People’s Watchdogs or Government Poodles?

Abstract

From the First World War to the Iraq War in 2003, academics have analysed the performance of the media, especially the press, in fulfilling a watchdog role by offering an independent critique of government and military actions. The overrepresentation of government or military voices and the underrepresentation of other affected groups has been repeatedly asserted. National broadsheet newspapers represent a critical element in a nation’s public sphere, ideally fulfilling a ‘watchdog’ function on behalf of the citizenry, and so attract higher expectations of quality than tabloids or, arguably, television. This study, using a content analysis of Scotland’s two national broadsheets, The Herald and The Scotsman, reveals an over whelming emphasis on reporting military achievements or movements. By contrast, the massive damage to infrastructure, to public health and the environment and to civil order, resulting from massive high ordnance bombing and from the destruction of institutions of law and order, received very little attention. Furthermore, out of 2775 reports, only a very small number, given the scale of the fatalities and injuries, covered the daily toll of civilians and only a tiny handful featured the voices of Iraqis or other Arab/Islamic groups. Following theoretical pieces on Hermann and Chomsky’s Propaganda Model by Klaehn and by Corner, this article offers an empirically based context within which to consider the debate. In addition, the extent to which these results offer evidence of the accuracy or otherwise of Livingston and Eachus’s Indexing Hypothesis and Edward Said’s Orientalism is discussed.