M E L A N Y PA R L A M A N

S A L I S B U R Y U N I V E R S I T Y

M L PA R L A M A N @G M A I L . C O M

War of Words:

An Examination of Government Sourcing, White House Opinion Dominance,

and the “War on Terror” Frame in National Newspapers Post-9/11

The Free Press?

Media & Government, a “reluctant symbiosis” Sinister connotations of the reciprocity of interest

Propaganda, Information Dominance, & Opinion Dominance

Framing & Foreign Policy Discussions

War of Words The “War on Terror” frame

Cascading Activation

Institutionalized Propaganda

News is: “An institutional means of

providing information to consumers”

“An ally of legitimated institutions”

“A product of the institutional and professional practices of news workers”

“The product of a social institution in league with other institutions”

Sourcing

The Propaganda Model

Thesis Statement

This study Analyzed the journalistic

conventions of story framing and sourcing

Examined quoted material of articles in four publications of national prominence

Specifically examined the immediate post-9/11 period (9/12/01 - 9/12/02)

Determined source variety and presence of “War on Terror” frame

Method

Lexis-Nexis database

Code Book Type War on Terror Frame terminology

Qualtrics

Microsoft Excel & SPSS

Results: Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 1 proposed that U.S. government sources would be more likely to appear as the first source of an article.

Results: Hypothesis 2

Hypothesis 2 proposed that the sample of articles would exhibit a dominance of U.S. government sources.

Which publication exhibits the most government sourcing?

Which publication exhibits the least government sourcing?

Results: Research Questions 1 & 2

Results: Hypothesis 3

Hypothesis 3 proposed that a majority of sources quoted would exhibit terminology consistent with the “War on Terror” frame.

Results: Hypothesis 4

Hypothesis 4 proposed that a majority of articles would exhibit a dominance of sources exhibiting terminology consistent with the “War on Terror” frame.