• DOI:10.1080/10584600903502615
• Corpus ID: 55531477

Whose Views Made the News? Media Coverage and the March to War in Iraq

@article{Hayes2010WhoseVM,
  title={Whose Views Made the News? Media Coverage and the March to War in Iraq},
  author={Danny Hayes and Matt Guardino},
  journal={Political Communication},
  year={2010},
  volume={27},
  pages={59 - 87}
}

• Danny Hayes, Matt Guardino
• Published 29 January 2010
• Political Science
• Political Communication

Criticism of the news media's performance in the months before the 2003 Iraq War has been profuse. Scholars, commentators, and journalists themselves have argued that the media aided the Bush administration in its march to war by failing to air a wide-ranging debate that offered analysis and commentary from diverse perspectives. As a result, critics say, the public was denied the opportunity to weigh the claims of those arguing both for and against military action in Iraq. We report the results of a systematic analysis of every ABC, CBS, and NBC Iraq-related evening news story—1,434 in all—in the 8 months before the invasion (August 1, 2002, through March 19, 2003). We find that news coverage conformed in some ways to the conventional wisdom: Bush administration officials were the most frequently quoted sources, the voices of anti-war groups and opposition Democrats were barely audible, and the overall thrust of coverage favored a pro-war perspective. But while domestic dissent on the war was minimal, opposition from abroad—in particular, from Iraq and officials from countries such as France, who argued for a diplomatic solution to the standoff—was commonly reported on the networks. Our findings suggest that media researchers should further examine the inclusion of non-U.S. views on high-profile foreign policy debates, and they also raise important questions about how the news filters the communications of political actors and refracts—rather than merely reflects—the contours of debate.