ABSTRACT

This study examines the media portrayal of the Israel-Hamas conflict by two prominent News outlets, CBN and Al Jazeera, to understand how language and framing shaped public opinion and constructed conflicting narratives. The objectives were to identify and analyse the framing strategies, language use, and sourcing patterns employees by both outlets; and to explore how these shape the public's understanding of the conflict.

This study conducts a critical discourse analysis of news articles and broadcasts from CBN and Al Jazeera, using van Dijk's Critical Discourse Analysis and Entman's Framing Theory as theoretical frameworks. The study focuses on language use, framing strategies, and sourcing patterns to uncover underlying power dynamics and biases.

The findings revealed distinct framing strategies, language use, sourcing and presentation patterns between CBN and Al Jazeera. CBN employs “terrorism" and "defence" frames, while Al Jazeera highlights "victimization", "occupation" and "resistance" frames. The Language choices legitimize preferred narratives, and sourcing patterns revealed biases. The study demonstrates how media outlets shape public opinion and construct conflicting narratives of the Israel-Hamas conflict, contributing to our understanding of the media's role in international conflicts.