Media coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE DAILY STAR AND DIE WELT’S COVERAGE OF THE ISRAEL-PALESTINE CONFLICT FOLLOWING THE HAMAS ATTACK IN ISRAEL ON 7 OCTOBER 2023

Mafizul Islam

Felix Eicher

Term Paper, Winter Lab B 23/24

Supervisor: Prof. Dr Sebastian Pranz

The issue at hand

The Middle East conflict is one of the most significant global conflicts, with differing perspectives across regions. The Western world generally supports Israel, although some criticise its military tactics against Palestinians, whilst Middle Eastern countries strongly support the Palestinians. The media, both in the West and in Middle Eastern countries, play a key role in shaping public opinion. Whilst media narratives in these regions have been well studied, less attention has been paid to the Muslim-majority countries in South Asia. One such country is Bangladesh, where approximately 90 per cent of the population follows Islam. According to Rashiduzzaman (1994), in Bangladesh, Islamic sentiment has re-emerged as a significant political force in recent decades, having overshadowed Bengali nationalism, secularism and cultural identity, which were some of the key motivations for the country’s independence. The author also argues that a sense of solidarity, which he termed the ‘we-feeling’, has developed amongst Bangladeshi Muslims; eventually, that feeling crossed the country’s borders and incorporated other Muslims into their so-called ‘we-feeling’ attitude or emotion, regardless of any borders, governments or states (p. 37). On the other hand, Germany’s relationship with Israel is deeply influenced by its historical responsibility for the Holocaust and the broader legacy of the Second World War. The Holocaust has been a central factor in shaping Germany’s policies towards Israel. German leaders have consistently acknowledged their country’s responsibility for the atrocities committed during the Nazi era. This acknowledgement is reflected in policies such as reparations and the support for Israel’s security as a core principle of German state policy (Strack, 2023). This is why there is generally a great deal of support for Israel in Germany, both in the media, in politics and amongst the population.

After Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October 2023, the situation escalated, with widespread media coverage. Against this backdrop, this study has analysed how two newspapers—*Die Welt* from Germany and the *Daily Star* from Bangladesh—framed the conflict from 8 to 12 October. Using content analysis, it explores the differences in framing and the media’s influence on public opinion.

Research questions

RQ1: What are the key media frames used by the Daily Star and Die Welt in their coverage of the Hamas attack on Israel on 7 October 2023?

RQ2: Is there any difference between the Daily Star’s and Die Welt’s coverage of the issue? If so, how do they differ?

Theoretical background

Media framing shapes public perception by emphasising certain aspects of a story whilst downplaying others, thereby influencing how audiences interpret events. It can affect behaviour in many different ways. The focus will be on two specific framing theories.

Priming Theory: This theory is rooted in psychology and examines how prior exposure to stimuli shapes perceptions, behaviours and decision-making. It activates mental constructs that influence responses to subsequent stimuli. Types include semantic priming (e.g., ‘ocean’ priming ‘beach’) and perceptual priming (where similar cues influence one another). In the media, priming operates in conjunction with agenda-setting, meaning that exposure to specific news coverage not only influences the salience of particular issues (agenda-setting), but also primes specific attitudes or interpretations regarding those issues (priming).

Framing theory: Introduced by Gregory Bateson in 1972, it builds on agenda-setting theory by focusing on how issues are presented rather than the topics themselves. Media frames shape audience perception by emphasising certain aspects of events. Five framing methods are identified: conflict, human interest, consequences, morality and responsibility.

Frames can be issue-specific, tailored to particular events but limited in scope, or generic and applicable to different topics and contexts. In political communication, framing is divided into media frames (organising ideas for news presentation) and individual frames (guiding personal interpretation). Framing shapes public attention, simplifies complex news and affects perception. It operates through communication and mental interpretation, relying on techniques such as metaphors, stories, slogans, artefacts and contrast. Furthermore, it is linked to both agenda-setting theory and gatekeeping theory.

Methodology

Selection of Newspapers: This study compares how *The Daily Star* (Bangladesh) and *Die Welt* (Germany) framed news coverage of the Israel–Palestine conflict following the Hamas attack on 7 October 2023. It analyses all news items from 8 to 12 October, focusing on initial reactions and narratives from these two geographically distinct publications.

Study Design: A qualitative content analysis is used to address the research questions. Drawing on Mayring’s framework, the study systematically categorises and analyses the news content, following structured steps such as category development and applying coding rules to enable a clear comparison of media framing.

Development of Coding Categories: The study adopted a deductive approach to category development. The table below shows the framing categories for events, tones, visuals and sources (developed using MAXQDA 2024).

Data Collection and Reliability & Validity: All relevant news items (text and images) were collected from the online versions. Mafizul Islam (MI) analysed The Daily Star content, whilst Felix Eicher (FE), a native German speaker, analysed Die Welt and translated the findings into English, ensuring accuracy in meaning and nuance. A codebook (see appendix) guided the analysis, covering: word choice, tone, sources, images, prominence and key framings. Both authors used MXQDA 24 software for independent coding and regularly discussed their findings to ensure consistency. MI created a coding system based on the codebook, exported it and shared it with FE to ensure consistent application.

Results

Key Media Framings

Table 1: Comparing news framings between the two newspapers

Table 1 presents the results of the framing analysis between The Daily Star and Die Welt. It shows stark contrasts in framing between the two newspapers. This study identified 11 distinct media frames, with the conflict and human-interest frames being the most frequent. The Daily Star employed a conflict frame in 60 per cent (n=27) of its articles, emphasising the violence and chaos of the conflict. The human-interest frame, present in 53% (n=24) of the articles, drew attention to the human cost of the war. The responsibility/blame frame was also significant. Interestingly, *The Daily Star* attributed 24 per cent (n=11) of the blame to Israel, whilst responsibility for Hamas was mentioned in only 7 per cent (n=3) of the total news items.

In contrast, *Die Welt* also used the conflict frame prominently but with a focus on consequence frames, accounting for 23 instances in its articles. The newspaper consistently focused on the repercussions of the conflict, particularly regarding Israel’s defence measures and the reactions of the EU and Germany. Responsibility for the conflict was attributed primarily to Hamas and Iran in *Die Welt*’s coverage, with no direct criticism of Israel’s role.

Tone

Table 1 shows that both newspapers display notable differences in tone. The Daily Star adopted a mostly negative tone, particularly towards Israeli actions, as reflected in 85 per cent (n=22) of the news items analysed. Whilst it portrayed Hamas relatively neutrally, the Israeli response was heavily criticised. Die Welt, on the other hand, overwhelmingly favoured negative framing against Hamas, with 147 occurrences, compared to positive or neutral tones.

Discussion

The framing of conflicts is influenced by a nation’s political and cultural affiliations, which was evident in the contrasting perspectives of The Daily Star and Die Welt. The Daily Star’s coverage, reflecting Bangladesh’s Muslim-majority readership, framed Hamas more sympathetically, often referring to them as “fighters” or “resistance” (15.8 per cent of articles). In contrast, *Die Welt* presented Hamas as “terrorists” and framed the conflict as an act of aggression orchestrated by Hamas and Iran. This discrepancy illustrates how national interests and political alliances shape media narratives. Of course, as described at the outset, the respective histories of both countries also exert a strong influence on this.

Die Welt’s coverage was consistent with the pro-Israel stance expected of Springer Essentials, which guides the newspaper’s editorial policies. The focus on the ‘Morality Frame’ in *Die Welt*, which was frequently used to condemn Hamas, underscores the newspaper’s attempt to frame Israel’s military actions as morally justified responses to terrorism.

In conclusion, the framing of the Israel-Palestine conflict in *The Daily Star* and *Die Welt* demonstrates the complex interplay of media, politics and public perception. These differences in framing not only reflect the cultural and political orientations of the respective countries but also illustrate how the media can influence public opinion on international conflicts.

References

Rashiduzzaman, M. (1994). Islam, Muslim identity and nationalism in Bangladesh. Asian Journal of Communication, 18(1), 1–25. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/1311895820/fulltextPDF/4032A1440CC14F7FPQ/1?accountid=14527&sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals

Strack, C. (25 April 2023). German-Israeli relations: ‘A permanent responsibility’ – DW – 25 April 2023. Dw.Com. https://www.dw.com/en/german-israeli-relations-a-permanent-responsibility/a-65374537