View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Stellenbosch University SUNScholar Repository The framing of the coverage of the Gaza withdrawal by Israeli forces in the Cape Times, Mail & Guardian and Sunday Times from July 1, 2005 to September 12, 2005 Bryan David Silke Thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Philosophy (Journalism) at Stellenbosch University Supervisor: Prof. Herman Wasserman March 2007 1 I, the undersigned, hereby declare that the work contained in this thesis is my own original work and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it at any university for a degree. Signature: Date: (Bryan Silke) March 2007 2 Acknowledgements I hereby wish to thank first and foremost, my parents – Melville and Joan Silke, for their unwavering financial and emotional support of this project. With this backing, I was able to focus on the academic research without being side-tracked by logistical issues. I would also like to sincerely thank the staff of the Stellenbosch University Journalism Department, especially Bevely Februarie and Professor Lizette Rabe for their constant encouragement and making the environment for conducting research so relaxed and motivating. Finally, I would like to wholeheartedly thank my supervisor for this thesis, Professor Herman Wasserman – a pillar of wisdom. Doc, your superb critique and constructive advice is what motivated me to finish this thesis. 3 Abstract The Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be classified as an isolated conflict. Today’s clashes were not triggered by a single event, but rather are as a result of thousands of years of violent and at times restrained disagreements about the rights of Jews, Muslims and other ethnic groups to the disputed land known collectively today as Israel and the Palestinian Territories. This study examines the media coverage of one event during the conflict, i.e. the withdrawal by Israeli settlers from the Gaza area. The study tracks coverage over ten weeks in the South African media context, specifically the Mail & Guardian, Cape Times and the Sunday Times – a media setting in itself highly diverse and compelling. Using a qualitative framing analysis as the central methodology, the study focused on six core frames in analysing all articles/reports relating to the Gaza withdrawal. In addition, the editors of the respective newspapers were interviewed to complement the textual analysis. The methodological approach addressed how each story was packaged and presented, and then questioned why certain frames dominated and others did not. The study found that conflict (a combination of violent and non-violent) was the dominant frame chosen. Consequences and Attribution of Responsibility were the next two most prominent frames. Both these frames were found to apportion blame to a particular side in presenting the news reports and when providing comment. Whilst all three newspapers argued that they practiced a balanced coverage, it was this perceived “balance” in using several different frames of presentation that neglected a key “historical” frame. This lack of historical context was one of the key results of the other frames being so dominant. 4 Opsomming Die konflik tussen Israel en Palestina kan nie gesien word as ’n geïsoleerde konflik nie. Die huidige konflik is nie veroorsaak deur ’n enkele gebeurtenis nie, maar spruit uit die voortslepende geweld tussen Jode, Moslems en ander etniese groepe wat reeds duisende jare lank duur, as gevolg van betwiste aansprake op die grondgebied gesamentlik bekend as Israel en die Palestynse grondgebied. Dié studie ondersoek die mediadekking van een gebeurtenis in die konflik, naamlik die onttrekking van Israeli setlaars in die Gaza-gebied. Die studie volg mediadekking oor tien weke deur drie Suid-Afrikaanse publikasies, Mail & Guardian, Cape Times en Sunday Times. Met behulp van kwalitatiewe raming-analise as die sentrale metodologie, konsentreer dié studie op ses rame in die analise van artikels, wat verband hou met die onttrekking uit die Gasastrook. Die navorsing word aangevul met onderhoude met die redakteurs van die koerante. Die metodologie is toegespits op die manier waarop die stories verpak en aangebied word, en bevraagteken waarom sekere raamwerke oorheers en ander van minder belang is. Die studie bevind dat Konflik (’n samestelling van geweldadige en nie-geweldadige konflik) die oorheersende raam was waarbinne artikels in dié tydperk aangebied is. Die Gevolge- en Toeskrywing van Verantwoordelikheid-rame kom ná konflik die meeste voor. By albei raamwerke word bevind dat skuld aan die een of ander kant toegeskryf word in die aanbiedeing van nuusverslae en wanneer kommentaar gelewer word. Hoewel al drie koerante volhou dat hulle gebalanseerde dekking aanbied, word ’n belangrike “historiese” raam in dié aanbieding verontagsaam as gevolg van die gebruik van verskeie rame om balans te bewerkstellig. Die gebrek aan ’n historiese konteks is een van die vernaamste gevolge van die oorheersing van die ander rame. 5 Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 – Introduction 1.1 Aim and motivation 11 1.2 Background and rationale 12 1.2.1 South African public interest in the conflict 12 1.2.2 Background to the conflict: What is in dispute and why is there South African interest? 18 1.2.3 The relevance of the study 22 1.3 Problem statement 23 1.4 Conceptualisations: definitions to fit the context of the study 24 1.4.1 Israel 24 1.4.2 Israeli 25 1.4.3 Palestinian 25 1.4.4 Conflict 25 1.4.5 Terrorism 26 1.4.6 Intifada 27 1.4.7 Zionism 27 1.4.8 Framing 27 1.5. Theoretical framework 28 1.6. Brief summary of research design and methodology 29 1.7. Outline of remainder of thesis 31 1.8 Afterthought – the flare-up of the Israeli-Lebanon conflict: July/August 2006 32 1.9 Summary of chapter 34 6 CHAPTER 2 Literature review and theoretical framework 2.1 Literature Study 35 2.1.1 Literature on Israeli-Palestinian conflict news coverage (television and print news) in recent times 35 2.1.2 Literature on conflict reporting and framing in the media 39 2.2.1 The Media’s Conflict Reporting in Africa 44 2.2.2 Previous literature on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the South African media 46 2.3 Framing as a theoretical approach 47 2.3.1 Introduction to mass media theory and context 47 2.3.2 The functionalist paradigm, its shortcomings, and effects studies as the broader theoretical approach 48 2.3.3 Effects studies and the standing of framing theory today 49 2.4 History of framing theory 51 2.5.1 Kelton Rhoad’s three part frame analysis 52 2.5.2 Frame functions: to offer a perspective 52 2.5.3 Frame functions: manipulating salience 52 2.5.4 Frame functions: influencing subsequent judgment 53 2.6 Tuchman, and framing as a function of the newsroom’s organisational structure 53 2.7 Robert Entman’s conception of framing, and its critiques 55 2.8 Summary of chapter 58 CHAPTER 3 Research design and methodology 3.1 Research Methodology and approach 60 7 3.2.1 Quantitative vs Qualitative methodologies 61 3.2.2 Scope and subjects of examination 63 3.2.3 Triangulation of research with interviews 64 3.2.4 Research questions 65 3.5 Types of frames and selection criteria 66 3.5.1 Conflict (violent & non-violent) frame 69 3.5.2 Human-interest frame 70 3.5.3 Economic consequences frame 70 3.5.4 Morality frame 71 3.5.5 Attribution of responsibility frame 72 3.6 Research design, variable definitions and sources 73 3.6.1 Definitions 74 3.6.1.1 Editorial 74 3.6.1.2 Column 74 3.6.1.3 News story/report 74 3.6.1.4 Frame 74 3.7 Summary of chapter 75 CHAPTER 4 Historical overview 4.1 How the ‘land question’ frame became central to cause and conflict 76 4.2 Prelude to contemporary frames: the emergence of the State of Israel and the Palestinian Nation 76 4.3 Palestine under the British mandate 77 4.4 The New State, territorial turbulence up to 1967, and an official doctrine of occupation 81 8 4.5 The Six-Day War, its consequences and Israel as the occupier of Palestinian territory 83 4.6 Summary of chapter 85 CHAPTER 5 Summary of findings, in-depth interviews and discussion 5.1.1 Summary of chapter and structure of results 87 5.1.2 Summary of findings 88 5.1.3 What was covered? 90 5.1.3 Results of the framing analysis: Dominant frames? 91 5.2 Results by Frame 91 5.2.1 Consequences 92 5.2.2 Attribution of responsibility 99 5.2.3 Human-interest 103 5.2.4 Morality 111 5.2.5 Conflict (non-violent) 117 5.2.6 Conflict (violent) 123 5.2.7 Other 129 5.3 Editors on the framing of the conflict 137 5.3.1 Mail & Guardian 137 5.3.2 Cape Times 140 5.3.3 Sunday Times 142 5.4 Summary of chapter 144 CHAPTER 6 Discussion and conclusions 9 6.1 Introduction 145 6.2 Argument: A lack of historical context 145 6.3 Do the dominant frames provide sufficient context? If not, what are they lacking 146 6.4 Conclusion 151 6.4.1 Overall summary 151 6.4.2 Conclusion of research findings and arguments 154 6.4.3 Future Research – relevance, opportunities and recommendations 155 7. References 157 8. List of Tables 8.1 Frame frequency in the respective newspapers 135 8.2 Bar graph analysis of articles and their frames 136 9. Appendices 9.1 Israeli-Palestinian conflict: timeline (A) 166 9.2 Sample of questions posed to editors for in-depth interview (C) 198 9.3 Loughborough Table: References to Historical events in Israeli/ Palestinian BBC News Coverage (August 1 2005-January 31 2006) (D) 200 9.4 Media Tenor audit – Israel-Palestine (B) 201 10 Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Aim The aim of the proposed study is to assess the framing of the coverage of the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza strip and subsequent evacuation of Jewish settlers in three South African newspapers over the period of 1 July – 14 September 20051.