion opposed to modernity of any kind. He refers to the terms like ―Islamicfundamentalists‖ or ―Islamic militants,‖ that have become a part of the large frame of theWestern media coverage of Islam, therefore, irretrievably attribute negative meanings toone whole religion. Said (1997) claims that labels attributed to the Muslim populationtoday could not be attributed to any other ethnic or religious group in the mainstreamdiscussion.

When discussing the influences on media content, Shoemaker and Reese (1991) arguethat news construction is influenced by the reporter‘s framework, personal attitudes andorientations. There are other factors that influence news making and selection in the USmedia, i.e., media routines level, the organization level, the extramedia level, and theideological level, Shoemaker and Reese (1991)

Public opinion about Pakistan in US since 9/11Following is a summary of the US public opinion on Pakistan reported by the Roper

Center at University of Connecticut Public Opinion Online — period 2001 to 2006.

To a question of how much Americans like Pakistan, the survey revealsthat only 28% Americans like Pakistan

To a question regarding Pakistan being an ally in the war againstterrorism, 70% views that Pakistan is not doing enough to support theU.S. campaign against terrorism.

Similarly, regarding Pakistan reliability in the war against terrorism, theresponses were scattered and saying that 10%, very reliable, 33%somewhat reliable 29% somewhat unreliable, 21%, Very unreliable and7% not sure/decline.

Regarding Pak-US friendship, the survey reveals that 6%, 27%, 31%,24%, and 11% Americans believe that Pakistan is a close friend, notclose friend, not friend, neither enemy nor friend, and not sure/refusedrespectively.

Certain countries of the world are important to the U.S. for political,economic or security reasons. In this regard 70% opined that America



16

has vital interest in Pakistan.

To a question of whether to favor or oppose U.S. troops if thegovernment of Pakistan requests to help against a radical Islamicrevolution? 61% wanted to favor the request, while 32% opposed and

7% were not sure.

Opinion regarding President Pervez Musharraf as US ally wasmoderately favorable.

In the light of the earthquake disaster in Pakistan, majority thought thatthe US government should increase assistance to the victims.

Regarding economic aid to Pakistan by the US, 32% opined that itshould be kept as it is. However 28%, were of the view the aid should bedecreased and 23%, wanted to stop the aid altogether. 17% refused to

respond.

Regarding conduct of war against terrorism in the presence of disputebetween Pakistan and India over Kashmir. Majority viewed that it wouldbe difficult to conduct such war in the presence of Pak-India conflict.

To a question of whether Pakistan or India will have a better relationshipwith the United States in the long term? Majority favors India.



17

CHAPTER IIILITERATURE REVIEW

There are number of factors that influence news content. Shoemaker & Reese (1996)found that media serve as means of the ruling power to produce and maintain thedominant ideology. Galtung and Ruge (1970) argue that news is an ideological product incountries of all types. Ahem (1984) found that, among extrinsic variables, GNP, trade,and political relations influence on media coverage. Previous studies revealed thatinternational news coverage in the US media has a direct influence on U.S. publicopinion. Wanta (2004) found strong effect on American public opinion, especially forconflict-related international stories.

While commenting on the symbiotic relationship between media and society, Gary(1986) quotes Saturday review cartoon caption, ―If a tree falls in the forest, and the mediais not there to cove r it, has the tree really fallen?‖ Gary (1996) argues that all

governments spend quite great money and use more people to circulate news than thenews organizations do to collect it. He furthers says, ―There is now a bureaucratic stateand a media state‖. According to James David Barber, ―Media in the United States arethe new political parties and the old political parties are gone‖. Linsky (1986) argues―Press has the tendency to speed up the policy making process‖ p.107).

Communication Scholars consider government views as strong extramedia factor thatinfluence media content. Graber (1993) argues that government is considered a strongfactor, which influences news coverage. Herman & Chomsky (1988) believe that medialargely serve the dominant elite. They argue that this is equally true when the media areprivately owned without formal censorship, as when they are directly controlled by the

state. While arguing on the media routine approach, Hirsh (1977) says that the massmedia may serve different functions, but they share many organizational similarities thatovershadow many of the differences. The organizational perspective proposes is anotherfactor that might affect news coverage; even though the media are not financed by thegovernment, they are in many ways controlled by the state, Hirsh (1977).

Graber (1993) argues, "violence conflict, disaster and familiar persons or situationsare the major selection criteria in the US media. He further comments that negative andconflict news seem to be more important in the United States than in any other society"(pp. 207-31). Hester proposes that culture affinities, economic associations, and news andinformation conflicts could be determents in selecting international news in the US

media. Gen (1979) detected ethnocentrism, altruistic, democracy, responsible capitalism,small-town photorealism, individualism, modernism, social order, and national leadershipas values influencing decision for selecting news in the US media.

Shoemaker, Chang, and Bredlinger (1987) developed a criteria to determine what isnewsworthy in terms of international news; i.e., potential for social change; normativedeviance (oddity or uniqueness of the event, which break the norm); relevance to theU.S.; language affinity; geographical distance (closer countries are preferred in news



18

coverage); press freedom; and the economic system of the country being covered. Hester(1973) argues that international news worthiness in the US media are determines by anations‘ geographic size, popul ation, economic development, and its length of existenceas a sovereign nation, their cultural affinities, economic associations, and news andinformation conflicts. Gans (1979) proposes an eight point criteria to decide what values

make newsworthiness according to the American point of view in the internationalperspective. These criterion values are: ethnocentrism, altruistic democracy, responsiblecapitalism, small-town pastoralism, individualism, moderatism, social order, and nationalleadership.

Shoemaker and Reese (1991) developed a model of concentric circles/levels thatinfluence media coverage. They are: personal attitudes and orientations of reporters are inthe center of the scheme and surrounded by four other levels, or circles: the mediaroutines level, the organization level, the extramedia level, and the ideological level.Following the tradition of critical theory, the authors stress the importance of mediaowners in the process of making decisions about the news content, and they view

hegemo nic values in news as tools of permeating the notion of ―common sense‖ in thesociety. Shoemaker and Reese state that sources can exert a subtle influence on news

content by offering ―the context within which all other information is evaluated, byproviding usable information that is easier and cheaper to use than that from othersources‖ (p.150).

Mujajid (1971) says that there are large number of content studies pertaining to theflow of foreign news in the US media While covering international events, theresearchers agree that media primarily regard the national interest, Shoemaker et el.Chang's (1990) survey of American newspaper editors found that the US media primarycover U.S. interests and involvements abroad and threats to world peace. Similarly, Gans(1979) confirms that foreign news in the U.S. media cover stories relevant to Americansinterests. Paletz & Entman (1981) argue that international reporting is consistent withU.S. foreign policy because reporters rely almost on sources sympathetic to the Americaninterest. This research base on the Shoemaker and Reeve‘s theory of content effect andparticularly focuses on the factors of ideology and government policy that influence newscontent in the US media in the international perspective.

The influence of Ideology on news contentsIdeology has extensively been defined by the social scientists According to Becker

(1984) "An ideology is an integrated set of frames of reference through which each of ussees the world and to which all of us adjust our actions" (p. 69). Hall (1986) definesideology as "the mental frameworks--the languages, the concepts, categories, imagery of thought, and the systems of representation--which different classes and social groupsdeploy in order to make sense of, define, figure out, and render intelligible the waysociety works" (p. 29).

Samuel Becker (1984) defines ideology as ―govern the way we perceive our worldand our selves; it controls what we see as ‗natural‘ or ‗obvious‘‖ (p. 69). According to



19

Raymond William s (1977) ideology is a ―relatively formal and articulate system of meanings, values and beliefs, of a kind that can be abstracted as a ‗world view‘ or a ‗classout look‘‖ (p. 109).

Press is generally consistent with the values and aspiration of the society, therefore,

ideology is wielded with the media contents. Shoemaker & Reese (1991) argue that―ideas have links to interests and power and that the power to create symbols is not aneutral forces‖ (p. 185). They further observe that ―not only is news abo ut the powerful,but it structures stories so that events are interpreted from the perspective of powerfulinterests.‖ (Shoemaker & Reeve, p.185). According to them media work as extensions of powerful interests in society.

Media portrayal of foreign countries often reflects the dominant ideology of the hostcountry, Yu and Riffe, (1988). News reporting is often motivated by ideology rather thannewsworthiness. Ideology is a tool that ―serves as a binding force in a society‖,Shoemaker and Reese (1991 p.186). News is basically constructed for the people in a

given society. The world of media reality is different then the social reality. Shoemaker &Reese (1991) "news is a socially created product, not a reflection of an objective reality,(p.186). Ramapras ad & Majid (1995) argue that as a socially constructed product, ―newsis influenced by a number of factors, i.e., political, economic, and ideological, and opento a fascinating process of cognitive simplification‖, (p.1). They state that t hese factorsinfluence media for advocating ideology in a given society. Hull (1989) explains that―ideology focuses our attention on the symbolic influence of media on audience of media,the ―definition‖ that prevails, and the legitimization and exercise of symbolic power‖ (p.309).

Postmodern media has moved every thing into representation. Jean Budrillard (1993)argues that the Tangible world is replaced by selection of images and whichsimultaneously has imposed itself as a Tangible. He further argues that mass media isshifting our experiences away from the reality to hyper-reality.

Media construct social reality on the bases of ideology of a given society. Shoemaker& Rerve (1991) comment that ideology is a tool that serves as a binding force in asociety. Zengjun (2004) argues that national image is constructed through a complexhistorical process involving many factors, such as the political and social realities of aparticular country, diplomatic relations, and changes in the international political andeconomic spheres. Adoni (1984) found that mass media by using these factors can play amajor role in shaping a country image. According to Kellner (1995) media frame eventswithin the context of ideology, politics and culture in such a way that cultivaterepresentational picture in the audience mind.

Media maintain an ideological base in order to reaffirm social norms. In this regard,Shoemaker and her colleagues (1988) found that those political groups perceived asdeviant by newspapers‘ editors were typically g iven less favorable treatment. Shoemaker,Chang, Brendlinger (1987) established that International stories published by the USmedia were more deviant then those stories not reported. They observed that ―events



20

often conveyed normative deviance. That is, ―they would have broken American normshad they occurred in the United States‖ (Shoemaker, Chang, Brendlinger, (1987 p.165).

Media portray deviance in a way that tantamount to ridicule. Miliband (1969) arguesthat ―irrelevant eccentricities which serious and responsible people may dismiss as of no

consequence‖ (Miliband, 1969, p. 238). As quoted by Shoemaker and Reeve (1991)Gitlin (1980) in the 1960s students‘ radical movement identified a number of specifictechniques that were used to make students‘ ac tion appear more deviant. These includedtrivialization; polarization by showing counter-demonstrations; emphasis on externaldiscussion; disparagement by undercounting the students‘ numbers and minimizing their effectiveness; reliance on official; emphasis on the presence of Communists, Vietcongflags, and violence and considerable attention to right-wing opposition (Shoemaker &Reeve, p. 187).

Daniel Hallin (1986) explains that media maintain three ideological boundaries, i.e.,legitimate controversy, consensus and deviance. He argues that the sphere of legitimate

controversy is relating to the media‘s objectivity and balance. In the sphere of consensus, journalist is neither neutral or oppose. While in the sphere of deviance, journalist is notnatural. In this regard Hallin (1986) argues ―it plays the role of exposing, condemning, or excluding from the public agenda those who violate or challenge the political consensus.It marks out and defends the limit of acceptable conflict‖ (p. 117). McQuial (1986) w hileresearching on the pluralistic model in the US questions, ―Whether media offer opportunities for politically diverse audiences and/or audience interest to flourish.‖ (P.138). 'Today, not only is the quantity of foreign news questioned but also its quality nowthat some coverage comes from reporters parachuting in for events without much on-the-ground context' (Campbell 2001, p.1S).

The Influence of government policy on Media ContentAccording to the critical studies research, the U.S. media coverage of international

news is largely based on foreign policy. Media by and large are supposed to be a co-worker of the government and a tool to endorse national standpoint in internationalrelationships, (Lent, 1977; Merrill, 1995). Chang, 1988, 1989; Dorogi, 2001; Yu andRiffe, 1988 confirm that coverage of international news by all US mainstream media hasbeen unfailing with the US government foreign policy. In principle, the limitations innewsgathering resources frequently drive the news media to rely on government sourcesfor international reporting, Z. Peng (2004). Similarly Chang (1988) claim that theAmericans‘ opinion about the outside world is generally based on their mainstreammedia. In this regard, Merrill, (1995) argues that media inculcate favorable andunfavorable images of the world in the mind of the people. Likewise, Perlmutter, (1998)established that perception of the American public could easily be cluttered of the otherparts of the world through the news coverage of the American media.

Shoemaker & Reese (1991) affirm, ―there is little doubt that governments of allcountries apply controls over the mass media‖ (p. 169). Gartner (1988) describes thatgovernment‘s officials and politicians pressure the media to influence news content. And



21

added ―broadcasting today is essentially a public -policy laboratory in which the congressfeels it can play with impunity‖ (p. 4).

Herman (1993) claims that the American media tend to overlook relevantinformation in the coverage of international events when it collides with the national

agenda. He argues that the media excessively treat governmental sources as priorityplausible, therefore allowing domestic leaders to manipulate them. Herman and Chomsky(1988) argue that a propaganda model subsists yet in the countries whose democraticregimes do not publicly exert pressure on the media. They claim that American mediafollow the frame of the propaganda model, which consists of five filters: (1) size,ownership and profit orientation of the mass media, (2) advertising license, (3) sources,(4) flak and the enforcers, and (5) anticommunism as a control mechanism. Herman andChomsky argue that those filters marginalize and eliminate voices of dissent in theAmerican mainstream media, which become the tools ―that can set the national agenda‖(p. 4.) They conclude that U.S. media coverage of ―enemy‖ countries, such as communistregimes, differs from the coverage of ―friendly‖ or ―client‖ regimes, such as military

dictatorships in in some countries of Asia and Latin America. Latin America, Obad(2003).

Shoemaker & Reese (1991) observed that Federal Communication Commission hasconsistently been using control over the broadcast media since its inception. In additionto government laws and regulations, thousands of government workforce and mediaspecialists have been engaged with the media to manipulate media content for desiredgoal, (Shoemaker & Reese 1991). Boylan (1989) documents comments of the Journalist,I.F. Stone ―the US President Lyndon Johnson ―sometime seems to think the constitutionmade him not only commander-in- chief of the nation‘s armed forces but editor in chief of its newspapers‖ (p. 47).

While investigating the coverage of the Washington Post and the New York Times onUS-China relationship, Cha ng (1989) established that ―the more the government favoredthe US-China relations, the more the newspapers preferred better relations between thetwo countries‖ (p. 504). Shoemaker & Reese (1991) argue that there is an effect of theUS policy on the media content. Chang (1989) noted that change in coverage in the USnewspapers takes place in response to the shift in government policy.

(2004) in a documentary film provides comparison of U.S. and international mediacoverage of the crisis in the Middle East. The documentary exposes how the foreignpolicy interests of American political elites--oil, and a need to have a secure military basein the region, among others--work in combination with Israeli public relations strategiesto exercise a powerful influence over how news from the region is reported.

The documentary analyzes and explains how--through the use of language, framingand context--the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza remains hidden in thenews media, and Israeli colonization of the occupied terrorities appears to be a defensivemove rather than an offensive one. The documentary also explores the ways that U.S.



22

journalists, for reasons ranging from intimidation to a lack of thorough investigation,have become complicit in carrying out Israel's PR campaign.

With this background in view, this study assumes that coverage of Pakistan may beperceived favorably in the US newspapers because Pakistan has good relationship with

the United States since her independence. The relationship has gone deep after theSeptember 11 th 2001 terrorist incidents, as Pakistan is an ally of the US in the fightagainst terrorism.

News Framing and IdeologyOne of the vital factors in news coverage is framing. Framing technique in mass

media is part of the agenda setting. It is a journalistic product, which is presented in away that influences audience‘s perception about an issue in order to formulate publicopinion/image either positive or negative of specific interest, Obad (2003). Framing inmedia refers to the characteristics of properties and qualities of an objects or people in the

news, Renita Coleman and Stephen Banning (2006). Media researchers have beenexamining news framing as theory since long, Entman, (1993). Obad (2003) describesthat the news framing process was first attempted by Tuchman 1978 and since than anumber of other media researchers have been contributing to the theory. Reese (2000)views framing as ―organizing principles that are socially shared and persistent over time,that work sym bolically to meaningfully structure the social world‖ (p.11).

Hoffman (1974) defines "framing" as "the principles of organization, which govern[social] events." (p. 145). According to this definition, all kinds of stories that take placeare subjected to news framing. According to Tuchman, (1978) framing is some thing of subjective association in an event. Norris (1995) argues news frames as cognitiveschemata, and journalists usually work with news frames to simplify, prioritize andstructure the narrative flow of events. Majid and Ramaprasad (2000) argue that framing isinevitable while making news stories, it provides a podium at which journalists spotproblems, scrutinize reasons and construct moral judgments. Entman, (1991), newsframes are embodied in 'key words, metaphors, concepts, symbols and visual imagesemphasized in a news narrative, (pp. 7).

Scheufele (1999) developed a model of framing and its effect. This model has sixstages for generating effect on individual and society. They are: "Frame building" takesplace when journalists construct stories, followed by "frame setting," when those framesare "set" upon the public by mass dissemination. These frames enter our cognitions in astage called "individual level effects framing," which results in the final stage, dubbed"societal frames." Societal frames in turn act upon journalists' frames and influence theirconstructions at the original "frame building" stage, (p.p. 103-1).

Entman (1993) argues that media frame crop up when journalists "select some aspectsof a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a wayas to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation,and/or treatment recommendation for the item described."(pp. 51-58). This can beachieved in the media message by the "presence or absence of certain keywords, stock



23

phrases, stereotyped images, sources of information, and sentences that providethematically reinforcing clusters of facts or judgments." (Ibid. p. 52). In order tohighlighting particular facts more relevant to the audience, journalists often use certainterms/phrases in the stories so that the reader can process them easily and understoodthem quickly, Entman (1993). Kerr (2002) argues that frames are capable of producing

social effects after encoded in specific phrases once they are widely accepted.Goffman (1974) argues that audiences on the bases of personal experiences develop

their own frame, which they use while interpreting the news. Debating on the media andaudience frames, Gamson and Modigliani, (1987) argue ―media frames refer to thosephrases or images which allow journalists to classify information and make it easilyavailable to their audiences (p. 143). While Entman, (1993) refers to the audience framesare ―mentally stored clusters of ideas that guide individual‘s processing of information,‖(p. 53).

Journalists while working with the news frames can play powerful role in determiningthe success or failure of social movements. One of the major news framing in the USmedia is by and large experienced either sensationalized or marginal the foreign countrycoverage. This study investigates frames that used in the US news media are"Fundamentalists, "Liberal" and "Friend" or "Foe‖,

This study uses the Shoemaker and Reese hierarchy to explore how the image of Pakistan was portrayed by the US Media in the one year each pre and Post September 11terrorist incidents in the USA. Shoemaker and Reese, particularly, consider theideological, extra-organizational and the journalist routine and individual levels as themost prime which refer to the power and the distribution of power in society. Thesehierarchy levels often assign meaning and significance to people and events; they

―promote a way of looking at events which fundamentally distorts them.‖ Shoemaker andReese, (1991, p. 112).

AssumptionIn the light of the above background information and review of literature, it is

generally, assumed that there would be greater coverage on Pakistan, particularly, afterthe 9/11 incidents it is expected that on the one hand, Pakistan may be perceived andcovered favorably because of Pakistan long relationship with the US in general and afterthe 9/11 in particular. However contradictory perception possibly exists in the Americanpublic mind and in the US media when things are incongruent to the American ideology

and foreign policy, particularly, Pakistan is an Islamic country at a time when Islam isunder scrutiny/siege its image may be unfavorable.

Moreover, the unfavorable coverage may be viewed in a larger context, such asPakistan being a nuclear Islamic country in the Islamic block, Pakistan unfriendlyrelationship with Israel, Pakistan‘s strategic relationship with China, terrorists‘ activitiesin the tribal area (Waziristan), opposition to America by the Islamic fictions, USinclination towards India in the areas of trade and international politics, etc.



24

In addition to that the US media conventionally portray crime, undemocratic values,strikes and protests of the third world countries more often than the developmental issues.These complex factors might have forged unfavorable attitude in the American mediatowards Pakistan.

Given that newspapers in the United States consistently reflect the nationalfeeling/ideology, and since there are terrorists activities going around Pakistan, thecoverage of Pakistan in the specified US newspapers is most likely possible that a lot of news stories will deal with:

Terrorism, Pakistan‘s Nuclear, political in ternal Politics, Islamicreligious fundamentalism, militancy, President Musharraf as US ally,Pakistan and India relations, and general stories on Pakistan.

The above information and an initial assessment of the newspapers‘ coverage letto the development of the following questions and hypotheses.

Research QuestionsThis study will examine the coverage of Pakistan since 9/11 in leading US

newspapers, the New York Times and the Washington Post . The questions of interest tothis study are:

R.Q 1 Did the amount of coverage given to Pakistan in the New York Times and Washington Post differ between the pre-and post- 9/11 period?

H.1a Pakistan will receive more coverage in terms of number of stories (alarger number of stories) after 9/11 than before in both the newspapers.

H.1b Pakistan will receive more coverage in terms of length of stories (meanlength of stories) after 9/11 than before in both the newspapers

R.Q 2 How far did the amount of coverage of Pakistan differ in the twonewspapers for both the pre-and post-9/11 period?

H.2 Coverage of Pakistan will be larger in the New York Times than the Washington Post in both the periods.

R.Q 3 What topics/themes were reflected in the coverage of Pakistan?

H.3a Terrorism will receive more favorable and less unfavorable coverage interms of number of stories after 9/11 than before 9/11



25

H.3b Pak-India relations will receive more favorable and less unfavorablecoverage in terms of number of stories after 9/11 than before 9/11

H.3c Musharraf will receive more favorable and less unfavorable coverage interms of number of stories after 9/11 than before

H.3c Pak. culture and society will receive more favorable and lessunfavorable coverage in terms of number of stories after 9/11 thanbefore

H.3d Pakistan internal politics will receive more favorable and lessunfavorable coverage in terms of number of stories after 9/11 thanbefore

H.3e Pakistan foreign relations will receive more favorable and lessunfavorable coverage in terms of number of stories after 9/11 than

before H.3f Pakistan’s, nuclear, development and Afghan refugee’s will receive

more favorable and less unfavorable coverage in terms of number of stories after 9/11 than before

R.Q 4 Did the slant of the coverage given in both the newspapers to Pakistandiffer between the pre-9/11 and post- 9/11 period?

H.4 Pakistan will receive more favorable and less unfavorable coverage interms of number of stories after 9/11 than before 9/11

R.Q 5 Did the frames used in coverage given in both the newspapers toPakistan differ between the pre-9/11 and post- 9/11 period

H.5 More stories will frame Pakistan as a foe before 9/11 and friend after 9/11 in both the newspapers.



26

CHAPTER IVMETHODOLOGY

This chapter includes (a) Period of research (b) Selection of newspapers, (b) Study

population sampling, (c) variables, categories and rules (d) coding unit, context unit andunit of analysis, (e) statistical tests, (f) code sheet, (g) Inter-coder reliability.

IntroductionThe study is primarily a content analysis, which will qualitatively and quantitatively

examine publication of the specified news categories in the selected Americannewspapers; i.e., The New York Times and The Washington Post . The period for thisstudy is one year each pre and post of 9/11, 2001 terrorists events in the USA.

According to Paisley, J. A. (1964) content analysis is a process in which

communication message is recorded through objective and systematic application of categorization rules, into data that can be summarized and compared. Danielson (1963)defines content analysis as descriptive and inferential. While descriptive content analysisis more exploratory, while inferential analysis generalizes the result of investigation onthe whole population. In other words it links events in the environment. According toBerelson (1952) "a research technique for the objective, systematic, and quantitativedescription of the manifest content of communication" (p. 18). Krippendorff (1980)explains content analysis is a research technique by which researcher can make replicableand valid inference from data to their context. Compared with other research techniques,Krippendorff (1980) maintains that content analysis has four major distinctions: (1)Content analysis is an unobtrusive technique. (2) Content analysis accepts unstructuredmaterial. (3) Content analysis is context-sensitive and thereby able to process symbolicforms. (4) Content analysis can cope with large volumes of data.

Using the content analysis techniques, this study will examine all the stories includinghard news and soft news. Although photo image is important in framing analysis, thisstudy will not include photos, because analyzing visual image requires differentoperational definitions, Zheng (2006). All items on Pakistan in each issue will be codedin term of slant (favorable, neutral and unfavorable) topics etc. Classification of all thestories will be based on careful qualitative judgment for identification of the keywords/terms as mentioned in the specified hypothesis.

Period of Research StudyThe period for this study is one year each pre and post 9/11 terrorist attacks. This

period has been chosen because the world has considerably changed after the attack onthe New York Twin Towers and Pentagon in the Washington. The incident has globallydivided the world between the Muslim and Christianity. Due to this divide a new

phenomenon ‗Clash of Civilization‘ is being witnessed by the world. It has generallybeen observed that the Western media are most likely portraying the Muslims countries



27

in a negative sense. Since, Pakistan being an ally in the US ―war against terror‖ soportrayal of Pakistan of the US media may lead to positive coverage. The one-year preand post period was chosen in order to investigate differences in the portrayal of Pakistanimage before and after the terrorist attracts in the United States. To see how much attitudeof the American media changed particularly in the slant and frames towards Pakistan.

Study Population and SamplingThe population for this study will be all news stories related to Pakistan published in

The New York Times and The Washington Post , one year each pre and post 9/11 terroristincident in the United States. The news stories of the New York Times and theWashington Post were retrieved from the Lexis-Nexis electronic database on US news.The one- year pre 9/11 period was specified as ―September 11, 2000 to September 10,2001 and the one year- post 9/11 period was specified as ―September 11, 2001 toSeptember 10, 2002.

The time was entered first as delimiters. Then the key words "Pakistan" was input forone-year pre Pre-9/11 incident, the database yielded 57 and 38 articles of the New York Times and the Washington Post respectively. Similarly, for the one-year Post 9/11incident, the database yielded 305 and 196 articles of the New York Times and the Washington Post respectively.

Systematic sampling method was deemed appropriate and employed for this study.As a result, 153 articles from the New York Times and 98 articles from the WashingtonPost of the post-9/11 scenario were randomly selected by using a skip interval of one tocreate a sample that is 50% of the population. According to Krippendorff (1980),systematic sampling is favored when data come from regularly appearing publications.Due to few numbers of articles on Pakistan in the pre- 9/11 scenario in both thenewspapers, it was decided to select the whole population as sample. Thus, total numberof articles 334 in both pre and post periods of 9/11 were selected from both the papers formeasurement.

Intercoder reliability will be measured by using Holsti‘s coefficient, determined bythe following formula: R = 2 M / {N1 + N2}. Where M refers to the ―number of codingdecisions on which the coders agree,‖ and N1 and N2 refer to ―the number of codingdecisions by the first and the second coder, respectively,‖ (Wimmer and Dominick, p.151).

Selection of the NewspapersThe Washington Post and the New York Times have been selected for this study

because they are the leading American newspapers and circulated widely across thecountry as well as across the world. High officials, critics, policy makers and seniormedia practitioners in Pakistan also read these newspapers for critical insight of the worldissues. According to Merrill (1980), both papers are knowledgeable, serious, andindependent. They are financially stable, with greater integrity, social concern and



28

professional sound newspapers. They emphasize on politics and world consciousness,determined to serve and help extend well-educated, intellectual readership at home andabroad, processing large, intelligent and technically proficient staff. According to Pool(1970) both the newspapers reflect more are less government point of view. The New York Times and Washington Post are major daily newspapers, coming closer than any

others in terms of being national newspapers, (Kim 1979).

Profile of the New York Times Founded in 1851, the New York Times enjoys an undisputed reputation, especially for

its International coverage and its liberal policy, (Cohen 1963) He claims that ―the NewYork Times is the American "prestige paper," (p. 136). Gitlin (1980) says that the NewYork Times is generally considered to be the "paper of record" for international newscoverage and that it influences the content of other mass media.

Pittatore (1983) argues that it sets agenda for other newspaper in the United State for

foreign affairs. Zoglin (1997) regarded The New York Times as "easily the best, mostimportant newspaper in the country, authoritative and unfailingly serious" (p. 68), Zoglin(1997) says that it has become a must-read for both U.S. State Department officialsinvolved in foreign policy making. Katz & Katz (1992) said that The New York Times actually "sets the standard by which all other domestic newspapers are measured" (p.867). According to Tunstall & Machin (1999) the New York Times in and around 1940largely established the patterns of elite journalism. The Sunday edition of the paper isread largely by the readers outside New York, (Merrill and Fisher 1980). "You cannotwork in the state Department with out the New York Times .‖ Comments of the foreignpolicy official, (Cohen 1963, P.135).

Profile of the Washington Post Information on the Washington post has been derived from the Washington Post web

archive (2006). The Washington Post is the largest newspaper of the US Capital — Washington. The paper became most notable for investigative coverage of the Watergatescandal. The paper was founded in 1877 by Stilton Hutchins and in 1880 added a Sundayedition, thus becoming the city's first newspaper to publish seven days a week. The firstcolor photograph appeared in the Post on January 28, 1999. The newspaper established aWeb site in 1996. In 1970 the Post became one of the first newspapers in the UnitedStates to establish a position of "ombudsman" or readers' representative, assigned toaddress reader complaints about Post news coverage and to monitor the newspaper'sadherence to its own standards. Ever since, the ombudsman's commentary has been afrequent feature of the Post editorial page, washingtonpost.com.

The Post is one of the leading American newspapers and has distinguished itself through its reporting on the workings of the White House, Congress, and other aspects of the U.S. government. As of October 2006, its average weekday circulation was 656,297and its Sunday circulation was 930,619, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations, making it the sixth largest newspaper in the country by circulation. As of 2006 the Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audit_Bureau_of_Circulations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Pulitzer_Prize

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Pulitzer_Prize

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audit_Bureau_of_Circulations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House




29

had been honored with 22 Pulitzer Prizes, 18 Nieman Fellowships, and 368 White HouseNews Photographers Association Awards, among others, http://en.wikipedia.

The Washington Post is generally considered as "culturally and politicallyconservative", washingtonpost.com. According to Herman and Noam Chomsky (2004)the post‘s policy is supportive of the Washington Establishment and the status quo. Aslate publisher Katherine Graham noted in her memoirs Personal History, the paper longhad a policy of not making endorsements for presidential candidates. Its editorialpositions are frequently liberal-to-moderate, yet it has taken some conservative stances: ithas steadfastly supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, warmed to President George W.Bush' s proposal to partially privatize Social Security, supported pro-Iraq war Sen. JoeLieberman over successful anti-war challenger Ned Lamont in the 2006 ConnecticutDemocratic primary (and Lieberman's subsequent bid as an independent) , and advocatedfree trade agreements, including, among others, CAFTA (2006).

VariablesVariables selected for this study are Topic, Slant, Frames, Placement, wordage and

sources of the story. Following are the details of these variables.

TopicTopic is defined as the showcase of a story. Topic is defined as ―a summary label of

the domain of social experiences covered by a story‖ Zheng (2006). In other words, topicis the gist of a news story. Topic contains main subject of a story. Topics about thePakistan‘s image in the US media have been identified after an initial reading of thestories published on Pakistan in The New York Times and The Washington Post . Finallythe following nine category topics are identified for the study.

1. Terrorism2. Pakistan Nuclear3. Pak-India and Kashmir4. Musharraf 5. Arts, Culture, and Society6. Development7. Foreign Relations8. Pakistan‘s Internal politics 9. Others

SlantTopic is a key variable while investigating the media's coverage, but it is difficult to

get conclusion with just from the topic. Media coverage may refer either to the "topic", orto the ''slant'' presented in the narration of news reports (Pinch, 1978). ‗‗Slant‘‘ and''topic'' are interdependent in the content analysis research. Zheng (2006) argues, ―topicreveals what has been reported, and tone indicates how it has been narrated‖. Tone andtopic are two different approaches in measuring media content. The absence of either onemight lead to false conclusions, Zheng (2006) maintains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulitzer_Prize

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nieman_Fellowship


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_%28United_States%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Lamont

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_primary%2C_Connecticut_United_States_Senate_election%2C_2006


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_U.S._Senate_election%2C_2006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_trade

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAFTA


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_trade

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_U.S._Senate_election%2C_2006



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Lamont



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_%28United_States%29




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nieman_Fellowship

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulitzer_Prize



30

While taking into account slant in the story, a consistent approach by and large hasbeen adopted by the researchers for value judgment; i.e., favorable, neutral orunfavorable. For example, Liu (1969) while investigating the media coverage of theseating of China in the UN used ―most favorable to ―most unfavorable‖ for measuringattitude. Kim (1979) classified three categories slant in the news story: favorable, neutral

and unfavorable. Mills (1969) adopted approve, disapprove, and no stand taken as slant inthe stories.

In this study, slant refers to the writer‘s attitude in the story towards Pakistan. Thestudy follows the existing studies by dividing slant into three categories; i.e., Favorable,neutral and unfavorable. Slant in the story will be coded separately for each of the ninetopics. It will be classified as favorable, neutral and unfavorable for all the topics.

FrameTo identify frame in this study such as Pakistan being ‗friend‘, ‗foe‘,

―fundamentalism‖ (hard-line religious forces/ Islamic extremists/angry Muslim mob)

―militants‖, and pejorative description (e.g., "strident" or "hateful") Khalid (2001) usedthis frame category by describing it as deionization frame. To identify frames, the entirestory will be analyzed from the textual point of view. Coding frame in a story has beenexplained below separately in this chapter.

Nature of storyIn this study nature of story refers to as news story, feature and editorial in the

newspapers

Length of storyLength of a story will be measured by wordage in the story on ratio level.

Byline StoryByline story means whether the story has been filed by a Pakistan reporte or foreign

reporter.

Coding UnitCoding unit as defined by Holsti (1969) is ―the spe cific segment of content that is

characterized by placing it in a given category‖ (p.116). A single word or symbol isgenerally the smallest unit of analysis. While the context unit is the largest body of content to characterize a recording unit, Holsti (1969). In this research, topic, slant,frame, wordage, placement and source of the story will be examined as variables and tomeasure these variables, the entire story will be the context unit and unit of analysis.While headline and Intro are the coding unit for identifying the topic. Similarly, eachparagraph is the recording unit for identifying slant in the story. Since the Westernnewspapers carry mixed attitudes/slants in the story, Zheng (2006). Therefore, usingparagraph as unit of analysis to investigate slant is some time difficult. For example, astory may carry 12 paragraphs in which 6 carry pro-Pakistan slant while the other 6 carryanti-Pakistan slant. Such story is most likely to be coded as neutral in slant. However, in



31

this case it should be coded either favorable or unfavorable if the headline contains suchslant.

Frames will be recognized in the entire story from the contextual point of view. Theframes identified in this study are: Friend, Foe, Fundamentalist and Militancy and

pejorative description.

Instructions rules for CodersThe New York Times and the Washington Post are the sample newspapers. All items

on Pakistan appearing in the selected papers will be coded.

Topics and SlantThis study will code each story into one of eight topics. It will also code each story in

terms of slant into favorable, unfavorable and neutral. Because the topics are widelydifferent and examples for rules need to be specific to provide clear operational

definitions for coding, in the rules below, first a topic is defined operationally, then therules for slant for that topic are provided. Then the second topic is defined operationallyand the rules for slant are provided. And so on. However, topic and slant are two differentvariables coded independently. The rules for slant provide different examples but they allshare the common definition of what is favorable, unfavorable and neutral.

Definition of FavorableWordNet dictionary defines ‗favorable‖ as position of advantage, tending to favor or

bring good luck, encouraging or approving or pleasing, tending to promote or facilitate, occurring at a convenient or suitable time, wordwebonline. According to Webster'sRevised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) favorable is conducive; contributing; tending to

promote or facilitate; advantageous; and convenient. Favorable also means : affirmative, affirmatory, approbative, approbatory, approving, complimentary, convenient, following, friendly, good, indulgent, plausive, pleasing, propitious.

Definition UnfavorableAccording to WordNet dictionary unfavorable means: tending to hinder or oppose,

not encouraging or approving or pleasing, It has also means: admonishing, admonitory, adverse, bad, badly, contrary, critical, disapproving, discriminatory, harmful, hostile, inauspicious, invidious, negative, reproachful, reproving, uncomplimentary, unfavorably, unpropitious, untoward, wordwebonline.

Definition of NeutralA neutral point of view is neither sympathetic nor in opposition to its subject.

According to the wikipedia encyclopedia, the neutral point of view requires that, wherethere are conflicting views, these should be presented fairly. None of the views should begiven undue weight or asserted as being the truth, and all significant published points of view are to be presented, not just the most popular one. It should also not be asserted thatthe most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is thetopics and in term of slant/tone for each topic separately.

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/ENCOURAGING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/APPROVING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PLEASING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/TENDING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PROMOTE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/FACILITATE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/CONVENIENT

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/SUITABLE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/AFFIRMATIVE


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/AFFIRMATORY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/APPROBATIVE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/APPROBATORY


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/COMPLIMENTARY


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/FOLLOWING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/FRIENDLY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/GOOD

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/INDULGENT

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PLAUSIVE


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PROPITIOUS


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/HINDER

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/OPPOSE




http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/ADMONISHING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/ADMONITORY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/ADVERSE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/BAD

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/BADLY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/CONTRARY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/CRITICAL

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/DISAPPROVING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/DISCRIMINATORY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/HARMFUL

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/HOSTILE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/INAUSPICIOUS

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/INVIDIOUS

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/NEGATIVE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/REPROACHFUL

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/REPROVING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/UNCOMPLIMENTARY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/UNFAVORABLY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/UNPROPITIOUS

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/UNTOWARD

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/UNTOWARD

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/UNPROPITIOUS

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/UNFAVORABLY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/UNCOMPLIMENTARY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/REPROVING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/REPROACHFUL

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/NEGATIVE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/INVIDIOUS

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/INAUSPICIOUS

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/HOSTILE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/HARMFUL

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/DISCRIMINATORY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/DISAPPROVING

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/CRITICAL

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/CONTRARY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/BADLY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/BAD

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/ADVERSE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/ADMONITORY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/ADMONISHING




http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/OPPOSE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/HINDER


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PROPITIOUS


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PLAUSIVE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/INDULGENT

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/GOOD

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/FRIENDLY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/FOLLOWING


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/COMPLIMENTARY


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/APPROBATORY

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/APPROBATIVE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/AFFIRMATORY


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/SUITABLE


http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/FACILITATE

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PROMOTE







32

TerrorismTerrorism includes stories on all sort of terrorism taking place in Pakistan, terrorist

camps in Pakistan, security measurement against terrorism, Pakistan citizens‘involvement in terrorists activities, Pakistan‘s fight against terrorism, Pakistan as an ally

of the US and West in the fight against t errorism, Pakistan‘s army engagement on theAfghan‘s border to stop terrorists‘ infiltration, Pakistan‘s help in exchange of intelligenceand investigating terrorism cases, and ban on terrorist/extremists/radicals‘ organizationsin the country.

FavorableA story will be coded as favorable slant if it is about:

1. Pakistan‘s help in exchanging intelligence and investigating terrorism cases;2. Terrorist attacks in Pakistan killing people and damaging property;3. Security measure taken by Pakistan to protect life and property of US and all

other foreign nations. Security measures against terrorism in Pakistan in

general;4. Pakistan bans terrorist and radical organizations;5. Pakistan‘s Army engagement in war against terrorism; 6. Pakistan‘s forces ceasing terrorists‘ i nfiltration on its borders; and7. Item showing a general positive attitude as Pakistan being an ally in fight

against terrorism.

UnfavorableA story on the terrorism shall be coded as unfavorable if it is about:

1. Pakistan in not cooperating in the war against terrorism in exchange of intelligence and investigating terrorist cases;

2. Pakistan‘s lake security measurements to protect foreign citizen and its ownpeople against terrorist attacks;

3. Story that show terrorists organizations operating in Pakistan, terrorists hide inPakistan, terrorist infiltration in other countries from Pakistan‘s territories;

4. Item showing a general impression that Pakistan is doing nothing or less orneed to do more in the war against terrorism; and

5. Stories that show involvement of Pakistan citizens in the terrorist activitiestaking place around the world.

Neutral Story which places no clear emphasis on either the favorable or unfavorable aspects

of the topic will be coded as neutral. If a story may carry 12 paragraphs in which 6 carryfavorable tones while the other 6 carry unfavorable tone, such story will most likely becoded as neutral. However, in this case, the story should be coded as favorable orunfavorable if the headline contains such slant.

Pakistan’s nuclearPakis tan‘s nuclear activities include stories on Pakistan‘s nuclear security, Dr.

Qadeer‘s controversy; nuclear inspections, nuclear sanctions, nuclear weapons; nuclear



33

program for peace/energy/etc.; nuclear threats from Pakistan and India towards eachother, and Pakistan and India nuclear race.

FavorableA story on Pakistan nuclear will be coded as favorable slant if it is about:

1. Pakistan nuclear program is secured and responsible;2. Pakistan is cooperating with the international nuclear inspection originations;3. Pakistan needs nuclear for peace and energy; and4. Pakistan is not leaking nuclear to other countries.

UnfavorableA story on Pakistan nuclear will be coded as unfavorable slant if it is about:1. Pakistan nuclear is not safe and responsible;2. Dr. Q adeer‘s Khan nuclear controversy; 3. Sanction on Pakistan‘s nuclear; 4. Nuclear war threat from Pakistan and India towards each other;

5. Nuclear race between Pakistan and India; and6. Nuclear Weapons.


of the topic will be coded as neutral. If a story may carry 12 paragraphs in which 6 carryfavorable tones while the other 6 carry unfavorable tone, such story will most likely becoded as neutral. However, in this case the story should be coded as favorable orunfavorable if the headline contains such slant.

Pak-India and KashmirPak-India and Kashmir includes stories on Pakistan and India relations, dialogues on

Confident Building Measurement (CBM), all sort of agreements, Visit of the officials,dignitaries‘ and diplomats and people to people contacts from each other countries. Itemsthat show meetings between the two countries, talks on various issues, governments‘spokesmen, activities of the ambassadors and exchange of culture and arts between thetwo countries. Story showing Kashmir dispute involving Pakistan and India, and storythat show conflicts, fighting, and militancy in Kashmir, Story that depict exchange of statements and condemnations from each other countries on issues of disputes.

FavorableA story on Pak-India and Kashmir will be coded as favorable slant if it is about:

1. Pak-India dialogues on Confident Building Measurement (CBM), all sorts of agreements, meetings, talks, and activities of the ambassadors, government‘sspokesmen announcements for peace, friendship and resolution of disputesbetween the two countries;

2. Visit of the officials, dignitaries‘ and diplomats and people to people contactsfrom each other country; and

3. Exchange of culture, arts and sports between the two countries.



34

UnfavorableA story on Pak-India and Kashmir will be coded as unfavorable slant if it contains

tone showing:1. Pakistan Kashmir dispute involving Pakistan and India;2. Conflicts, fighting, and militancy in Kashmir blaming Pakistan being

responsible;3. Exchange of statements and condemnations from each other countries onissues of disputes; and

4. Stories portraying past wars between the two countries;



President Pervez Musharraf Musharraf includes stories on whether Musharraf is doing enough in the war against

terrorism, how well he maintains relationships with the US and the West, how he dealswith the Islamic forces in Pakistan, leaders of the political parties and high rankingmilitary and civil officials, Stories that show his involvements in politics, his foreignvisits, statements, speeches, and meeting with the foreign dignitaries. Stories that portrayMusharraf personal life and activities, Item that depicting Musharraf as a ruler, hispolicies/decisions, his approach towards Islam and democracy, his friendship with theUS. Criticism against his policy and his ruling approach in the country. And story thatshows Musharraf as a military man.

FavorableA story on Musharraf will be coded as favorable slant if it is about:

1. Musharraf as friend of US and the west on war against terrorism, Musharraf positive role in the war against terrorism and his courageousness;

2. Item that depicts Musharraf as a liberal leader whose rule has a lot of characteristics of a true democracy; and

3. Stories that show Musharraf image as ―modern‖, ―civilized‖, ―pro -Western‖,―progressive‖, and ―liberal leader‖ and his dealing with ―Islamicfundamentalists‖ in a pro -Western‖ stance; Story that suggests that the presentunstable situation in Pakistan demands that Musharraf should stay in power,

4. Story that portrays Musharraf importance f or the success of the United States‘fight against the terrorism;

5. Story that show Musharraf decisions important to his own country, such as his―anticorruption drive‖, ―free press,‖ and ―great degree of governmenttransparency‖ code for rape, women empower ment, law against honor killing;and

6. Story that depict him as a person pertaining to the Western cultural experiencehis education, his fluency in English, and his educated family background.



35

UnfavorableA story on Musharraf will be coded as unfavorable slant if it is about:

1. Musharraf is not a true friend of US and the West in the war against terrorism;2. Musharraf is not playing a positive role and he is not doing enough the war;

3. Item that depicts Musharraf as a pro-Islamic and ruling the countryundemocratically;4. Stories that show Musharraf image as a lavish person using country‘s

unjustifiably, involve in corruptions, malpractices, favoritism, lust for power,misusing power and suppressing and torturing political opponents;

5. Story that show criticism against decisions of Musharraf; and6. Story that depicts him as military dictator and throwing a democratically

elected government.



Pakistan’s internal politicsPakistan‘s Internal politics includes stories on the political scene in Pakistan, such as

election, politicians‘ statements, parliament‘s debates, political rallies, Ministers‘portfolios, political interviews, political corruptions, misuse of government power,mismanagement, etc.

Favorable A story on Pakistan‘s internal politics will be coded as favorable slant if it is about:

1. Statement praising the present government policies, its progress,developments, democracy, good governance, etc.; and

2. Timely Election, Social new amenity laws, attendance of government‘sofficial in seminars, forums and their speeches and writings.

UnfavorableA story on Pakistan‘s internal politics will be coded as unfa vorable slant if it is about:

1 Statements criticizing policies of the present government;2. Stories showing peoples of Pakistan dissatisfaction with government; and3. Stories that portray the government as weak, corrupt, manipulative,

mismanagement of funds and relief efforts.


of the topic will be coded as neutral. If a story may carry 12 paragraphs in which 6 carryfavorable tones while the other 6 carry unfavorable tone, such story will most likely be



37

1. Stories relating to country‘s development and progress in education,agriculture, roads, health, and communication; and

2. Stories that show economic stability and people‘s participation in the societaldevelopment.

UnfavorableA story on Pakistan‘s Art, Culture and Society will be coded as unfavorable slant if itis about:

1. Story that shows events‘ causing economic problems such, unemployment,protest against developmental projects. Illiteracy, malnutrition, illiteracy;poverty, etc.; and

2. Mismanagement of funds and in relief efforts3. Lake of appropriate funds and lake of expertise



Foreign relationsStories relating to Pakistan‘s agreements with foreign countries, good diplomatic

relations and foreign aids, visits of Pakistan dignitaries to other countries and visits of foreign dignitaries to Pakistan. Item on Pakistan that depicts trade, foreign exchange, etc.

FavorableA story on Pakistan Foreign Relations will be coded as favorable slant if it is about:

1. Pakistan‘s agreements with foreign countries, good diplomatic relations andforeign aids, visits of Pakistan dignitaries to other countries and visits of foreign dignitaries to Pakistan.

2. Improvements in Pakistan‘s trade, f oreign exchange etc.

UnfavorableA story on Pakistan‘s Art, Culture and Society will be coded as unfavorable slant if it

is about:1. Refusal/cut in aids to Pakistan2. Criticism of Pakistan by other nations3. Cancellation of visits of foreign count ries‘ heads to Pakistan.4. Deficit in foreign trade and exchange.5. Pakistani citizens abroad involving in crime or other bad activities.


of the topic will be coded as neutral. If a story may carry 12 paragraphs in which 6 carryfavorable tones while the other 6 carry unfavorable tone, such story will most likely be



39

Keys for the coders

ID: For identification of the Newspapers, value 1 will be assigned forThe New York Times and Value 2 for the Washington Post.

Placement of story Publication of story in various section of the newspapers such asnews, feature and editorial. Values 1, 2 and 3 should be assignednews, feature, and editorial respectively.

Wordage: # of words in the story. It should be recorded in ratio level.

Source of the News Source of news means whether the story has been filed by thePakistani source or foreign source. Value 1, and 2 will be assignedto Pakistan source and value 2 for the foreign source.

Topics: Mentions of the dominant theme of the topic in the story‘s headline

and lead will be assigned value in the following order1. Terrorism2. Pakistan Nuclear3. Pak-India and Kashmir4. Musharraf 5. Arts, Culture, and Society6. Development7. Foreign Relations8. Pakistan‘s Internal politics

Slant: Reading of all the stories will be based on careful qualitative judgment for identification of the key words, terms, theme asmentioned in the specified hypothesis Slant in the story asfavorable, Neutral and unfavorable will be identified in thefollowing way. Value 1, 2, and 3 will be assigned for favorable,neutral and unfavorable respectively.

Frames: Frame as Pakistan being friend or foe, Fundamentalism, militancyand Pejorative description will be measured on contextually in thearticle. Value 1, 2, 3, and 4 should be assigned to friend, foe,Fundamentalism, militancy and Pejorative respectively.



40

CHAPTER VFINDINGS

Description of the Sample

The final sample comprised 335 stories, with 205 (61.2%) being from the New York Times and 130 (38.8%) being from the Washington Post . Similarly, in the pre-and post-9/11 periods, the New York Times published 56 (16.7%) stories in the pre-9/11 period and149 (44.5%) stories in the post-9/11 period. Respective figures for the Washington Post were 39 (11.6%) and 91 (27.2%) (Table1). The overall mean length of stories was739.238 words (larger than one column length of the newspapers).

The breakdown of the sample by type of stories was as follows: 227 (67.7%) werenews stories, 63 (18.8%) were features, 16 (4.8%) were editorials, and 29 (8.7%) fell intothe other category, which included letters to the editor, etc.

Tests of Research Questions Difference by Byline

RQ 1: Did the number of stories differ by byline?

Most of the stories (216 or 64.5%) were contributed by US reporters. Indian reporterscontributed 32 (9.6%) stories, and Pakistani reporters contributed 23 (6.9%) stories. Theremaining stories (64 or 19.1%) were contributed by reporters from several differentcountries. The number of stories by US reporters was significantly larger than the numberof stories by other reporters (chi-square = 289.537; p. = .000) (Table 1). 1

Difference by TopicRQ 2: Did the amount of coverage in terms of number of stories differ by topic?

A large number of stories (102 or 30 %) were on Pakistan-India Relations,followed by War Against Terrorism (95 or 28 %). President Pervez Musharraf received 41 (12 %) of the stories. Society and Culture, Internal Politics, ForeignRelations, and Other topics received the remaining 30% of coverage (chi-square =156.442; p. = .000) (Table1).

Difference by SlantRQ 3: Did the number of stories differ by slant?

Most of the stories 127 (37.9%) were unfavorable, followed by favorable (125 or37.3%). Altogether 83 (24.8%) stories were neutral (chi-square = 11.057; p. = .004)(Table 1).

1 For this as well as the tests for Topic, Byline, Slant, and Frames, the difference of proportion test was done on the frequenciesrelating to these variables as shown in the ―Total‖ column.



41

Difference by Frame 1RQ 4: Was Pakistan framed more often as a friend or as a foe?

A large number of stories (125 or 41.8%) framed Pakistan as a foe, followed by the

friend frame (107 or 35.8%). Altogether, 67 (22.4%) stories had a neutral frame, i.e., theydid not use either the friend or the foe frame (chi-square = 17.686; p. = .000) (Table 1).

Difference by Frame 2RQ 5: Was Pakistan framed more often as a fundamentalist or as a liberal state?

Most of the stories (73 or 85.9%) framed Pakistan as a fundamentalist state, followedby a liberal frame (12 or 14.1%), (chi-square = 43.776; p. = .000; p. = .000) (Table 1).

Tests of Hypotheses Difference by period in Amount of coverage (number of stories and number of words)

RQ 6: Did the amount of coverage given to Pakistan in the New York Times andWashington Post differ between the pre-and post-9/11 period?

H1a: Pakistan will receive more coverage (larger number of stories) in the post-9/11 period than in the pre-9/11 period.

The number of stories was larger (240 or 71.7%) in the post-9/11 period than in thepre-9/11 period 95 (28.3%) (chi-square = 62.761; p. = .000) (Table 1).Hypothesis 1a wassupported.

H1b: Pakistan will receive more coverage (larger mean length of stories) in the post-9/11period than the pre-9/11 period.

Mean story length was significantly larger (829 words) in the post-9/11 period than inthe pre-9/11 period (513.1158) (t = .297; p. = .000). Thus Hypothesis 1b was supported.

Slant by period RQ 7: Did the slant of the coverage given to Pakistan differ between the pre-9/11and post-9/11 period?

H2: Pakistan will receive more favorable and less unfavorable coverage in terms of number of stories in the post-9/11 period than the pre-9/11 period.

Pakistan received more unfavorable stories in the pre-9/11 period and more favorablestories in the post-9/11 period (chi-square = 8.042; p. = .005) (Table 1). Hypothesis 2 wassupported.

Frame by period RQ 8: Did the frames used for Pakistan differ between the pre-9/11 and post-9/11period?



42

H3a: More stories will frame Pakistan as a foe in the pre-9/11 period and as a friend in the post-9/11 period.

More stories framed Pakistan as a foe in the pre-9/11 period and as a friend in thepost-9/11 period, (chi square = 8.042; p. = .005) (Table 1). Hypothesis 3a was supported.

Byline by period for Mean Story lengthRQ 9: Did mean story length in the pre-and post-9/11 periods differ by byline(Pakistani, US and Indian reporters)?

H4: The mean story length in the pre-and post-9/11 periods will differ by byline .

The ANOVA test revealed main effects but no interaction, thus Hypothesis 4 was notsupported. Mean length of stories differed by period, with post-9/11 stories being longerthan pre-9/11 stories. 2 Also, mean length of stories differed by byline. A post-hoc Tukeytest revealed that Indian and US reporters‘ stories were significantly longer than storieswritten by Pakistani reporters (F = 6.400, p = .000) (Table 1).

2 These mean lengths were based on a smaller n size wherein "Other" reporters‘ stories had been removed. Another t -test for the fullsample had also provided similar results of a significant difference.



43

Table 1Distribution of Stories by Number of Stories, Newspaper, Type of Story, Byline,

Topic, Slant and Frame, by Period and Mean Story Length by Byline________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pre-9/11 Post-9/11 Total

N (%) N (%) N (%)________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

No. of stories1

95 (28.3) 240 (71.7) 335 (100.0) Newspaper New York Times 56 (16.7) 149 (44.5) 205 (61.2) Washington Post 39 (11.6) 91 (27.2) 130 (38.8)

Type of storyNews 54 (16.1) 173 (51.6) 227 (67.7)Feature 18 (5.4) 45 (13.4) 63 (18.8)Editorial 5 (1.5) 11 (3.3) 16 (4.8)Other 18 (5.4) 11 (3.3) 29 (8.7)

Byline 2 Pakistani 7 (2.1) 16 (4.8) 23 (6.9)US 59 (17.6) 157 (46.9) 216 (64.5)Indian 4 (1.4) 28 (8.4) 32 (9.6)Others 25 (7.5) 39 (11.6) 64 (19.1)

Topic 3 War on Terrorism 5 (1.5) 90 (26.9) 95 (28.4)Pakistan India Relations 31 (9.3) 71 (21.2) 102 (30.4)Musharraf 15 (4.5) 26 (7.8) 41 (12.2)Society & Culture 11 (3.3) 14 (4.2) 25 (7.5)Internal Politics 12 (3.6) 10 (3.0) 22 (6.6)Foreign Relations 11 (3.3) 19 (5.7) 30 (9.0)Other 10 (3.0) 10 (3.0) 20 (6.0)

Slant 4, 5 Favorable 26 (20.8) 99 (79.2) 125 (37.3)Unfavorable 47 (37.0) 80 (63) 127 (37.9)Neutral 22 (26.5) 61 (73.5) 83 (24.8)

Frame 1 6, 7 Friend 19 (17.8) 88 (82.2) 107 (35.8)Foe 42 (33.6) 83 (66.4) 125 (41.8)Neutral 27 (40.3) 40 (59.7) 67 (22.4)

Frame 2 8, 9 Fundamentalism 9 (12.3) 64 (87.7) 73 (85.9)Liberal 10 (83.3) 2 (16.7) 12 (14.1)

Byline Mean Story length 10 Pakistani 251.2857 622.2857 509.6957US 662.4407 903.3631 837.5556Indian 588.7500 945.8571 901.2472Total 617.1143 886.9453 817.2472

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Note:1 Chi square = 62.761; p. = .000. 2 Chi square = 289.537; p. = .000. 3 Chi square = 156.442; p. = .000.4 Chi square = 8.042; p. = .005. 5 Chi square = 11.057; p. = .004. 6 Chi square = 11.877; p. = .003.7 Chi square = 17.686; p. = .000. 8 Chi square = 29.936; p. = .000. 9 Chi square = 43.776; p. = .000.10 F = 10.533, p = .000.



44

Byline by slant H5a: Stories with Pakistani bylines will be more favorable than unfavorable.

For Pakistani bylines, there were more favorable stories than unfavorable (chi-square9.478; p. = .009) 3 (Table 2). Hypothesis 5ba was supported.

H5b: Stories with Indian bylines will be more unfavorable than favorable.

For Indian bylines, there were more unfavorable stories than favorable. However, chi-square test was not significant, (Table 2). Hypothesis 5b was not supported.

Table 2Distribution of Byline of Stories by Slant by Period

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pre-9/11 Post-9/11 TotalN (%) N (%) N (%)

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pakistani1

Favorable 4 (17.4) 10 (43.5) 14 (60.9)Unfavorable 2 (8.7) 5 (21.7) 7 (30.4)Neutral 1 (3.4) 1 (4.3) 2 (8.7)

Indian Favorable 1 (3.1) 7 (21.9) 8 (25.0)Unfavorable 2 (6.3) 11 (34.4) 13 (40.6) Neutral 1 (3.1) 10 (31.3) 11 (34.4)

US 2 Favorable 17 (7.9) 71 (32.9) 88 (40.7)Unfavorable 28 (13.0) 53 (24.5) 81 (37.5)Neutral 14 (6.4) 33 (15.3) 47 (21.8)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________Note:1 Chi square = 9.478; p. = .0092 Chi square = 5.020; p. = .025.

Byline by period by slant H5c: More stories with US bylines will be unfavorable in the pre-9/11 period and favorable in the post-9/11 period.

For US bylines, there were more unfavorable stories in the pre-9/11 period (28 or13.0%) and more favorable stories in the post-9/11period (71 or 32.9%) (chi-square5.020; p. = .025) (Table 2). Hypothesis 5c was supported.

Topic by period and Slant H6: For each topic (War on Terrorism, Pakistan-India Relations, Musharraf,Culture and Society, Internal Politics, and Foreign Relations), more stories would be unfavorable in the pre-9/11 period and favorable in the post- 9/11 period.

3 For this as well as the tests for Indian Byline by slant, and Byline stories of Pakistani reporters and Byline stories by Indian reporterby Frame, the difference of pro portion test was done on the frequencies relating to these variables as shown in the ―Total‖ column.



45

Slant in the stories on each topic (War on Terrorism, Pakistan-India Relations,Musharraf, Culture and Society, Internal Politics, and Foreign Relations) was morefavorable in the post-9/11 period and more unfavorable in pre-9/11 period. However,chi-square test was not significant, (Table 3). Thus Hypothesis was not supported.

Table 3Distribution of Topics of Stories by Slant by Period

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

War on TerrorismFavorable 1 (1.1) 45 (47.4) 46 (48.4)Unfavorable 3 (3.2) 22 (23.2) 25 (26.3)Neutral 1 (1.1) 23 (24.2) 24 (25.3)

Pakistan India relationsFavorable 13 (12.7) 23 (22.5) 36 (35.3)Unfavorable 7 (6.9) 24 (23.5) 31 (30.4)Neutral 11 (10.8) 24 (23.5) 35 (34.3)

Musharraf Favorable 4 (9.8) 14 (34.1) 18 (43.9)Unfavorable 10 (24.4) 10 (24.4) 20 (48.8)Neutral 1 (2.4) 2 (4.9) 3 (7.3)

Society & CultureFavorable 3 (12.0) 3 (12.0) 6 (24.0)Unfavorable 6 (24.0) 8 (32.0) 14 (56.0)Neutral 2 (8.0) 3 (12.0) 5 (20.0)

Internal PoliticsFavorable 0 (.0) 4 (18.2) 4 (18.2)Unfavorable 10 (45.5) 6 (27.3) 16 (72.7)Neutral 2 (9.1) 0 (.0) 47 2 (9.1)

Foreign relationsFavorable 4 (13.3) 9 (30.0) 13 (43.3)

Unfavorable 4 (13.3) 4 (13.3) 8 (26.6)Neutral 3 (10.0) 6 (20.0) 9 (30.0)____________________________________________________________________________________

Byline and Frame H7a: Byline stories of Pakistani reporter will frame Pakistan more often as a friend than as a foe.

Bylines stories of Pakistani reporter framed Pakistan as a friend more often then as afoe. However the chi-square test was not significant (Table 4). Hypothesis 7a was notsupported.

H7c: Byline stories of Indian reporter will frame Pakistan as a foe more often in boththe periods.

Bylines stories of Indian reporter framed Pakistan as a foe more often then as a friend.(chi-square = 4.167; p. = .041) (Table 4). Hypothesis 7b was supported.



46

Table 4Distribution of Byline of Stories by frame by Period

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


___________________________________________________________________________________________________________Pakistani

Friend 3 (17.6) 7 (41.2) 10 (58.8)Foe 2 (11.8) 5 (29.4) 7 (41.2)

Indian 1 Friend 1 (4.2) 6 (25.0) 7 (29.2)Foe 2 (8.3) 15 (62.5) 17 (70.8)

US 2 Friend 11 (7.3) 64 (42.4) 75 (49.7)Foe 23 (15.2) 53 (35.1) 76 (50.3)

Note:1 Chi square 4.167; p. = .041.

2 Chi square 5.263; p. = .022. With regard to stories using a US byline, there were more stories that framed Pakistan as a foe in

the pre-9/11 period and more stories that framed Pakistan as a friend in the post-9/11period.

Byline by Period by Frame H7c: Byline stories of US reporter will frame Pakistan as a foe more often in the pre-9/11 period and as a friend in the post-9/11 period.

With regard to stories using a US byline, more stories framed Pakistan as a foe (23 or15.2) and as a friend (64 or 42.4) in the pre-and post-9/11 period respectively, (chi square5.263; p. = .022) (Table 4). Hypothesis 6b was supported.

Topic and frame H8: For each topic (War on Terrorism, Pakistan-India Relations, Musharraf,Culture and Society, Internal Politics, and Foreign Relations), more storieswill frame Pakistan as a foe in the pre-9/11 period and as a friend in the post-9/11 period.

Chi-square test was not significant for the topics on War on Terrorism, Pakistan-India Relations, Culture and Society, Internal Politics, and Foreign Relations. ThusHypothesis for these topics was not supported. However Hypothesis was supportedfor the topic, Musharraf, (chi-square = 4.156; p. = .041) (Table 5).



47

Table 5Distribution of Topics of Stories by Frame by Period

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

War on Terrorism

Friend 0 (.0) 37 (56.9) 37 (56.9)Foe 3 (4.6) 25 (38.5) 28 (43.1)Pakistan India relations

Friend 7 (11.1) 23 (36.5) 30 (47.6)Foe 5 (7.9) 28 (44.4) 33 (52.4)

Musharraf*Friend 4 (11.4) 14 (40.0) 18 (51.4)Foe 10 (28.6) 7 (20.0) 17 (48.6)

Society & CultureFriend 2 (10.0) 3 (15.0) 5 (25.0)Foe 7 (35.0) 8 (40.0) 15 (75.0)

Internal PoliticsFriend 1 (6.7) 3 (20.0) 4 (26.7)Foe 6 (40.0) 5 (33.0) 11 (73.3)

Foreign relationsFriend 3 (15.8) 8 (42.1) 13 (57.9)Foe 4 (21.1) 4 (21.1) 8 (42.1)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________Note:*Chi square = 4.880; p. = .027

DiscussionUS news coverage particularly of the developing world has met with considerable

criticism in the past because it pays this part of the world little attention, and when it does

pay attention, it tends to cover negative news. The overall coverage of Pakistan across thetwo papers and two periods was not different. Pakistan was more often coveredunfavorable than favorably and more often framed as a foe than a friend, overall. Pakistanwas also framed more often as a fundamentalist than a liberal state. Also, most of thestories on Pakistan had US bylines, followed by Indian and Pakistani bylines. Thecoverage ignored the domestic scene and concentrated on foreign affairs within the USglobal strategy. In this regard Poornananda (1998) analyzed that US media generallyportray third world countries in negative stories based on crimes, disasters, conflicts, andfailure of governments while areas including science, arts and culture were significantlymarginalized.

The negative accounts about Pakistan in the sample papers may be understood withinthe context of the larger picture of Pakistan. Pakistan is an Islamic country at a time whenIslam is under scrutiny/siege; additionally, its Islamic factions have voiced opposition tothe United States and it has witnessed terrorist activities in the tribal area of Waziristan.In this regards Griffin (2004) states that media reinforce those versions of events thathave already been established in public discourse. Besides, Pakistan is also a nuclearIslamic country in the Islamic block. It has an unfriendly relationship with Israel, but hasa strategic relationship with China. And, today the United States has leaned towards India



48

in international politics to a degree not often seen in the past and has partnered with Indiain the area of trade.

However, 9/11 did make a difference. The overall coverage of Pakistan in the post9/11 period in both the newspapers was large as the number of stories and mean story

length were significantly greater in this period. Pakistan was also more often coveredfavorably and less often covered unfavorably after 9/11 than before 9/11. Further,Pakistan was framed more often as a friend in the post-9/11 period and as foe in the pre-9/11 period. The favorable coverage to Pakistan falls in line with research that hasdemonstrated that generally newspapers in the United States consistently reflect thenational ideology. In this regard Mann, 1999; Yu & Riffe, 1989; and Dorman & Farhang,1987 observed that the U.S. media image of other nation depends that whether the USforeign policy considers that nation as a friend or as a foe.

Once Pakistan became an ally of the US, the newspapers consistently emphasized therole of Pakistan and of the current government of President Pervez Musharraf as an ally

of the US in the war against terrorism. The n ewspapers mentioned President Musharraf‘seffort to side with the US against the internal political pressure in general and the Islamicgroups in particular. They highlighted the fact that the present government of Musharraf was important for the success of the US fight against terrorism. Yu and Riffe (1988)analyzed the coverage of China‘s national leaders Chiang and Mao in three Americannew magazines Time, Newsweek, U.S. News & World report from 1949 to 1976 revealedthat the U.S. media image of other na tion‘s leaders depending upon the status of thatnation as a friend or foe in U.S. foreign Interests.

They noted the engagement of Pakistan‘s army in securing the border withAfghanistan to prevent the infiltration of terrorists. They gave accounts of the fact thatthe government had banned terrorist and radical organizations in Pakistan. Pakistan wasregarded as a ―frontline‖ state in the war against terrorism; its security was crucial to notonly regional but also global security. The favorable coverage to Pakistan falls in linewith the finding of Yu and Riffe (1988) that coverage of international news by all USmainstream media has been unfailing with the US government foreign policy.

While covering various topics/themes (War on Terrorism, Pakistan-India Relations,Musharraf, Culture and Society, Internal Politics, and Foreign Relations), both thenewspapers gave most of the coverage to Pakistan-India Relations, followed by WarAgainst terrorism and Musharraf. The Pakistan-India Relationship figured most of thecoverage on the issue of Kashmir and Indian condemnation of terrorists‘ infiltration fromPakistan. During the study period, both countries were at the brink of war. Although afterthe end of the cold war, United State maintains good relationship with India but this didnot affect the slant and frame in the coverage of Pakistan in the US media. The coverageon the theme of Pakistan-India relations was mostly towards peace between the twocountries. At that point in time, the US government never wanted war between Pakistanand India rather wanted Pakistan to fully concentrate on the war against terrorism and tomobilize its forces on the border with Afghanistan to combat terrorism, etc. Mujahid(1971) while investigating the image of Pakistan in the three US magazines found that



49

Indo-Pakistan relationship figured most of the coverage and Kashmir was the major andfavorable theme. Although after the end of the cold war, United State maintains goodrelationship with India but this did not affect the slant in the coverage of Pakistan in theUS media. The coverage on the theme of Pak-India and Kashmir was mostly towardresolution of peace between the two countries. The coverage slant was not generally

favorable. This result was also affirmative with the M ujad‘s studies. As quite in line withthe Mujahid‘s study, the domestic scene was mostly ignored in the coverage and it was,however more foreign affair oriented concerned with U.S. global strategy.

The newspapers tended to portray Musharraf as a pro-Western leader and noted hisintention to oppose extremism. The 1998 military coup that he was responsible for waslabeled as a ―bloodless coup‖ after 9/11 and was discussed in terms of its positive effects.Musharraf‘s dictatorship was presented as desirable, for a country susceptible to ―Islamicextremism.‖ The newspapers discussed his policy for combating corruption, improvingliving standards and ensuring a genuine democracy by instituting top-down controls in

the government. The newspapers repeatedly emp hasized Pervez Musharraf‘ as a―progressive,‖ ―modern,‖ ―liberal‖ and ―courageous‖ leader who strove to move thecountry away from the extremist forces. These finding are in line with earlier research onUS media coverage of friendly undemocratic leaders (Herman and Chomsky,YEAR;Obad, 2003).

ConclusionThe coverage more often than not reflected the changed relationship between the

United States and Pakistan after the 9/11 attack, wherein Pakistan became an ally of theUnited States in its War Against Terrorism. The coverage confirms Shoemaker andRees‘s theoretical contention that foreign policy influences media content relating tointernational events. The findings are also in line with the arguments of several otherauthors (Said, 1997; Kux, 2001; Obad, 2003) that the U.S. media tend to portraypositively those countries that are close to the interests of the United States even whenthey represent non-democratic regimes. To sum up, this study concludes that US medianews framing of other country‘s image depends upon the degree of US interest in thatcountry as well as the US foreign policy.



50

ReferencesAdoni, H. & Mane, S. (1984). Media and social construction of reality: Toward anintegrating of theory and research. Communication Research, 11, 323-340.

Ahem, Thomas, 1984. Determinants of Foreign Coverage in U.S. Newspapers, in RobertL. Stevenson and Donald Lewis Shaw, eds., Foreign News and the News World Information Order, The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa

Akhavan-Majid, R., & Ramaprasad, J. (2000). Framing Beijing: Dominant ideologicalinfluences on the American press coverage of the Fourth UN Conference on Women andthe NGO Forum. Gazette, 62(1), 45-60.

Backer, Samuel. (1984). Marxist Approach to Media Studies: The British experience.Critical Studies in Mass Communication, In Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D. (Ed.),Mediating the Message: Theories of influence on Mass Media Content (pp. 183-204).NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Berelson, B. (1952). Content Analysis in Communication Research. Glencoe, Ill: FreePress.

Burki, Shahid (2007) Kashmir: A Problem in Search of a Solution. United States Instituteof Peace, Washington, DC.

Campbell, K (2001) U.S. is long on game show, short on foreign news, Christian ScienceMonitor, 1 March Feature section, P. 15.

Chang, T. K. (1988). The news and U.S.-China policy: Symbols in newspapers anddocuments. Journalism Quarterly, 65(2), 320.

Chang, T. K. (1989). The impact of presidential statements on press editorials regardingU.S.-China. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly. 1980-200, Vol. 79, No. I,Spring,

Chang, Tsan-Kuo, 1993. The Press and China Policy: The Illusion of Sino-AmericanRelations, 1950-1984, Norwood, NJ: Ablex Pub. Corp.

Cohen, B. C. (1963). The press and Foreign Policy. Princeton, NJ: Blackwell PublishersInc.

Cohen, B. C. (1961). Foreign policy makers and the press. In J. Rosenau (Ed.),International politics and foreign policy. New York: The Free Press.

Cohen, S. (1995). Kashmir: The Roads Ahead. South Asia Approaches the Millennium:Reexamining National



51

Daily Express, March 28, 2006.

Danielson, W, A., and H. Jackson (1963). Computer automation of two readabilityformulas, Journalism Quarts., 40, 201-206.

Dietram A. Scheufele, "Framing as a Theory of Media Effects," journal of Communication 49 (winter 1999): 103-1

Dorogi, T. 1. (2001). Tainted perceptions: Liberal-democracy and American popularimages of China. Lanham: University Press of American.

Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky (2004) Manufacturing Consent, PantheonBooks, 1988

Entman, R. M. (1991). Framing U.S. Coverage of International News: Contrasts inNarratives of the KAL and Iran Air Incidents. Journal of Communication 41(4), 6-27.

Galtung, Johan & Ruge, Mari Holmboe, (1970). The Structure of Foreign News, inJeremy Tunstall (ed.) Media Sociology, London, Constable.

Gannon, M. (2001) The true story of a man and a nation under attack, in Kent, K. LauraA, Schmid (2004). Coverage of September 11. The Journal of InternationalCommunication, Volume 10 (1).

Gans, Herbert, 1979. Deciding What's News, New York: Random House

Gary, R. (1986). Thinking about the Press and Government. In Linsky, M. (1986).Impact: How the Press Affects Federal Policymaking. W.W. Norton & Company, Inn.New York.

Gaye Tuchman, Making News: A Study in llie Construction of Reality (NY: Free Press,1978).

Gitlin, T. (1980). The Whole World is watching. In Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D. (Ed.),Mediating the Message: Theories of influence on Mass Media Content (pp. 183-204).NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Goffman, E. (1974) Frame analysis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Graber, Doris A., 1993. Mass Media and American Politics (Fourth Edition),Washington, D.C.; Congressional Quarterly Press, p. 374.

Hall, Stuart. (1989). Ideology. In E. Burnout (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Communication. In Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D. (Ed.), Mediating the Message:Theories of influence on Mass Media Content (pp. 183-204). NY: Longman PublishingGroup.



52

Hallin, Daniel. (1986). The Uncensored War: The Media and Vietnam. In Shoemaker, P.J & Reese, S. D. (Ed.), Mediating the Message: Theories of influence on Mass MediaContent (pp. 183-204). NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Herman, Edward, & Chomsky, Noam, 1988. Manufacturing Consent: The Political

Economy of the Mass Media, New York: Pantheon, p. 2.

Hirsh, Paul, 1977. Occupational, Organizational and Institutional Models in mass mediaResearch: Toward an Integrated Framework, In P. M. Hirsch, P. V. Miller, & F. G. Kline(Eds.), Strategies for Communication Research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 13-40.

Holsti, O. L. (1969). Content Analysis for Social and Humanities. Reading, MA;Addison-Wesley. In Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D. (Ed.), Mediating the Message:Theories of influence on Mass Media Content (pp. 183-204). NY: Longman PublishingGroup.

http://en .wikipedia.org. /wilki/war on terrorismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

http://www.flashpoints.info/countries-conflicts/Kashmir-India_vs_Pakistan.

http://www.instecdigital.com/1/pakfact4.htm

http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/statistics.html



http://www.paknews.com; http://www.pak.gov.pk

http://en.wikipedia.orgwashingtonpost.webarchive.

Harimirza (2007). Kashmir: Paradise Exposed to Hell. Retrieved June 26, 2007,

Hussain, ijaz. (1998), Kashmir Dispute: An International Law Perspective , NationalInstitute of Pakistan Studies.

Ithiel de Sola pool, The prestigious Press: A comparative Study of political Symbols(Cambridge Mass.: M.I.T. press.

John C. Merrill and Horld Fisher, The world's Great Dailies profile of Fifties newspapers,(New York: Hastings Publishers (1980) p.6.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral%20point%20of%20view




http://www.paknews.com/

http://www.pak.gov.pk/

http://www.pak.gov.pk/

http://www.paknews.com/




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral%20point%20of%20view




53

Karim, K. H. (1999). Covering the South Caucasus and Bosnian Conflicts: Or How theJihad Model Appears and Disappears. In A. Malek & A. P. Kavoori (Eds.) The GlobalDynamics of News: Studies in International News Coverage and News Agendas (pp.145-168). Stamford, Connecticut: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Karim, K. H. (2000). The Islamic Peril: Media and Global Violence. Montreal: Black Rose Books.

Katz, B. & Katz, L. S. (1992). Magazine for Libraries. New Providence, NJ: R.R.Bowker.

Kellner, D (1995). Media culture: Media studies, identities and politics between themodern and postmodern. London: Routlege.

Kent, K. Laura A, Schmid (2004). Coverage of September 11. The Journal of International Communication. Volume 10 (1).

Khalid, M. (2001). US Mass Media and image of the Muslim World. Pakistan StudyCenter, Bi-Annual Journal. Vol. 6 (2).

Kim, S. T. (2000). Making differences: US Press Coverage of the Kwangju and Tianmenpro-democracy movements. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77 (1), 22-36.

Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to it Methodology. NewburyPark, CA: Sage Publication, INC.

Kux, D. (2001). The United States and Pakistan 1947-2000. Baltimore: The JohnsHopkins University Press.

Lent, A. (1977). Foreign news in American media. Journal of Communication, 27, 46-51.

Linsky, M. (1986). Impact: How the Press Affects Federal Policymaking. W.W. Norton& Company, Inn. New York.

Liu, P.H. (1969). An Analysis of the New York Times Editorial attitude toward therepresentation of Communist China in the United Nation: 1949- 1966. A master‘s thesis,Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, IL.

Malik, I. (2002) Kashmir: Ethnic conflict international dispute. Oxford University Press,Karachi.

Malik, I. H. (2001). Pakistan in 2000: Starting Anew or Stalemate? Asian Survey 41(1),104-115.

Mohmand, Shah, Rustam, (2008), Why we failed in FATA,http://www.opfblog.com/4143/why-we-failed-in-fata-rustam-shah-mohmand/

http://e/Why%20we%20failed%20in%20FATA,







54

McQuial, D. (1986). Diversity in Political Communication: Its sources, forms and future.In Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D. (Ed.), Mediating the Message: Theories of influenceon Mass Media Content (pp. 183-204). NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Merrill, J. C. (1988). Inclination of nation to control press and attitudes onProfessionalization. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 839-844.

Merrill, J. C. (1995). Global journalism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Miliband, R. (1969). The Process of Legitimation. In Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D.(Ed.), Mediating the Message: Theories of influence on Mass Media Content (pp. 183-204). NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Mills (1969). Editorial Reaction to the Bay of Pigs invasion. A master‘s thesis, Universityof Missouri Illinois, Columbia, MO.

Mosher, S. W. (1990). China misperceived: American illusions and Chinese reality. NewYork: Basic Books.

Norris, P. (1995). The restless search light: Network news framing of the post-Cold Warworld. Political Communication, 12,357-470.

Obad, Orlanda. Framing a Friendly Dictator: U.S. Newsmagazine Coverage of PakistaniPresident Musharraf After 9/11. Conference Papers — International CommunicationAssociation, 2003 Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA

Pinch, E. T. (1978). A brief study of news Patterns in sixteen third world countries.Medford, MA: Tufts University, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.

Pittatore, O. (1983). The Image of Italy in the New York Times, MA Thesis, SouthernIllinois University at Carbondale, IL, USA.

Paletz, D. L. & Entman, R. M., 1981. Media, Power, Politics, New York: The Free Press,p.215.

Perlmutter, D. (1998). Photojournalism and foreign policy: Framing icons of outrage ininternational crisis. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Peter A. Kerr and Patricia (2002) Newspaper Coverage of Fundamentalist Christians,Pinch, E. T. (1978). A brief study of news Patterns in sixteen third world countries.Medford, MA: Tufts University, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.

Pittatore, O. (1983). The Image of Italy in the New York Times, MA Thesis, SouthernIllinois University at Carbondale, IL, USA.



55

Ramaprasad, J. (1984). Effects of U.S.-India relation on New York Times Coverage,Journalism Quarterly.

Ramaprasad, J. (1984). Foreign Policy and Press Coverage: A Study of the New York Times ‘ coverage of India from 1973 to 1980. Dissertation, Southern Illinois University at

Carbondale, IL.Ramaprasad, J. & Majid, R, A. (1995). Framing and Ideology: A Comparative Analysisof American and Chinese Newspaper Coverage of the Fourth UN Conference on Womenand the NGO Forum in China.

Reese, S. D. (2001). Prologue – Framing Public Life: A Bridging Model for MediaResearch. In Reese, S.D., Gandhi Jr, O.H. & Grant, A.E. (Eds.). Framing public life:Perspective on media and our understanding of the social world (pp. 7-31). Mahwah,N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Rahman, A. (1982). Pakistan and America: Dependency Relations. New Delhi: YoungAsia Publications.Rahsid, Ahmed (2000), Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and fundamentalism in central Asia,Viking Adult, London.

Renita Coleman and Stephen Banning (2006). Network TV News' Affective Framing of the Presidential Candidates: Evidence for a Second-Level Agenda-Setting Effect throughVisual Framing. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly Summer, 313-328.

Said, E. (1997). Covering Islam. New York: Vintage Books.

Security. C. Kumar and M. G. Weinbaum, Westview Press.

Shoemaker, P. J. & Reese, S.(1991). Mediating the Message: Theories of Influence onMass Media Content. White Plains, N.Y.: Longman Publishing Group.

Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D. (1991). Mediating the Message: Theories of influence onMass Media Content (pp. 183-204). NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Shoemaker, P., & Reese, S. (1996). Mediating the message: theories of influences onmedia content. In Ramaprasad, J. & Majid, R, A. (1995). Framing and Ideology: AComparative Analysis of American and Chinese Newspaper Coverage of the Fourth UNConference on Women and the NGO Forum in China (pp. I-30).

Shoemaker, P., Chang, T. K., & Brendlinger, N. (1987). Deviance as a predictor of Newsworthiness: Coverage of international news in the US Media. In Shoemaker, P. J &Reese, S. D. (Ed.), Mediating the Message: Theories of influence on Mass Media Content(pp. 183-204). NY: Longman Publishing Group.



56

Shoemaker, P., Danielian, L., & Brendlinger, N. (1988) Deviant act, risky business andUS interest. Paper presented to the International Communication Association, NewOrleans, May. In Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D. (Ed.), Mediating the Message: Theoriesof influence on Mass Media Content (pp. 183-204). NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Shoemaker, Pamela 1., & Reese, Stephen D., (1996). Mediating the Message, Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content, Longman, New York, NY.

Shoemaker, Pamela J., Danielian, Lucig H., & Brendlinger, Nancy, (1991). Deviant Acts,Risky Business and U.S. Interest: The Newsworthiness of World Events, JournalismQuarterly, 68 (4), pp. 781-795.

Siddiqi, M. A. (1997). Islam, Muslims and Media: Myths and Realities. Chicago,London, Delhi: NAAMPS Publications.

SIPRI, Ed. (2002). SIPRI Yearbook 2002 : Armaments, Disarmament and International

Security, Oxford University Press.Survey of Pakistan, 2005.

Syed, Anwar, Extremism, terrorism and fundamentalism, DAWN (13 October 2001),http/www.dawn.com

Terry C. Wallace. (1998) The May 1998 India and Pakistan Nuclear Tests. SouthernArizona Seismic Observatory (SASO).

Tunstall J. & Machin, D. (1999). The Anglo-American Media Connection. Oxford

University Press.

University of Connecticut. Opinion poll June 11, 2002 & March 16, 2004)

US Defense Department report (2001) Proliferation: Threat and Response, A DefenseDepartment report on the status of nuclear proliferation in South Asia

Wanta, W. Guy, G. & Cheolhan, L. (2004) Agenda Setting and International news:Media Influence on Public Perceptions of Foreign Nations, Journalism and MassCommunication Quarterly Vol. 81, No. 2 Summer, 364-377.

Williams, Raymond. (1977). Marxism and Literature, New York: Oxford UniversityPress. In Shoemaker, P. J & Reese, S. D. (Ed.), Mediating the Message: Theories of influence on Mass Media Content (pp. 183-204). NY: Longman Publishing Group.

Wisconsin Project (2001) . Pakistan Nuclear Update

Yu, Y., & Riffe, D. (1988). Chiang and Mao in U.S. news magazines. JournalismQuarterly, 66, 913-914.

http://www.geo.arizona.edu/geophysics/faculty/wallace/ind.pak/index.html



http://www.geo.arizona.edu/geophysics/faculty/wallace/ind.pak/index.html



Zengjun Peng, Z. (2004). Representation of china: An Across Time Analysis of coveragein the New York Times and Los Angeles Times. Asian Journal of Communication. Vol.14, No. 1, pp. 53-67.

Zheng, L. (2006). Newspaper conformity to national foreign policy in coverage of the

2003 Ira q war in the New York Times, The Times of London and People‘s Daily (China).MA Thesis, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, IL,

Zoglin, R. (1997). The last great newspaper. Time, pp. 67-73.

image of pakistan in the us media exploring news framing

Documents