A ‘Humanitarian Disaster’ or a ‘Liberation Struggle’: a comparative analysis of the coverages of The Independent and The New York Times of the 2016 and the 2017 military operations in Aleppo and Al-Raqqa

Abstract

This article explores the coverage by The Independent and The New York Times of the 2016 and the 2017 military operations in Aleppo and Al-Raqqa. It highlights the uneven reporting on the humanitarian crisis in the two cities. The analysis shows that the similarities in the coverage of the two newspapers were greater than the differences. The New York Times and The Independent (to a lesser extent) espoused a pro-US narrative of the Syrian conflict by framing Aleppo as a humanitarian ‘catastrophe’ and Al-Raqqa as a ‘liberation’ struggle. Biases were constructed out of several elements including (1) the dominance of US sources and selective use of UN and NGO sources; (2) the use of visual content quantitatively and qualitatively; (3) the use of graphic and emotive terms; (4) focus on the humanitarian crisis in Aleppo and the military operations in Al-Raqqa.