Page 79 - Mass Media, Mass Propoganda Examining American News in the War on Terror

Weapons of Mass Diversion 69

An Analysis of the New York Times' WMD Coverage

Throughout this analysis, one sees a consistent pattern of a heavy reliance on
pro-war, pro-WMD charges, alongside a systematic neglect of views that Iraq
disarmed and did not pose a serious danger to the West. The chart below
represents data collected from a content analysis studying the coverage of the
New York Times from the period of September 12,2002 to November 30,2002.
This time frame was chosen for analysis because it was within the run-up to the
Iraq war, meaning that the New York Times coverage was likely having a
significant effect on public opinion in terms of the issue of WMD during this
period. The period from September 12 to November 30 represents the first
month and a half after Bush's landmark speech to the U.N. As a result, media
coverage of the WMD issue in the New York Times and other major national
newspapers was extensive. The data collected is representative of all the articles
related to Iraq on the front pages and in the international sections of the paper
collected from day-to-day, and from week-to-week.
This analysis was conducted by looking at all of the articles with any
references, quotes, or reporting concerning Iraq WMD. The categories were
determined based upon references within the New York Times to any U.S, U.N.,
British, Iraqi or any other state or international leaders/officials, along with any
state agencies (CIA, M16, etc) who spoke of the issue of Iraqi WMD. As an
important side note, any Iraqi, American, or other citizen (who was not either
currently or previously holding political office) were not considered in this
analysis, primarily because statements from such individuals made up such a
miniscule portion of the paper's reporting.
The "WMD" frame category refers only to stories containing a
specific statement that is in favor of the WMD charges. "WMD also
signifies that no negative or critical claim was made or seen within
each piece in question. This category is predominantly made up of
direct quotes from Western officials claiming Iraq possessed WMD.
The "No WMD frame category refers only to articles that
included one or more statements that were skeptical of, or refuted the
WMD charges. This category includes only newspaper articles that
contained critical statements without any reference suggesting or
indicating that the WMD charges may have been true.
The "Balanced" frame category includes stories that contained
both "positive" and "negative" references regarding the likelihood that
Iraq possessed WMD. In a more balanced media in which reporters and
media organizations widely report multiple sides of issues,-one would
expect that this category would include the largest number of
references.
The "Ambiguous" frame category refers to news article that
contained only "neutral" language regarding the WMD charge (this
includes pieces that used terminology such as Iraqi "potential" for
possessing WMD, the possibility that Iraq "may have" WMD, or that it
is "suspected" of possessing WMD). Such conjecture was typically