ARAB AND BRITISH MEDIA

The Controversial News in Arab and British Media

Table of Contents

CHAPTER # 1: INTRODUCTION2

Background of Study2

Problem of Study4

Purpose of Study5

Rationale of Study6

Hypotheses8

Structure of Paper9

Summary9

CHAPTER # 2: LITERATURE REVIEW11

The Creation of the Arab “Other”11

The Terrorist Arab Frame13

The Power of Association18

In the Media21

Framing the News25

CHAPTER # 3: METHODOLOGY28

Database28

Analysis29

CHAPTER # 4: FINDINGS32

Results32

Characteristics of Media Discourse Addressing AJ as Subject36

Distribution of AJ-as-subject Sources37

CHAPTER # 5: DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION45

Characteristics of Media Discourse Addressing AJ as Normative Issue45

Distribution of Story Tone46

Conclusion50

REFERENCES57

APPENDIX63

Chapter # 1: Introduction

Background of Study

Within minutes of the massive blast that ripped through the Oklahoma City Federal Building on April 19, 1995, hundreds of media outlets around the country leapt to pen down their assumptions of the potential bombers. Those first crucial hours after the tragedy would help to reinforce the initial assumptions brimming in the minds of public and press alike. Media accounts immediately selected a vocabulary scattered with words and phrases alluding to Islamic and Arab fundamentalists (Nacos and Torres-Reyna 2003, 133; Shaheen 2003, 175). Middle Eastern terrorists were the first and only of those accused of the heinous act (Kuzma 2000, 95) fueling the forthcoming mental and verbal associations based merely on speculation linking a specific background to an atrocious incident (Moore 2007, 124). As time went on, news agencies and terrorism “experts” alleged that Middle Eastern fanatics seemed to be the most logical to implicate due to the similarity in their “terrorism” tactics and those used at the bomb site (Bender and Revah, 11). Many scholars thereafter believe that these immediate presumptions helped trigger a racial backlash, which some believe led to the abrupt arrest of a Jordanian-American man, as well as various other implications (Johnston 1995, 24).

Why were those of Middle Eastern origin the first implicated in the minds of the American public? The obvious answer typically evokes a simple word: terrorism. More specifically terrorism and conflict within the past few decades ravaging the majority of the Middle East, it seems, and various parts of the globe. Why, then, should one not point fingers at a group who seems to attract tension and controversy, let alone full-out war? Because the various outlets of the media have tended to resort to a negative image of the Arab when trying to grasp the supposed reality of current world affairs (Mousa 1987, 102). The unlucky associations of Arabs and Muslims due to Orientalism, historical events, current international relations, and fringe members of the Arab community have led to an image the majority of Arabs would gladly cast aside (Said 1994, 334). Moreover, the general media is most likely gathering their information from the endless array of news and government reports describing the unending conflict of the Middle East. However, the reality of the situation, no matter how unintended or coincidental, places this ethnic group at the unlikable end of the ethnic stick.

Other explanations describing the tendency of this region, including its inhabitants and their descendents, to be prone to conflict are lacking. Several justifications, partly based on fact and partly on assumption, ...