The master thesis examines the war reporting of two Czech dailies (Mladá fronta DNES and Právo), specifically their coverage of the Czech Army mission and deployment in Afghanistan. In the theoretical part the quality of reporting, topic and factors that influence the journalist work are considered. A major theme is the relationship of media and political elites and some of its manifestations - the CNN effect connected with the media and public push on the departure of US military from Vietnam, and peace- journalism a concept of reporting on wars by exploiting more themes like reconstruction and peaceful solutions rather than war and combat. The quantitative analysis aims to verify these phenomenon in the Czech media. This is done mainly by analysing the reports sources and looking for the presence of three frames derived from the theoretical literature on this topic: heroic framing applied on Czech soldiers, national framing reflecting the national interests, and humanitarian and development aid framing.

<p><strong>Abstract</strong></p><p><strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Title: </strong><em>Krig och fred - 080808. Freds-, krigsjournalistik och propaganda i mediernas rapportering om Georgienkriget: en komparativ studie av Sveriges, Rysslands och USA:s press. </em>(War and peace – 080808. Peace Journalism, War Journalism and Propaganda in the Media´s Reporting on the Georgia War: a Comparative Study of the Swedish, Russian and American Press.) <strong></strong></p><p><strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Authors:</strong> Daniel Lövgren & Tatiana Makarova</p><p> </p><p><strong>Tutor:</strong> Anna Roosvall</p><p> </p><p><strong>Course: </strong>Bachelor Thesis: Media and Communication, PR</p><p> </p><p><strong>Purpose:</strong> The purpose of this essay is to compare how the press in Sweden, Russia and the USA reported on the war in Georgia 2008. Focus is put on identifying the extent to which the reporting is governed by <em>war</em> <em>journalism</em> or <em>peace</em> <em>journalism</em> and, to which degree <em>propaganda</em>, that is one of the aspects of <em>war</em> <em>journalism</em>, is present in the different countries press.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Methodology:</strong> Quantitative content analysis and critical discourse analysis<strong> </strong></p><p><strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Theoretical perspectives: </strong>The essay leans on the theoretical foundation of <em>peace</em> <em>journalism</em> and <em>war</em> <em>journalism </em>proposed by the Norwegian peace researcher Johan Galtung, further elaborated by the journalists Jake Lynch and Annabel McGoldrick. This essay also uses a theoretical framework on propaganda, among other the “Propaganda model” by Herman and Chomsky, the research of Kempf and Loustarinen and journalistic observations of Lynch and McGoldrick.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The study reveals both similarities and differences between the reporting on the Georgia war in the analyzed countries. The quantitative content analysis of 600 articles in nine different newspapers (three in each country) shows that it is the war journalistic framework that is dominating in all the three countries. The results also show that there is a difference between the support given to the parties involved in the war. In the USA and Sweden the majority of the articles are pro-Georgian and in Russia the majority of the articles take pro-South Ossetian/Russian stance. The critical discourse analysis of eight articles have shown similarities and differences in scale, design, content and the presence of propaganda. Indicators of propaganda in the analyzed material include a breakdown of the actors in the war to two opposing parties, a polarization between “us” and “them” where the first is humanized and the later demonized, a wide use of elite sources.  </p><p> </p><p><strong>Keywords:</strong> Peace journalism, war journalism, propaganda, Georgia war, South Ossetia, Swedish press, Russian press, American press</p> / The Caucasus Project

This thesis deals with the ethical aspects of reporting wars and conflicts. First of all, it defines the ethical principles in journalism and the ethical dilemmas that journalists face in the war as well as the rules enshrined in the ethical codes of the media. Afterwards it focuses on the specifics of international conflict reporting and defines two ways to deal with it. These are, as the title suggests, war journalism, which emphasizes violence, the aspects of warship itself and the elites, and peaceful journalism, which focuses on civilians, deescalation of violence, and peace-related solutions. In the practical part, this work aims to find and define individual signs of peace and war journalism in reporting of global news media. Finally, the characteristics of these two approaches undergo a comparative analysis to find out what ethical rules apply to these approaches and what extent they differ. Analyzed media are Reuters and AFP news agencies and the British print media and their internet versions The Guardian and The Telegraph. Selected conflicts include the 2008 South Ossetian war and the Pillar of Defense, a conflict in the Gaza Strip dating back to 2012.

This study examines how the media construct the identities of the Other by creating various ‘us’ versus ‘them’ positions (Othering) when covering non-violence-based intercultural conflicts in Arab and Western news media. Othering in this study is understood as an umbrella concept that in general terms refers to the discursive process of constructing and positioning the Self and the Other into separate identities of an ‘us’ and a ‘them.’ This process is analysed using a mixed method approach. A content analysis is used to map the data, and then a closer examination of the discourse is conducted using a qualitative approach inspired by critical discourse analysis. Two empirical studies are conducted based on this analysis: 1) the case of the Swedish newspaper Nerikes Allehanda’s publication of caricatures of the Prophet Mohamed in 2007 and 2) the media coverage of the headscarf ban in French state schools in 2004. This study also employs Galtung’s Peace Journalism model as a frame of reference in the conclusions to discuss how this model could contribute, if applied in journalistic texts, to more balanced constructions of intercultural conflicts. The results show that Othering is a central discursive practice that is commonly adopted in both Arab and Western media coverage of non-violent intercultural conflicts, but it appears in different forms. Many of the previous studies have devoted considerable attention to rather conventional dichotomous constructions of Eastern and Western Others. The present study, in contrast, brings to the fore more non-conventional constructions and, while recognizing the occurrence of the conventional constructions, goes beyond these binary oppositions of ‘us’ and ‘them’. Variations in the types of identity constructions found in my study can be attributed to the mode of the article, the actors/voices included, the media affiliations and the topic and its overall contextualization. The different types of identity constructions in the media coverage may bring about a less black and white understanding of an event and help bring forth a more nuanced picture of what is going on and who is doing what in a conflict situation. Their occurrence in the media can possibly be linked to a new vision of a global society that does not necessarily constitute homogenous groups with the same characteristics, but rather is more consistent with a hybrid identity. This research is timely, as with the recent arrival of large groups of migrants from the Middle East, the ‘fear of Islam,’ and the right wing propaganda regarding Muslims as a threat is increasing. Islamophobia can be seen as a new form of racism used by elites to serve particular agendas. If media practitioners applied a more critical awareness in their writings so as not to reproduce culturally rooted stereotypes, which can inflame conflicts between people and nations, we might see less hostility against migrants and achieve a less racist world.

Abstract   Title: Krig och fred - 080808. Freds-, krigsjournalistik och propaganda i mediernas rapportering om Georgienkriget: en komparativ studie av Sveriges, Rysslands och USA:s press. (War and peace – 080808. Peace Journalism, War Journalism and Propaganda in the Media´s Reporting on the Georgia War: a Comparative Study of the Swedish, Russian and American Press.)   Authors: Daniel Lövgren &amp; Tatiana Makarova   Tutor: Anna Roosvall   Course: Bachelor Thesis: Media and Communication, PR   Purpose: The purpose of this essay is to compare how the press in Sweden, Russia and the USA reported on the war in Georgia 2008. Focus is put on identifying the extent to which the reporting is governed by war journalism or peace journalism and, to which degree propaganda, that is one of the aspects of war journalism, is present in the different countries press.   Methodology: Quantitative content analysis and critical discourse analysis   Theoretical perspectives: The essay leans on the theoretical foundation of peace journalism and war journalism proposed by the Norwegian peace researcher Johan Galtung, further elaborated by the journalists Jake Lynch and Annabel McGoldrick. This essay also uses a theoretical framework on propaganda, among other the “Propaganda model” by Herman and Chomsky, the research of Kempf and Loustarinen and journalistic observations of Lynch and McGoldrick.   Conclusions: The study reveals both similarities and differences between the reporting on the Georgia war in the analyzed countries. The quantitative content analysis of 600 articles in nine different newspapers (three in each country) shows that it is the war journalistic framework that is dominating in all the three countries. The results also show that there is a difference between the support given to the parties involved in the war. In the USA and Sweden the majority of the articles are pro-Georgian and in Russia the majority of the articles take pro-South Ossetian/Russian stance. The critical discourse analysis of eight articles have shown similarities and differences in scale, design, content and the presence of propaganda. Indicators of propaganda in the analyzed material include a breakdown of the actors in the war to two opposing parties, a polarization between “us” and “them” where the first is humanized and the later demonized, a wide use of elite sources.     Keywords: Peace journalism, war journalism, propaganda, Georgia war, South Ossetia, Swedish press, Russian press, American press / The Caucasus Project

Contemporary studies of Peace Journalism have yet to examine how photographs, as visual content captured by print media, fit within the model of Peace Journalism. In this research, a content analysis of press images was conducted using predefined methodology on newspaper coverage of the annual July 12th Drumcree Parades (Marching) in Portadown, Northern Ireland, during the pre-, intra-, and post-peace process that occurred between 1996 and 2000. In most newspapers, the proportions of both violent/aggressive and nonviolent/non-peaceful content were higher in the relatively peaceful period of 2000, as compared to their proportions in at least one of the other ‘violent’ years of 1996 and 1998. No overall trend in content was observed in relation to the level of violence across 1996 to 2000. During this period, media practice in Portadown, Northern Ireland did not support the publication of newspaper commensurate with actual level of violence in the Northern Ireland or the depictions of peace building and the peaceful resolution of conflict. The implications of these findings for the development of ‘Peace Photojournalism’ are explored.

The purpose of this essay is to examine how peace journalism was expressed in Swedish newspapers´ reporting on the war in Georgia 2008. We did this by analyzing whether the reporting was elite- or people-orientated depending on how suffering was expressed and how the war players were described. The method we used was Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). It was applied on news articles from four Swedish newspapers that covered three different happenings in the war in Georgia. We found out that the reporting was mainly elite-orientated, both when it comes to how suffering was expressed, as well as how the war players were described. The newspapers tended to focus on only one party’s suffering and one party as evil-doer, which is elite-orientated reporting and also an indication of war journalism rather than peace journalism.

Abstract Title: The war in Afghanistan – a necessary evil? (Kriget i Afghanistan – ett nödvändigt ont? En kritisk diskursanalys av New York Times ställningstagande till och framing av kriget i Afghanistan) Number of pages: 41 (41 including enclosures) Authors: Jenny Häggmark, Madeleine Jansson Tutor: Christian Christensen Course: Media and Communication Studies C Period: Fall term 2011 University: Division of Media and Communication, Department of Information Science, Uppsala University Purpose/aim: Our main goal with this paper is to examine and describe how The New York Times have framed the war in Afghanistan in their editorials, and how their position on the war is reflected in the editorials. We are also interested in finding out if their position on the war has changed during the ten years of war. Are the New York Times editorials characterized by peace or war journalism? Material/Method: To fulfill our aim with this paper we are going to use a qualitative method of content analyzes, the critical discourse analysis, when we analyze the editorials selected. The material consists of 40 editorials from The New York Times from four different years – 2001, 2004, 2007 and 2011 – ten from each year. We will analyze these editorials using Johan Galtung’s theory of peace and war journalism, along with the theory of framing, using Robert M. Entman’s definition as a base. Main results: Our main results are that The New York Times has changed their position on the war in Afghanistan since it started in 2001. The first two years that we have analyzed, 2001 and 2004, The New York Times were positive towards the war. However, their position on the war has been negative or neutral in the studied editorials from 2007 and 2011. Our results show that The New York Times framed the war in six salient frames – position, peace, war, nation building/democracy in Afghanistan, “us and them”, and criticism against the Bush administration. The editorials from 2001 are characterized as war journalism while the majority of the editorials from the following years are characterized as peace journalism. Key words: War in Afghanistan, framing, peace journalism, war journalism, New York Times, editorials.

This diploma thesis called "Media framing of the Ukrainian conflict - articles comparison of German and Russian governmental servers concerning the theory of peace journalism" focuses on the extent, to which differ news coverage of Russian progovernmental webpage rt.com and German progovernmental webpage dw.com. It also researches how much these media contribute to potential escalation and de-escalation of the conflict. These results are gained by implementation of the concept of peace and war journalism into analysed articles. Thanks to quantitative and qualitative analyses methods, the research showed that the coverage of the Ukrainian conflict differs in both media. They vary primarily in the extent of contextual insight into the issue, in thematic contents of articles and in descriptions of parties involved in the conflict. Neither of these two media however can be associated with the practice of war or peace journalism according to the findings. They proved to choose certain aspects of the reality and increase its meaning in their articles, but the amount of such interventions cannot be interpreted as inclination to war or peace journalism.

The coverage of news media on conflicts increasingly became the subject of criticism, accused of sensationalism, oversimplification, and underrepresentation of certain issues. While recognizing that it is the journalists and editors that make choices regarding the collection and framing of the stories and accounts published in newspapers and digital media outlets, this thesis sets to understand these choices against the background of the web of structural constraints pertaining to professional, organizational, economic and political contexts of their work. Drawing on a theoretical perspective of Peace Journalism and Bläsi’s model of factors influencing conflict-coverage, this thesis explores what factors influenced the coverage of Hong Kong’s Anti-Extradition protests and how they can be seen as hindrances or facilitators for Peace Journalism. The study presents the results of a qualitative content analysis of material obtained through semi-structured expert interviews with four journalists who covered the protests on-site. The findings display that factors pertaining to the journalistic system, personal features of the journalist, lobbies, conflict situation on-site, public climate, and audience were playing a significant role in shaping the news production throughout the Anti-Extradition protests. A majority of these factors were identified as limiting rather than facilitating Peace Journalism. This study suggests that in order to have a relevant and lasting impact, Peace Journalism needs to formulate strategies that consider the realities journalists face on the ground and factors influencing conflict coverage that pose limitations to its practice.