international communication gazette 2010 fahmy 695 717

8/13/2019 International Communication Gazette 2010 Fahmy 695 717

1/24

http: //gaz.sagepub.com/ Gazette

International Communication

http://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/1748048510380801

2010 72: 695International Communication Gazette Shahira Fahmy

Arabic-language press coverage of war and terrorismContrasting visual frames of our times: A framing analysis of English- and

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:International Co mmunication Gazette Additional services and information for

http://gaz.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://gaz.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Dec 9, 2010Version of Record>>

at Jazan University on January 18, 2014gaz.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Jazan University on January 18, 2014gaz.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://gaz.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695http://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695http://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.refs.htmlhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.refs.htmlhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.full.pdfhttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://gaz.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://gaz.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://gaz.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.refs.htmlhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.refs.htmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.full.pdfhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.full.pdfhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.full.pdfhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.refs.htmlhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695.refs.htmlhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://gaz.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://gaz.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://gaz.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://gaz.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/content/72/8/695http://gaz.sagepub.com/


2/24

Article

Contrasting visual framesof our times: A framinganalysis of English- andArabic-language presscoverage of war andterrorism

Shahira FahmyThe University of Arizona, USA

Abstract

By operationalizing visual frames in terms of the human-interest vs technical frame and

the anti-war vs the pro-war frame, and exploring the use of two sets of framing devices:graphic portrayal and emphasis, this framing analysis of 1387 photographs examined con-trasting visual narratives employed by English- and Arabic-language transnational press incovering the 9/11 attack and the Afghan War. For the English-language newspaper, theInternational Herald Tribune, the frames emphasized the human suffering of 9/11 andde-emphasized the civilian casualties and moral guilt of implementing military force inAfghanistan by focusing more on a pro-war frame that showed the complex militaryhigh-tech operations and patriotic pictures. For the Arabic-language newspaper, Al-Hayat, the frames focused less on the victims and more on the material destruction of

9/11 and humanized the victims of the Afghan War. Furthermore, it focused on ananti-war frame by running visuals of anti-war protests and emphasizing graphic visualsportraying the humanitarian crisis in the Muslim country of Afghanistan.

Keywords

Afghan War, Al-Hayat, framing, International Herald Tribune, 9/11, photojournalism,transnational press, visual reporting, war coverage

Corresponding author:

Shahira Fahmy, College of Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Journalism, Department of Near Eastern

Studies, 845 N. Park Avenue, Marshall Building 325, PO Box 210158B, Tucson, AZ 85721-0158, USA

Email: [email protected]

the InternationalCommunication Gazette

72(8) 695–717

ª The Author(s) 2010Reprints and permission:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.navDOI: 10.1177/1748048510380801

gaz.sagepub.com

695

at Jazan University on January 18, 2014gaz.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/http://gaz.sagepub.com/


3/24

Since the 2003 Iraq War, discontent around the world with America’s policies has

intensified. European views are decidedly critical of US war policies and the Arab anger

toward the US remains pervasive. With the globalization of the world’s economic,

political and communication systems, news reporting and images provided in US mediavs Arab media have received considerable attention. Top US officials (e.g. US defense

secretary Donald Rumsfeld) repeatedly accused Al-Jazeera and other Arab-language

media outlets of harming the image of the US in the Arab world (see Voice of America,

2005; see also Shapiro, 2005).

As the world becomes increasingly interconnected and dependent on efficient means

of informing politics, economics and social and everyday life, more attention is needed

to the content of news across borders. The transnational Arab media system – bounded

by the Arabic language and Islam – for example, is the product of a commercialized

infrastructure, which transmits massive flows of information among Arabs and Muslims,

regardless of location. It thus expands beyond the confines of the nation-state to promote

collective political understanding of events, rather than the traditional Arab state-centric

interpretation of news (see Lynch, 2006).

The framing analysis in this article investigates the contrasting visual narratives in

English- and Arabic-language transnational press in covering the 9/11 attack and the

Afghan War by exploring two sets of visual frames: the human-interest vs technical

frame and the anti-war fame vs pro-war frame, and two sets of framing devices: graphic

portrayal and emphasis.

Comparing visual coverage in two newspapers of different cultural and political per-

spectives regarding two violent events helps to reveal the critical choices that journalists

subjectively make that would otherwise remain submerged.1 Entman (1991) explains

that comparison reveals that choices are not inevitable but rather are central to the way

the news frame helps establish the interpretation of news events. Neuman and colleagues

(1992: 120) suggest that the media ‘give the story a spin . . . taking into account their

organizational and modality constraints, professional judgments, and certain judgments

about the audience’.

With this perspective, this work examines photographs in the US-owned English-

language newspaper, the International Herald Tribune ( IHT )2 and the Saudi-owned

Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat from 12 September 2001, through 15 November 2001. The IHT and Al-Hayat are well-respected elite newspapers that are both transna-

tional in scope, with an approximate circulation of 200,000 each. Both are based in

Western Europe and represent two foreign news organizations catering to both English-

and Arabic-language audiences.

While both newspapers pride themselves on providing western notions of journalistic

objectivity and balanced coverage of events and issues, it is important to note that differ-

ent cultural and political perspectives inevitably filter into the news-making process and

inflect news values and organizational routines. Both newspapers are subjected to differ-

ent cultural perspectives that should give rise to important differences in how they cov-ered the two events under study. In other words, the ethos of journalistic objectivity and

the atypical claims to internationalist and cross-cultural positions suggests that these two

newspapers feature a similar style of reporting; one in which opinion seeps into coverage

by virtue of various factors, such as journalists’ approach to cover each story with an

696 the International Communication Gazette 72(8)

696




4/24

angle or a perspective. In Making News, Tuchman (1978), for example, explains that a

perspective is inevitable and is a result of routinized, legitimized and institutionalized

structures that favor certain ways of reporting the news. Thus, because of the tendency

for frame reductionism (see Scheufele, 2004) and by showing which images were con-sistently selected in these two newspapers, this article suggests which dimensions of the

terrorist attack and the Afghan War coverage carried the visual information that com-

prised the narratives. In this way, this article aims to illuminate in some detail the nature

of visual framing in transnational media.

From a theoretical perspective, this research, therefore, expands the study of framing

theory by examining visual frames and the framing devices used in an information war

and the transnational coverage of terrorism and conflict. How different English- and

Arabic-language media visually portray violent events remains a neglected area of sci-

entific inquiry and the proposed research represents a substantive effort to remedy this

deficiency. A review of past studies indicates that little of the work examining the fram-

ing of news events has focused on visual images. In an era of information warfare and

image management, the results of this study, thus, add to the current literature on framing

by exploring differences and similarities of visual reporting in a cross-cultural and trans-

national context. Furthermore, this research helps us speculate upon the interaction

between visuals of violent events and the thinking of English- and Arabic-speaking news

professionals and audiences, and how media coverage continues to reinforce the current

trends toward an increasingly polarized global public opinion.

The theoretical concept of framing

Scholars from differing theoretical and methodological perspectives suggest that media

content plays a particularly important role in constructing, shaping and reinforcing per-

ceptions of news events. However, because of this very interdisciplinary nature of the

communication field, Reese (2007) explains that while theoretical diversity has been

beneficial in developing and understanding the framing process, framing still lacks a

common shared theoretical model and suffers operational problems (see also Scheufele,

1999). Reese (2007) explains that for many scholars framing has represented more of aresearch program than a unified paradigm. Indeed, a review of the literature confirmed

an overall vague conceptualization of framing.

In an effort to clearly define the process, Reese (2001: 11) offered the following

definition: ‘Frames are organizing principles that are socially shared and persistent over

time, that work symbolically to meaningfully structure the social world.’ With this def-

inition he captured the dynamic process of negotiating meaning that occurs in the pro-

cess, while highlighting the relationships within discourse that may undergo changes

over time.

Similar to Reese (2007), Scheufele (2000) explained framing operates on a multi-levelstructure, suggesting a series of interrelated sub-processes. Scheufele (2000) developed an

analytical model that argued for a more careful examination of the three distinctive – yet

related – approaches of agenda setting, priming and framing and further suggested frames

need to be examined across levels of analysis (see Scheufele, 1999).

Fahmy 697

697




5/24

Framing studies have been mainly guided by a combination of the cognitive,

constructivist and critical perspectives (D’Angelo, 2002). From the constructive perspec-

tive – on which this study is based – scholars have defined media frames as ‘a central

organizing idea or story line that provides meaning to an unfolding strip of events . . .the frame suggests what the controversy is about, the essence of the issue’ (Gamson and

Modigliani, 1987: 143). And according to the constructive media effects model, public

opinion is shaped when audiences actively operate in the construction of meaning, while

relying on personal experience, social networking and interpretations from the mass

media (see Neuman et al., 1992).

Entman (1993) suggested the use of four framing functions: define a problem; iden-

tify a cause; present a moral evaluation; and suggest a remedy. Within the realm of visual

and political communication, Entman (1991) compared visual frames in the news cov-

erage of the US downing of an Iranian plane to the Soviet downing of a Korean jet in

the 1980s. He found that while the US media emphasized guilt in the Soviet downing

by showing visual messages that humanized the victims, the US media de-emphasized

the shooting down of the Iranian plane by showing messages that focused less on the

victims.

While Entman (1991) looked at how two different events were covered by one

‘source’– that source being the US media (Time, Newsweek , The New York Times, The

Washington Post and the CBS Evening News), the current study compares visual cover-

age of two different ‘sources’ ( IHT and Al-Hayat ) on two events that are, on the one

hand, roughly comparable in that they both involve violence, but, on the other hand, are

very different because one was a calamity on US soil and the other was a war in

Afghanistan. Thus, in Entman’s study, any variation in coverage patterns was within the

source’s ideologically driven approach to framing of different events. This study’s the-

oretical underpinnings, however, suggest that the sources are expected to differ in their

coverage patterns of framing of both events, owing to socially shared and persistent ideo-

logical differences over time in the two sources analyzed. Any variation found in this

study would, therefore come from the connection between source and event – e.g. an

English-language newspaper will cover an attack on US soil differently than would an

Arabic-language newspaper.

The visual framing of news events

Visual framing is both contingent upon, and distinct from, framing that occurs in written

parts of print news, and in written and spoken parts of broadcast news. In contrasting

visual framing to that which occurs in written and spoken news texts, Messaris and Abra-

ham (2001: 220) stated, ‘The special qualities of visuals – their iconicity, their indexical-

ity, and especially their syntactic implicitness – makes them very effective tools for

framing and articulating ideological messages’. Their definitive account of visual fram-

ing in Framing Public Life suggests that these three distinctive qualities of photographsmake visual framing less obtrusive than verbal framing, in such a way that ‘visual fram-

ing may convey meanings that would be more controversial or might meet with greater

audience resistance if they were conveyed through words’ (Messaris and Abraham,

2001: 215).


698




6/24

In the context of visual framing, the presence (or lack) of an image and the content of

a news photograph help determine the interpretation of a news event (Entman, 1993).

Contrary to common belief, photographs are not neutral (Hulteng, 1985; Tagg, 1988).

Even if images are not staged, they still need to be selected in a frame that cannot be wideenough to capture the complex reality (Messaris and Abraham, 2001), suggesting that

visual journalists inevitably set the framing process in motion. They may follow guide-

lines for objective reporting, but they may yet convey a dominant frame of news events

to their target audience (Entman, 1993). Past studies, for example, found that visual jour-

nalists in times of calamities and wars are expected to bend the rules of objectivity and

support their country’s troops and their government’s position on issues (see Fahmy,

2005a). Thus, in the case here, it is likely that different cultural and political perspectives

filtered into the news-gathering process and inflected news values and organizational

routines. One can thus infer two corollaries from this premise: (1) that different cultural

and political perspectives should yield predictably different types of visual coverage of

events in both newspapers; and (2) that events of international importance, such as war

and terrorism, should amplify the differences in visual coverage and make them more

observable.

The use of frames and framing devices

Based on Scheufele’s (1999) recommendation that framing needs to be examined across

levels of analysis, this section describes how four indicators operate at two differentlevels.

At the first level, lie the framing devices. The first and in some ways the most critical

framing device involves the overall salience and prominence of the events under study.

The literature indicates one of the most powerful framing devices is the frequency with

which a topic is mentioned in the news media. Entman (1993), for example, explains that

by repeating and reinforcing visual messages that reference some ideas and not others,

frames convey constant meanings, rendering ideas more salient and memorable than

others.

Aside from the images used to depict an event, how prominently an event is displayed also indicates the importance of that event (Entman, 1991; Fahmy, 2007; Fahmy et al.,

2007). Garcia (1987) found readers normally look at the largest photograph on a news

page, then the second largest and the third largest and so on. Wanta (1988) also found

larger photographs rather than smaller photographs can cause accompanying stories to

be more salient to the readers. Therefore, the more redundant the visual theme and the

more prominent, the clearer the indication we get about the presence of visual frames.

Attention has also been paid to the use of graphic device in photographs. Scholars

support the notion that graphic visuals capture viewers’ attention and bring viewers

closer to the action, making events more real and shocking (Fahmy and Johnson,2007b; Fahmy at al., 2006; Pfau et. al, 2006; Potter and Smith, 2000; Zelizer, 2004). For

example, a close-up image of a violent act is more graphic than a long shot of that same

act; seeing the image of a dead body from far away is not as graphic as seeing a close-up

of the dead person’s face lying in a pool of blood. Overall, then, the literature indicates

Fahmy 699

699




7/24

that the more graphic the photograph, the easier it is to employ visual frames in

developing a congruent interpretation of news events.

The second level of analysis deals with visual frames. The first visual frame examined

is the human-interest vs technical frame. Few studies have looked at coverage of victimsof tragic events to examine whether they were humanized, encouraging identification

with them, or whether they were made less visible with the information less centered

on the humanity they shared with the audience members and thus less likely to evoke

sympathy (e.g. Entman, 1991).

By and large, the literature suggests that media from different cultural and political

perspectives create different images of conflict. For example, while the US media failed

to report human agony and death of Iraqis in the first Gulf War (Herman, 1992), the Arab

media showed graphic images of suffering to gain public support for the Iraqi people

(Ayish, 2001).

In depicting the Gulf Wars, Griffin and Lee (1995) found that only 2 percent of total

images used to depict the first Gulf War showed images of wounded or killed US sol-

diers. Instead, news coverage emphasized material damage, such as bridges blowing

up, property damage and other forms of non-human destruction (Prince, 1993). Further,

the news media over-depicted the use and efficiency of smart bombs (Perlmutter, 1998).

It was only after the war that it was revealed that 70 percent of the bombs dropped in the

Gulf missed their targets (Frank, 1992; Hachten and Hachten, 1999; Winfield, 1992).

More recently, King and Lester (2005) concluded that although journalists in the recent

Iraq War were allowed safer and better access through the embed program (see Fahmy

and Johnson, 2005, 2007a), the images published in US newspapers were overwhel-

mingly pro-military, showing very few pictures of civilian casualties from either side

(see also Fahmy and Kim, 2008).

According to Herman and Chomsky (1988), the framing of suffering occurs in a

dichotomy that makes distinctions between the unworthy victims depicted as enemies

and the worthy victims who suffer. Consider the difference between emphasizing gra-

phic images of human suffering and death of civilians vs emphasizing pictures of mili-

tary arsenal and material destruction that could most likely numb the moral revulsion

that leads societies to see war as a last resort. The difference offers a powerful demon-

stration of how the visual dimension of reporting news events could potentially create ahuman-interest frame vs a technical frame of coverage, specifically in reporting violent

events.

The second visual frame is the anti-war vs the pro-war frame. This frame also belongs

to the selection of visuals of conflict in such a way that images of war could potentially

be placed in categories that conventionally either elicit support or opposition for that

conflict. Past studies indicate an important part of the framing process is the omission

of news (Entman, 1991; Gamson, 1985). Examples of widely publicized omissions

include anti-war demonstrations of the first Gulf War. The war had been widely opposed

in Japan, Spain and North African cities. However, no adequate recognition of the mas-sive public opposition, huge rallies and governmental resignations were present in US

media. The news media failed to provide an adequate sense of the massive worldwide

opposition. Instead, they focused on the support by the United Nations and most of the

world for the war efforts (see Schiller, 1992).


700




8/24

Consider the difference between de-emphasizing (or omitting) images representing

anti-war demonstrations vs emphasizing graphic images of US patriotism, along with

pictures of US aid efforts for the Afghan people. In the emphasis of patriotic and aid-

effort visuals lies a compelling demonstration of how the visual dimension of reportingthe Afghan conflict could potentially create a pro-war frame of coverage, specifically in

reporting a war that followed the 9/11 attack – one that the majority, at least in the US,

believed was morally justified.

Transnational media: The IHT and Al-Hayat newspapers

Because of the transnational media’s position at the intersection of various cultural,

political and economic environments, they are arguably a crucial forum in which news

outlets compete to establish interpretations and analyses to be accorded serious weight.

The two transnational newspapers were chosen as the medium of study because their

news reaches news consumers worldwide. Virtually unexplored is the way in which the

English- and Arabic-language transnational media visually guide the interpretation of

violent events related to war and terrorism.

The highly respected US-owned IHT is an English-language daily newspaper pub-

lished in Paris for the English-speaking market. It has traditionally published mainly

stories from The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post

(Merrill, 1991). These US articles are re-purposed for large US and European audiences.

The audience of the IHT is primarily concentrated in Europe (60 percent) and Asia

(35 percent). Nearly two in three readers live outside their country of origin ( New Media

Age, 2005). The readers could be divided into roughly three equal groups. A third are

Americans (tourists and expatriates). A third are expatriates of other countries (e.g.

Danish businessman in Switzerland). And a third are foreign nationals, primarily in Eur-

ope, the Middle East and Asia.3

The second transnational paper, the Saudi-owned Al-Hayat newspaper, is an

Arabic-language daily newspaper published in London for the Arab-speaking market.

It addresses itself to the needs of a pan-Arab audience (Schleifer, 1998). The audience

of Al-Hayat is concentrated in the Arab world (80 percent). Nearly eight in 10 readers

live in Middle Eastern countries. The readers of Al-Hayat are also in Europe (10 percent)and the United States (5 percent).4

It would be, however, improper to generalize to all national and transnational news

outlets from these two newspapers. But the strengths of the findings lie in the fact that

both newspapers pride themselves on being balanced in their coverage of events and

issues, suggesting that a larger database, specifically one based on mainstream national

media available in the United States and the Arab world, could show an even stronger

manifestation of framing than the results of the visual analysis identified here.

The comparison of the two constructed realities of 9/11 and the Afghan War does not

require the assumption that the underlying facts of violent events were analogous. Eventhough this sort of comparison has not been done, based on the literature one can make

solid predictions about visual framing of both events in the two newspapers (see Fahmy

and Johnson, 2009). Both were complicated events open to varying interpretations. For

example, the English-language newspaper would likely cover an attack on American soil

Fahmy 701

701




9/24

differently than would an Arab-language newspaper. On the one hand, the IHT , by

focusing on images portraying empathy and highlighting the suffering of 9/11 victims,

could create and incite public opinion to support the US- led ‘war on terror’. On the other

hand, Al-Hayat could focus on Afghan suffering, offering the opportunity to denouncethe United States for what was perceived to be the injustice imposed by bombing a poor

Muslim nation like Afghanistan. In other words, there is nothing inherent that would

compel a similar visual coverage of these two events in the two transnational newspapers

under study.

Method

This work investigates the visual news frames employed by transnational press in cov-

ering the 9/11 attack and the Afghan War. With this goal, the author collected two sets of

photographs from 12 September 2001 through 15 November 2001. The first data set is

from the daily English edition, the IHT newspaper. The second data set is from the daily

Arabic Al-Hayat newspaper. The start date is the day following the 9/11 attack. The end

date is two days after the fall of Kabul – the capital of Afghanistan. The data sets allowed

for the examination of visual news content of connected events produced in a certain

period of time.

Overall, a total of 1387 photographs from the two newspapers were analyzed. The

unit of analysis was the individual photograph. Each photograph depicting events related

to 9/11 and the Afghan War was coded. Borrowing from Griffin and Lee’s (1995) study,each image was coded in terms of visual content and event context.5 This study carefully

distinguished between the two visual frames and the framing devices used to portray

9/11 and the Afghan War. The focus was on the following four indicators.

The emphasis device

Based on past studies, this framing device was measured in terms of both frequency and

dominance. For frequency, each photograph was coded for portraying 9/11, the Afghan

War, or mixed. For example, a photograph of officials and leaders reacting to 9/11 and planning a retaliation war on Afghanistan was coded as mixed. In terms of dominance, a

photograph was coded as either dominant or not dominant. If it was not the largest image

on the front page or it appeared inside, it was coded as not dominant.

The graphic device

Graphic portrayal was measured in terms of the following categories: not graphic,

slightly graphic, graphic and very graphic.6 To be coded as ‘very graphic’ or ‘graphic’,

a photograph had to portray a highly realistic depiction of suffering. Examples of suchimagery included the portrayal of the dead and suffering of 9/11 and Afghan War vic-

tims. The only exception was photographs of the planes crashing into the twin towers.

These images were coded as ‘very graphic’ because they portrayed a moment in which

thousands of civilians were killed. Examples of images coded as ‘slightly graphic’


702




10/24

included long shots of material destruction. Images of airport security and mug shots

were coded as ‘not graphic’.

The human-interest vs the technical frame

This visual frame examined the ways that the violent events were reported in terms of

human-interest vs technical depictions. Photographs that did not fit into the human-

interest frame and the technical frame categories, such as pictures of political and

military officials, were coded as missing. For the human-interest category, each 9/11

photograph was coded for: victims, citizens mourning and memorializing 9/11, and

pictures of funerals; each Afghan War photograph was coded for: Afghan refugees,

evacuation, casualties and death. As a subcategory, each human-interest photograph was

further coded for the nationality of the subject/s portrayed. Nationality was coded as: US/European or Arab/Muslim.7 For the technical frame, each 9/11 photograph was coded

for: the collapse of the twin towers, the planes crashing into the buildings, the strike

effects on the Pentagon, the Pennsylvania plane crash, mug shots of suspected

terrorists and pictures of overall wreckage due to the 9/11 terrorist attack; each Afghan

War photograph was coded for: combat, weapons, explosions and overall destruction.

The anti-war vs the pro-war frame

To measure this variable, each photograph was coded for the depiction of the anti-war

frame and the pro-war frame. The anti-war frame was coded as: anti-war protests or none.

Examples of anti-war imagery included protests against the Afghan War in the United

States and abroad. The pro-war frame included two subcategories: patriotism and aid

efforts. Each photograph was coded as: patriotic symbols or none; and aid efforts or none.

Examples of patriotic symbols imagery included pictures of citizens waving the US flag

and examples of aid-effort visuals included images of US aid packages in Afghanistan.

Guidelines were used to provide a systematic way in which all photographs were dealt

with. The use of the mixed category allowed the researcher to identify a highly detailed

analysis of the images that strictly portrayed either the 9/11 attack or the Afghan War.

Intercoder reliability was checked for 140 images (10 percent of total). Overall the datareflected an intercoder reliability of 94 percent, based on Holsti’s formula. Reliability

estimates for each variable were calculated by Scott’s pi as follows: emphasis (frequency

99 percent; dominance 99 percent); human-interest vs technical frame 97 percent;

nationality 97 percent; graphic portrayal 95 percent; anti-war frame 95 percent; pro-

war frame (patriotism 96 percent and aid efforts 98 percent).

Findings

Of the 1387 photographs analyzed, the IHT ran 544 photographs and Al-Hayat ran 843 of

the events under study. The sample of photographs from Al-Hayat was larger than the

sample of photographs from IHT for a good reason. The IHT , on average, ran two-

thirds the number of photographs of Al-Hayat (35 vs 55 photographs daily).

Fahmy 703

703




11/24

The photographs were first coded as depicting: the 9/11 attack, the Afghan War, or

mixed. Because this study is interested in comparing visual narratives of the two events

between the two newspapers, the images coded as mixed in the theme category were

excluded. Therefore, 292 photographs were removed from the original data set leaving

a total of 1095 photographs to be analyzed. The findings suggest 483 photographs

depicted 9/11 and 612 photographs depicted the Afghan War (see Table 1 for frequencies

and percentages).

The following explores the visual framing employed by English- and

Arabic-language transnational press. For this and the remainder of the analysis, the focus

is on the two sets of frames and two framing devices. Cross-tabs were administered to

test differences between the two sets of photographs for the two newspapers. Further,

measures of framing devices were cross-tabulated with the two visual frames analyzed.

Results showed two findings are apparent in the overall salience and prominence of the

photographs under study. First, after excluding the mixed photographs, comparing the

frequency with which an event was portrayed in the two data sets produced significant dif-

ferences (w2¼ 79.4, p < .001). The IHT published 60.1 percent of its visuals depicting 9/11

and Al-Hayat newspaperpublished 67.1 percent of its visuals depicting the AfghanWar. The

two publications, however, did not differ on how prominently they ran those visuals on the

front pages. Chi-square tests showed no significant differences in the use of dominant photo-

graphs depicting 9/11 and the Afghan War (w2¼ .1, p > .05;w2¼ .095, p >.05 respectively).8

These results, then, indicate that although there is no marked difference between the two

newspapers in how prominently the visuals were displayed, a manifestation is yet noted in the higher proportion of photographs that referenced one event more than the other, ren-

dering that event more salient and memorable to the target audience.

The second framing device focused on the ways the violent events were reported in

terms of providing highly realistic depictions of suffering, making the violent events of

9/11 and the Afghan War more real and shocking. Two statistical outcomes document

the consistent use of graphic devices in Al-Hayat newspaper for both events.

In the visual coverage of 9/11, a chi-square analysis suggested significant differences

between the two publications (w2 ¼ 8.39, p < .05) (see Table 2). The Arabic-language

newspaper published more graphic photographs than its English-language counterpart.While Al-Hayat published fewer photographs of the terrorist attack, overall, and no

images of victims and funerals related to 9/11, this seeming graphic portrayal is traceable

to the numerous depictions of material destruction the newspaper published. Many of

these images included visuals of the planes crashing into the twin towers. Such

Table 1. Frequency and percentages of images depicting 9/11 and the Afghan War in the IHT and Al-Hayat newspapers (N ¼ 1095)

Newspapers 9/11 Afghan War

IHT 271 (60.1%) 180 (39.9%) Al-Hayat 212 (32.9%) 432 (67.1%)Total 483 (44.1%) 612 (55.9%)

w2¼ 79.4, p < .001; d.f. ¼ 1.


704




12/24

photographs were coded as highly graphic for a good reason. The planes were used as

weapons to kill thousands of civilians.

In the visual coverage of the Afghan War, a chi-square analysis suggested significant

differences between the two publications (w2 ¼ 7.73, p < .05). Al-Hayat published sig-

nificantly more images portraying the graphic nature of war than the IHT . Images coded

as ‘very graphic’ and ‘graphic’ were images of Afghan refugees, casualties and deaths.

For example, as Figure 1 shows, the Arabic-language newspaper ran a photograph

depicting dead bodies of Taliban fighters in the Afghan capital of Kabul.

A few additional points need a mention. First, as shown in Table 2, about 90 percent of

photographs in the two newspapers were coded as ‘not graphic’ or ‘slightly graphic’. Sec-

ond, in covering the 9/11 event, in which approximately 3000 people lost their lives, nei-

ther newspaper published the shocking photographs of people trapped in the top floors of

the World Trade Center, images of people jumping or falling from towers, or images of the

dead and severely injured. Third, the IHT ran no ‘very graphic’ images of the Afghan War.

Specifically, the newspaper ran no images of casualties and death in Afghanistan.

The first visual frame focused on the ways the violent events were reported in terms of

human-interest vs technical depictions. The photographs in both newspapers were com-

plex, and in certain respects the two newspapers shared few identical photographs of

both events.9

But overall, their moral portrayals and their sensitivity about the victimsinvolved in the devastating events were set apart from the visual narratives (Table 3).

In depicting 9/11, the two newspapers differed significantly in reporting the terrorist

attack (w2 ¼ 50.53, p < .000). On one hand, the Arabic-language newspaper ran signif-

icantly fewer images of human suffering and death of civilians as opposed to more pic-

tures of material destruction, creating a technical frame of coverage (technical frame

82.0 percent vs human-interest frame 18.0 percent). The majority of its 9/11 photographs

were of overall wreckage; the plane crashing into the buildings; and mug shots of sus-

pected Arab terrorists. On the other hand, the English-language newspaper humanized

the event by publishing the largest percentage of its photographs depicting 9/11 victimsand citizens mourning, funerals and mug shots of the deceased victims and focused less

on visuals of material loss (technical frame 21.2 percent vs human-interest frame

78.8 percent). Figure 2 shows a photograph that ran in the IHT , depicting emergency

workers helping a woman at the World Trade Center. Al-Hayat newspaper published

Table 2. Frequency and percentages of graphic images depicting 9/11 and the Afghan War in theIHT and Al-Hayat newspapers (N ¼ 1059)

Categories

IHT

(9/11)

Al-Hayat

(9/11)

IHT

(Afghan War)

Al-Hayat

(Afghan War)

Very graphic and graphic 15 (5.5%) 27 (12.7%) 6 (3.3%) 43 (10.0%)Slightly graphic 68 (25.1%) 43 (20.3%) 56 (31.1%) 132 (30.6%)Not graphic 188 (69.4%) 142 (67%) 118 (65.6%) 257 (59.5%)

Total 271 (100%) 212 (100%) 180 (100%) 432 (100%)

w2 for 9/11 ¼ 8.39, p < .05; d.f. ¼ 2 ; w2 for the Afghan War ¼ 7.73, p < .05; d.f. ¼ 2.

Note: For this analysis, so as to maintain reasonable cell sizes, the ‘very graphic’ and ‘graphic’ categories werecollapsed into one category.

Fahmy 705

705




13/24

no such image. In fact the portrayal of the attack and material destruction in Al-Hayat

newspaper is outstanding when compared to the absence of photographs of funerals and

victims of the tragic event.

Figure 1. A graphic image showing dead bodies of Taliban fighters in the Afghan capital of Kabul.copyright 2001 AFP.


706




14/24

That said several additional findings regarding these data are notable. First, Al-Hayat

did publish a few photographs memorializing the terrorist attack. Second, although the

IHT published the image of Palestinians celebrating the news of 9/11 on US targets, it is

important to note that the Arabic-language newspaper published none. Third, the images

of suspected terrorists were downplayed in the IHT (19.9 percent) making the dominance

of mug shots of suspected terrorists in Al-Hayat noteworthy (56.4 percent).

In depicting the Afghan War, as shown in Table 4, both newspapers ran a larger

percentage of images portraying war preparations, weapons and overall destruction due

to the conflict. Overall, however, the two newspapers visually depicted the war differ-

ently (w2¼ 4.14, p < .05). The data indicate the IHT showed a more benign and bloodless

coverage that significantly differed from its Arabic-language counterpart. Al-Hayat

newspaper emphasized the human-interest visuals more than the IHT (43.1 percent vs

31.3 percent respectively). It published, for example, many images depicting casualties

and death. As Figure 3 shows, the Arabic-language newspaper ran a photograph depict-

ing four dead Afghan children and a father crying over the body of his dead baby. It is

quite remarkable that the IHT published no such image of civilian casualty in Afghani-

stan. Considering the evidence of a lack of such visuals, almost immediately it becomesclear that the coverage in the IHT sanitized the conflict, leading to a single dominant

interpretation; one that de-emphasized guilt for the lack of empathy with the civilians

injured or killed; and one that tended to obscure rather than to highlight the realistic and

graphic nature of war. This finding indicates that by and large, Al-Hayat newspaper

humanized the tragedy by focusing on more visuals depicting loss of life and Afghan

refugees, as opposed to the visual coverage that ran in the IHT , which emphasized the

technical frame of coverage.

To gain further insight into this specific human-interest vs technical frame and because

the framing of suffering occurs in a dichotomy of us vs them, it was expected the picturesthat ran in the two newspapers to be less centered on the humanity of the other, and thus

less likely to evoke sympathy. If that were the case, it then seemed probable the coverage

would differ in terms of the nationality of the subjects portrayed in tragedy. With this

perspective, a cross-tab between nationality of the human-interest photographs and the

Table 3. Frequency and percentages of images depicting 9/11 in the IHT and Al-Hayat newspapers(N ¼ 149)

Categories IHT Al-Hayat Total

Technical frame 21 (21.2%) 41 (82.0%) 62 (41.6%)Human-interest frame 78 (78.8%) 9 (18.0%) 87 (58.4%)

Total 99 (100%) 50 (100%) 149 (100%)

w2¼ 50.53, p < .000; d.f. ¼ 1.

Notes: 9/11 pictures that did not fit in these two categories were coded as missing. The technical frame includedimages portraying the following: the collapse of the twin towers, the plane crashing into the building, the strikeeffects on the Pentagon, the Pennsylvania plane crash, mug shots of suspected terrorists and pictures of overallwreckage due to the 9/11 terrorist attack. The human-interest frame included images portraying the following:9/11 victims, citizens mourning and memorializing 9/11 victims and pictures of funerals.

Fahmy 707

707




15/24

two newspapers was administered. As expected, the findings indicate significant differ-

ences (w2 ¼ 50.4, p < .001). The IHT depicted the majority of the human-interest photo-

graphs from the western world (75.4 percent). Al-Hayat newspaper depicted the majority

of the human-interest photographs from the Arab and Muslim world (61.8 percent). Inother words, the IHT published proportionally fewer images humanizing the tragedy of

Arabs and Muslims than did Al-Hayat newspaper and vice versa.

One additional point, thus, merits mention. Such findings suggest that audiences did

not have an adequate opportunity to learn all sides of an event and resist any single

Figure 2. In the aftermath of the 9/11 attack, emergency workers help a woman after she wasinjured at the World Trade Center. Photograph by Gulnara Samoilova, copyright 2001 APWorldwide Photos.


708




16/24

dominant interpretation. In cross-tabulating the above measures of framing devices withthis visual frame, results showed that both frequency10 (w2 ¼ 7.30, p < .01) and graphic

portrayal (w2¼ 10.60, p < .01) were significantly used. Journalists, thus, chose frequency

and graphic portrayal devices to emphasize the human-interest vs technical frame of cov-

erage. For example, in the striking difference regarding the decision to run the graphic

photo of the injured woman at the World Trade Center in the IHT (Figure 2) as opposed

to the graphic photo of dead Afghan children in Al-Hayat (Figure 3) lies a powerful

demonstration of how the human-interest frame promoted contrasting evaluations of the

two events in the two newspapers.

Figure 3. A man cries over the body of his son and neighbors who died in US raids in the Afghancapital of Kabul on 28 October 2001. Ten civilians, eight of them belonging to one family, perishedin one bomb hit, while two more were killed in a mini bus when another bomb landed in themiddle of a main road. Photograph by Sayed Salahuddin, copyright 2001 Reuters.

Table 4. Frequency and percentages of images depicting the Afghan War in the IHT and Al-Hayatnewspapers (N ¼ 359)

Categories IHT Al-Hayat Total

Technical frame 68 (68.7%) 148 (56.9%) 216 (60.2%)Human-interest frame 31 (31.3%) 112 (43.1%) 143 (39.8%)Total 99 (100%) 260 (100%) 359 (100%)

w2¼ 4.14, p < . 05; d.f. ¼ 1.

Notes: Afghan War pictures that did not fit in these two categories were coded as missing. The technical frameincluded images portraying the following: combat, weapons, explosions and overall destruction due to theAfghan War. The human-interest frame included images portraying the following: Afghan refugees, evacuation,casualties and death.

Fahmy 709

709




17/24

The second visual frame focused on the ways the events were reported in terms of

eliciting support or opposition for war. The cases suggest that overall Al-Hayat empha-

sized the anti-war frame and the IHT newspaper emphasized a pro-war frame of coverage.

Furthermore, in cross-tabulating measures of framing devices with this frame, frequency(w2¼ 87.81, p < .01) and graphic portrayals (w2¼ 35.637, p < .01) were used significantly.

Results showed the Arabic-language newspaper showed significantly more images of

anti-American/anti-war protests in the United States, Afghanistan and abroad: 10.9 per-

cent vs 6.9 percent of such images that ran in the IHT (w2¼ 5.0, p < .05). In terms of the

pro-war frame, the IHT showed significantly more images of patriotic symbols (w2¼ 9.6,

p < .01) and aid for the Afghan people (w2 ¼ 10.2, p < .001) than its Arabic-language

counterpart. For example, while the English-language newspaper ran images of patriotic

symbols (4.2 percent), such as citizens waving the US flag, the Arabic-language news-

paper published proportionally fewer such images (1.7 percent). Regarding aid efforts in

Afghanistan, the IHT published significantly more images of support, such as US food

packages: 7.3 percent vs 3.1 percent of such images in Al-Hayat newspaper. The major

thrust of these findings, thus, suggests that when pro-war and anti-war frames got

favored over others in the transnational arena, the two newspapers chose frequency and

graphic portrayal devices to emphasize critical visual choices that inevitably became

central to the way this visual frame helped establish support or opposition for the Afghan

conflict.

DiscussionThis study offers a quantitative contribution to a topic that has received mostly anecdotal

discussion. Some critics accuse news reporting and visuals provided in US media vs

Arab media of exploiting political incidents to expand support or opposition and

mobilize public pressure. By operationalizing visual frames in terms of the human-

interest vs technical frame and anti-war vs the pro-war frame, and exploring the use

of two framing devices: graphic portrayal and emphasis (which encompassed frequency

and prominence), this study examined visual narratives employed by English- and

Arabic-language transnational press in covering the 9/11 attack and the Afghan War.

A notable omission of the framing research stream has been the lack of visual framingresearch investigating visual framing of news events in a cross-cultural and transnational

context. It is hoped that this exploratory study will generate hypotheses for examining

the nature of visual frames in transnational media.

Both newspapers operate from Western European countries and both adhere to an

ethos of journalistic objectivity. Nonetheless, both are subject to different cultural and

political perspectives. These different perspectives gave rise to important differences

in how they covered important events of worldwide significance.

Clearly, the results of this study suggest that differences in covering 9/11 and the

Afghan War did not lie in the dominant visuals published on the front pages of the twonewspapers but in how these events were visually emphasized in the newspapers in gen-

eral. The manifestation of visual emphasis was unmistakably noted in the higher propor-

tion of photographs that referenced one event more than the other. The cases suggest

that, overall, readers of the two transnational newspapers did not have an adequate


710




18/24

opportunity to learn all sides of the 9/11 and the Afghan War events to resist any single

dominant interpretation.

When the human-interest vs technical frames and pro-war vs anti-war frames were

favored over others, journalists significantly used frequency and graphic portrayal devicesin developing congruent interpretations of both events. For example, the Arabic-language

newspaper emphasized the emotion of guilt in the Afghan War by showing proportionally

more visual messages that humanized the victims. Al-Hayat newspaper ran more graphic

images depicting refugees, casualties and loss of life, and thus focused on the humanitarian

crisis in a neighboring Muslim country. It framed the terrorist attack story in a more tech-

nical frame by de-emphasizing visual messages that focused on the victims and emphasiz-

ing images of material destruction and depictions of the planes’ impacts; it published

fewer images of people mourning, no photographs depicting 9/11 funerals and victims

of the tragic event. On a similar level, the English-language newspaper emphasized the

emotion of guilt in 9/11 by showing the largest proportions of its visuals humanizing

9/11 victims. It ran images of citizens mourning, mug shots of the deceased and funerals,

and focused less on depictions of material loss. The IHT de-emphasized the bombing of

Afghanistan by running visuals that focused less on the victims and more on arsenals and

weaponry, thus framing the Afghan War story in a technical frame.

In comparing photographs depicting tragedy, the two newspapers seemed to be less

centered on the humanity of the other, and thus less likely to evoke sympathy. The IHT

newspaper depicted the majority of the victims from the western world and Al-Hayat

newspaper depicted the majority of the victims from the Arab and Muslim world. Fur-

ther, many of the photographs that ran in the two newspapers dehumanized the other by

portraying wide-angle shots of rubble caused by the terrorist attack or US air strikes in

Afghanistan (data not shown).

Data analyses also showed Al-Hayat newspaper emphasized the anti-war frame and

the IHT newspaper emphasized a pro-war frame. The IHT depicted fewer images of

anti-American, anti-war protests and more images of aid and patriotism than Al-Hayat .

For example, unlike Al-Hayat , the IHT ran images of US aid in Afghanistan, trying to

portray a more benevolent coverage of the war. This finding suggests that the visual cov-

erage of the IHT might have shifted the attention and the public sympathy away from the

agony and suffering inflicted upon the Afghans to a new concern, supporting and win-ning the war. Results indicate the IHT dedicated a considerable proportion of its images

depicting war preparations, patriotism and US aid. Meanwhile, the newspaper portrayed

the war as a bloodless event by not publishing a single image of casualty and loss of life

in Afghanistan.

As 9/11 and the Afghan War had far-reaching consequences for international rela-

tions, politics, diplomacy and military action, the contrasting visual framing of the two

violent events by English- and Arabic-language transnational press was expected. The

gap between the two cultures currently runs deep. With the ongoing Afghan and Iraq

conflicts and the unresolved Israeli–Palestinian issue, discontent around the Arab world with US policies has intensified (see Fahmy and Johnson, 2007b). Similarly, in the after-

math of 9/11, high levels of anti-Arab sentiments in American public opinion polls were

reported, in addition to significant stereotyping of Arab Americans, Arabs and Muslims

as terrorist sympathizers (see Nacos and Torres-Reyna, 2003).

Fahmy 711

711




19/24

As further evidence for misunderstanding and use of contrasting visual narratives,

the following makes the point best. One of the most controversial images of 9/11 was

the Reuters photograph of Palestinians cheering following the event. Anecdotal evidence

suggests this particular image was highly criticized by the US public (Fahmy et al.,2006). The idea that the attack was celebrated in Arab media is widespread. However,

results here showed that the IHT published the image and the Arabic-language newspa-

per did not. Trying to depict the people’s reaction to 9/11 in Arab and Muslim countries,

Al-Hayat published several images of Arabs and Muslims memorializing the victims.

For example, Al-Hayat ran an image of Iranians chanting anti-terrorism slogans and

holding candles for 9/11 victims and another image of Arab women mourning the

victims in a church in Damascus, Syria (see Fahmy, 2005b). Such images of Arabs and

Muslims, however, were absent in the IHT newspaper.

As for the use of graphic photographs, Al-Hayat consistently ran more graphic images

of both events. This finding suggests the two newspapers might have tailored the visual

coverage to their target readers. Current literature indicates that whereas many

Americans expect the media to be sensitive to graphic images, a recent survey of viewers

of Al-Jazeera found overwhelming support for the use of graphic imagery among the

Arab audience (Fahmy and Johnson, 2007), suggesting, however, that cultural

differences may predetermine any comparison based on this study’s definition of what

constitutes graphic imagery.

Investigating the interaction between visuals and the thinking of English- and

Arabic-speaking news professionals, the author contacted high-ranking editors of both

newspapers.11 For journalists to explain that those differences in visual coverage were

never intentional was to be expected. The literature suggests the concept of framing is

one that could include the intent of the sender, but the motives could also be uninten-

tional (Gamson, 1989). In other words, although journalists may follow guidelines for

objective reporting, different cultural and political perspectives do filter into the news-

making process, leading to a dominant framing of the news event to the target

audience.

Nick Stout, the assistant managing editor of the IHT at the time, explained that there

was no conscious effort by journalists to differentiate between the coverage of the two

events.12 They had simply tried to choose the visuals that told the story in the most objec-

tive way. Based on the differences between the target audiences, editors did not find the

findings surprising.13 Saadawi, the editor at Al-Hayat newspaper, further commented:

The factors that we considered for running 9/11 images in Al-Hayat were to show the mag-

nitude of the horror and its symbolism (vast destruction of buildings considered as icons and

symbols of power and wealth). . . . As for the Afghan War coverage, we concentrated on

two factors: women and children (the most vulnerable) and contrasts between pre-

Taliban and post-Taliban as far as society is concerned.14

Several aspects of these findings, the author believes, are suggestive about the way

transnational papers allowed for different interpretations of news and issues, specifi-

cally those related to war and terrorism. First, the visual coverage introduced contrast-

ing visual frames that limited the two transnational newspapers from replicating the


712




20/24

complex nature of the two tragic events. Second, the media’s emphasis on these

frames was somehow predetermined, a conclusion the author formed based upon the

predominance of photographs that ran in the two newspapers from identical news

sources: AP, Reuters and AFP (Fahmy, 2005b). The events and aftermath of 9/11 and the Afghan War catalyzed the two newspapers into presenting contrasting visual nar-

ratives of the two complicated events, making them explicitly relate to political and

cultural differences that favor certain ways of seeing. To be specific, regardless of

whether journalists in either newspaper were aware of the news-framing process, the

visual comparison revealed that choices were not inevitable but rather were central to

the way the frames and framing devices were employed to establish contrasting inter-

pretations of war and terrorism.

This raises at least two significant questions for future research. First, the cases sug-

gest the need for more research focusing on audience frames. Audience frames analysis

focuses on how audiences make sense of the news by using mentally stored ideas that

guide information processing (see Entman, 1993). Current literature suggests visual jour-

nalists believe their work can have powerful effects on the public (Fahmy and Wanta,

2007) and that news photographs are particularly powerful in visual agenda setting

(Fahmy et al., 2006) and in evaluating social and political environments (Domke

et al., 2002). On the evidence of the two cases examined, in which contrasting visual nar-

ratives tended to obscure and to highlight certain information, the thinking among the

bulk of the audience of these transnational media are unlikely to learn a comprehensive

view of the events and issues covered.

The second focus for more research is to examine how visual framing may be

influenced by social-structural factors, organizational factors, individual factors and

ideological factors (e.g. Eliasoph, 1988; Gitlin, 1980; Shoemaker and Reese, 1996;

Tuchman, 1978). While the cases examined here suggest the reporting may have

heavily tailored the visual coverage to the target audiences, there is little basis for pre-

dicting or understanding to what extent the visual frames and framing devices were a

revealing component of ownership, and thus a system of production and distribution.

The conditions that promote ideological and organizational control over framing vs

autonomous journalistic control in a transnational context merit research, especially

since transnational media claim to adhere to internationalist and cross-cultural posi-tions and constitute a crucial forum in which news outlets compete to establish inter-

pretations of importance to elite audiences.

Finally, the author acknowledges that the two cases examined do not provide a suf-

ficient basis for determining whether these visual indicators are common to other

transnational media outlets. Moreover, this research did not examine the function of

captions in framing photographs of conflicts. It is possible that different captions for

identical pictures might produce different ways in which images are interpreted.

Indeed, more than in the past, comparative visual research is needed. Findings of this

study suggest that Arabic- and English-speaking audiences most likely do not getexposed to similar visual coverage of war and terrorism. During an information age,

these differences in visual reporting may lead to more critical perceptions of the other ,

and more importantly, reinforce the trend of a progressively more polarized public

opinion worldwide.

Fahmy 713

713




21/24

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or

not-for-profit sectors.

Notes

1. Both newspapers have access to the same western news agencies: AP, AFP and Reuters. The

vast majority (99.3 percent) of photographs of 9/11 and of the Afghan War that ran in the IHT

and Al-Hayat newspapers were from these three western news agencies (Fahmy, 2005b).

2. In 2003 The New York Times acquired full ownership of the International Herald Tribune.

3. Nick Stout, deputy managing editor and chief editor for the International Herald Tribune in

Asia, Hong Kong, personal communication, 18 February 2005.

4. N Itanim, the International Section director of Daralhayat Information Centre, Beirut,

Lebanon, personal communication, 19 February 2006.

5. An important part of the analysis included registering and coding information from accompa-

nying captions. For example, a photograph of people cheering at a sporting event is different

from a photograph of people celebrating victory after winning a conflict.

6. To maintain reasonable cell sizes, the ‘very graphic’ and ‘graphic’ categories were later col-

lapsed into one category.

7. The author is proficient in four different languages – including Arabic – and could read the

captions to help identify the nationality of the subjects portrayed in Al-Hayat newspaper.

8. The IHT ran 4.1 percent and Al-Hayat newspaper ran 3.3 percent of 9/11 images as dominant; the

IHT ran13.9percentand Al-Hayat newspaperran13percentofitsAfghanWarimagesasdominant.

9. Several identical photographs were shared across the news media. Identical photographs in

both the IHT and Al-Hayat newspapers included images of the plane crashing into the building

on the front page and the public relations photograph of Yasser Arafat, the late president of the

Palestinian National Authority, donating blood for 9/11 victims.

10. Because the two publications did not differ on how prominently they ran visuals on the front

pages, dominance was removed from this – and subsequent – analyses that cross-tabulated

framing devices with the two visual frames examined.

11. To familiarize them with the focus of the research, a list of questions was included in the email

messages. The main questions focused upon the gate-keeping process regarding selecting photo-graphs of 9/11 and the Afghan War and whether the process differed based on the news event. The

editors were: Samir Saadawi, the international section editor of Al-Hayat newspaper; Nick Stout,

the 2001 assistant managing editor of IHT ; and Robert McCartney, the 2001 managing editor of

the IHT.

12. Nick Stout, personal communication, 18 February 2005. Nick Stout reported he is currently in

Hong Kong, working as the chief editor for the IHT in Asia.

13. Robert McCartney, personal communication, 25 February 2006. McCartney explained: ‘Our

paper is US owned and we publish for the elite English speaking audience abroad. I am not

surprised then that our newspaper differed from an Arabic-language newspaper, I am not surprised the photo choice was also different.’ Robert McCartney is back in Washington, DC, as

the assistant managing editor for continuous news at the Washington Post . He is in charge of

the desk that provides breaking news coverage to washingtonpost.com and serves as the prin-

cipal liaison between the newspaper and the website.


714




22/24

14. Samir Saadawi, personal communication, 18 February 2005.

References

Ayish MI (2001) American-style journalism and Arab world television: An exploratory study of news

selection at sixArab world satellitetelevision channels. Transnational BroadcastingStudies online

serial 6 (Spring/Summer). Available at: www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Spring01/Ayish.html

D’Angelo P (2002) News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: A response to

Entman. Journal of Communication 52(4): 870–888.

Domke D, Perlmutter D and Spartt M (2002) The primes of our times? An examination of the

power of visual images. Journalism 3(2): 131–159.

Eliasoph N (1988) Routines and the making of oppositional news. Critical Studies in Mass Com-

munication 5(4): 313–334.

Entman RM (1991) Framing US coverage of international news: Contrasts in narratives of the

KAL and Iran air incidents. Journal of Communication 41(4): 6–27.

Entman RM (1993) Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communi-

cation 43(4): 51–58.

Fahmy S (2005a) Photojournalists’ and photo-editors’ attitudes and perceptions: The visual cov-

erage of 9/11 and the Afghan War. Visual Communication Quarterly 12(3–4): 146–163.

Fahmy S (2005b) Emerging alternatives or traditional news gates: Which news sources were used

to picture the 9/11 attack and the Afghan War? Gazette 67(5): 383–400.

Fahmy S (2007) They took it down: Exploring determinants of visual reporting in the toppling of

the Saddam Hussein statue in national and international newspapers. Mass Communication and

Societ y 10(2): 143–170.

Fahmy S and Johnson T (2005) How we performed: Embedded journalists’ attitudes and perceptions

towards covering the Iraq War. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 82(2): 301–317.

Fahmy S and Johnson T (2007a) Different positions, different perspectives? How and why embed

coverage differed from unilateral coverage of the Iraq War. Newspaper Research Journal

28(3): 23–39.

Fahmy S and Johnson T (2007b) Show the truth and let the audience decide: A web-based survey

showing support for use of graphic imagery among viewers of Al-Jazeera. Journal of

Broadcasting and Electronic Media 15(2): 245–264.Fahmy S and Johnson T (2009) How embedded journalists in Iraq viewed the arrest of

Al-Jazeera’s most prominent reporter Taysir Alouni? Media, War and Conflict 2(1): 45–63.

Fahmy S and Kim D (2008) Picturing the Iraq War: Constructing the image of war in British and

US press. International Communication Gazette 70(6): 443–462.

Fahmy S and Wanta W (2007) What photojournalists think others think? The perceived impact of

news photographs on public opinion formation. Visual Communication Quarterly 14(1): 16–31.

Fahmy S, Cho S, Wanta W and Song Y (2006) Visual agenda-setting after 9/11: Individuals’ emo-

tions, image recall and concern with terrorism. Visual Communication Quarterly 13(1): 4–15.

Fahmy S, Kelly J and Kim YS (2007) What Hurricane Katrina revealed: A visual analysis of thehurricane coverage by news wires and US newspapers. Journalism and Mass Communication

Quarterly 84(3): 546–561.

Frank AG (1992) A third-world war: A political economy of the Persian Gulf War and the New

World Order. In: Mowlana H, Gerbner G and Schiller HI (eds) Triumph of the Image: The

Fahmy 715

715




23/24

Media War in the Persian Gulf. A Global Perspective. San Francisco, CA: Westview Press, 3–

21.

Gamson WA (1985) Goffman’s legacy to political sociology. Theory and Society 14(5):

605–622.Gamson WA (1989) News as framing: Comments on Graber. American Behavioral Scientist

33(2): 157–166.

Gamson WA and Modigliani A (1987) The changing culture of affirmative action. In: Braungart

RG and Braungart MM (eds) Research in Political Sociology. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 137–

177.

Garcia MR (1987) Contemporary Newspaper Design: A Structural Approach, 2nd edn.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Gitlin T (1980) The Whole World is Watching: Mass Media in the Making and Unmaking of the

New Left . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Griffin M and Lee J (1995) Picturing the Gulf War: Constructing an image of war in Time, News-

week, and U.S. News and World Report. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly

72(4): 813–825.

Hachten WA and Hachten H (1999) The World News Prism: Changing Media of International

Communication. Ames: Iowa State University Press.

Herman ES (1992) Beyond Hypocrisy. Boston, MA: South End Press.

Herman ES and Chomsky N (1988) Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass

Media. New York: Pantheon.

Hulteng JL (1985) The Messenger’s Motives: Ethical Problems of the News Media , 2nd edn.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

King C and Lester P (2005) Photographic coverage during the Persian Gulf and Iraqi Wars in three

US newspapers. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 82(3): 623–637.

Lynch M (2006) Voices of the New Arab Public: Iraq, Al-Jazeera, and Middle East Politics Today.

New York: Columbia University Press.

Merrill J (1991) Global Journalism, 2nd edn. New York: Longman.

Messaris PM and Abraham L (2001) The role of image in framing news stories. In: Reese SD,

Gandy O Jr and Grant AE (eds) Framing Public Life: Perspectives on Media and Our Under-

standing of the Social World . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 215–226.

Nacos BL and Torres-Reyna O (2003) Framing Muslim-Americans before and after 9/11. In: Norris PN, Kern M and Just M (eds) Framing Terrorism: The News Media, the Government,

and the Public. New York: Routledge, 255–278.

Neuman RW, Just MR and Crigler AN (1992) Common Knowledge: News and the Construction of

Political Meaning. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

New Media Age (2005) Strategic play – International Herald Tribune: News on the move.

29 September, p. 16.

Perlmutter D (1998) Photojournalism and Foreign Policy: Framing Icons of Outrage in Interna-

tional Crisis. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Pfau M, Haigh M, Fifrick A, Holl D, Tedesco A, Cope J et al. (2006) The effects of print news photographs of the casualties of war. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 83(1):

150–168.

Potter WJ and Smith S (2000) The context of graphic portrayals of television violence. Journal of

Broadcasting and Electronic Media 44(2): 301–323.


716




24/24

Prince S (1993) Celluloid heroes and smart bombs: Hollywood at war in the Middle East. In:

Denton RE Jr (ed.) The Media and the Persian Gulf War. New York: Praeger, 235–256.

Reese S (2001) Framing public life: A bridging model for media research. In: Reese SD, Gandy O

Jr and Grant AE (eds) Framing Public Life: Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of the Social World . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 7–31.

Reese S (2007) The framing project: A bridging model for media research revisited . Journal of

Communication 57(1): 148–154.

Scheufele B (2004) Framing-effects approach: A theoretical and methodological critique. Commu-

nications 29(4): 401–428.

Scheufele DA (1999) Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication 49(1):

103–122.

Scheufele DA (2000) Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive

effects of political communication. Mass Communication and Society 3(2–3): 297–316.

Schiller HI (1992) Manipulating hearts and minds. In: Mowlana H, Gerbner G and Schiller HI

(eds) Triumph of the Image: The Media War in the Persian Gulf. A Global Perspective. San

Francisco: Westview Press, 22–29.

Schleifer A (1998) Media explosion in the Arab world: The pan-Arab satellite broadcasters. Trans-

national Broadcasting Studies ?online serial? 1 (Fall). Available at: www.tbsjournal.com/

Archives/Fall98/Articles1/Pan-Arab_bcasters/pan-arab_bcasters2.html

Shapiro SM (2005) The war inside the Arab newsroom. The New York Times, 2 January, sec. 6,

p. 27.

Shoemaker PJ and Reese SD (1996) Mediating the Message. New York: Longman.

Tagg J (1988) The Burden of Representation: Essays in Photographies and Histories. London:

Macmillan.

Tuchman G (1978) Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality . New York: The Free

Press.

Voice of America. (2005) Rumsfeld: Al-Jazeera promotes terrorism. 4 June. Available at: author.

voanews.com/english/Rumsfeld-Al-Jazeera-Promotes-Terrorism.cfm.

Wanta W (1988) The effects of dominant photographs: An agenda-setting experiment. Journalism

Quarterly 65(1): 107–111.

Winfield B (1992) Two Commanders-in-Chief: Free Expression’s Most Severe Tests. Research

Paper R-7. Boston: The Joan Shorenstin Barone Center for Press, Politics, Public Policy,Harvard University, John F Kennedy School of Government.

Zelizer B (2004) When war is reduced to a photograph. In: Allan S and Zelizer B (eds) Reporting

War: Journalism in Wartime. New York: Routledge, 116–134.

Fahmy 717

717

international communication gazette 2010 fahmy 695 717

Documents