Citation

Scherling J. Media War Conflict 2021; 14(2): 191-220.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/1750635219870224

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The battles for Aleppo (2012-2016) and Mosul (2016-2017) were two intense and brutal sieges, which resulted in 31,000 and 40,000 largely civilian casualties, respectively, as well as hundreds of thousands of refugees. Even though both campaigns were similar in many ways, they received an entirely different media echo. While Aleppo in its final phase was covered almost daily, detailing the suffering of civilians and the brutality of the Syrian government and its Russian allies, while ignoring actions of rebels, Mosul received much sparser treatment, mostly relating to atrocities committed by the Islamic State (backgrounding casualties inflicted by coalition forces). In both cases, the respective governments claimed to be fighting terrorists, but only in the case of Mosul was this narrative naturalized by the media. Drawing on various methods from critical media studies, this article analyses how and why the two battles were reported on differently by British mainstream media across the ideological spectrum. The purpose is to show how systemic bias based on a binary us vs them distinction leads to distortion and a reinforcement of dominant, populistic and partisan narratives that may threaten to background or ignore uncomfortable but important facts that would challenge people in power.

Language: en

Keywords

Aleppo; critical media analysis; media; Mosul; thematic analysis; worthy/unworthy victims discourse