Since the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran and later since
Communism's decline, the fad of opposing "Islamic Fundamentalism" (Islam to be
precise) has been utilized as an effective substitute for the "national
religion" of the US and an ideological substitute for anti-communism (Siddiqi,
D.A., 1992). Many a scholarly political analysis has posed Islam as a threat to
Western culture, providing a base for agenda-setting in the media for "ever
bigger and better things" (Nixon, 1988; Lewis, 1990 and Brewda, 1990). Hackett
(1991) speculates that after the end of the Cold War, Islam might become the
future potential threat candidate on the Western media agenda (1990). He cites
Galung (1967) and Wright (1989) to note that Third World debt, war against
drugs, environmental issues and Islamic fundamentalism will be the most probable
"Threat Candidates" for the West after the end of the Cold War. Said (1987) also
feels that the Western media has fostered the belief that Islam is a violent and
destructive religion for individuals and civilizations.
This textual analysis of the US elite press (The New York
Times, the Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times) is based on the mix of
theoretical positions suggested by Gitlin (1984), Said (1981) and Hackett
(1984). Gitlin defines "Media Frames" as `persistent patterns of cognition,
interpretation, presentation, selection, emphasis, and exclusion, by which
symbol-handlers routinely organize discourse, whether verbal or visual' (P 7).
The notion of the media frame has been used loosely and often undefined. It is
frequently used in a vague way, or as a metaphor (Tankard et al, 1992).
This article intends to discuss how the US elite press
portrayed the image of Islam and Islamists from the reference point of the
victory of FIS in the
Algerian election. The New York times (NYT), The Washington Post (Post) and The
Los Angeles Times (LAT) have been selected for the purpose of this study as
representatives of the US elite press. The main goal of this study is to examine
the editorial policy of the elite press towards the Islamic Movement of FIS in
Brief Background of FIS
After the fall of Communism and the establishment of a new
world order, political pluralism is now recognized as an efficient guarding path
against tyranny, despotism and dictatorship. After three decades of an
authoritarian socialist regime, on December 26, 1991, Algerian voters went to
the ballot boxes to choose their parliamentary representatives. Out of 231 seats
(first round), the ruling FLN for Salvation (FIS) obtained 188, FFS received 25,
the ruling FLN got 15 seats and 3 went to independent candidates. The FIS led in
about 144 our of the 199 districts that remained to be decided. The FIS
practically secured itself the 98 additional seats required to attain a
However, the FIS, the victorious party which emerged as an
expression of the identity and aspirations of the identity and aspirations of
the people of Algeria, was denied its victory at the polls. On January 11, 1992,
the military/security establishment seized power allegedly for the sake of
"saving democracy" and announced the cancellation of the second round of
elections, which were to take place five days later. Algerians were denied their
inalienable right to freely elect their government, merely because they
preferred an Islamic state over dictatorship and puppet regimes (Haddam,
This study will examine the differences and similarities
between the editorials (signed and unsigned) of "The York Times" (NYT), "The
Washington Post" (Post) and "The Los Angeles Times" (LAT) on the issue of
portrayal of FIS in Algeria.
To determine how the elite press of a "Democratic Society"
perceives an undemocratic army action against a democratically elected Islamic
party in Algeria, the following questions have been posed for examination in
this research: (1) How did the US elite press frame the Islamic Movement (the
FIS)? (2) Were there any similarities and differences of approach found between
the elite papers' editorials while framing the FIS?
A mix of qualitative method of content analysis and a
method suggested by Tankard et al (1991) was used to interpret the latent
meaning of the text. The NEXIS data base information was used as the main source of this study. All
editorials relating to the above mentioned Islamic Movements and to Islam (in
general), published in all three US elite newspapers between January 1st to
March 23rd 1990, were included in this study. Purposive samples were drawn for
coding to reflect qualitative aspects of the sources which were deemed important
(Holsti, 1969:13). These purposive samples were different segments of the
contents on the subject of FIS since the time frames for these samples were
different according to the historical development of this particular event.
In order to avoid the bias of the qualitative approach, the
researcher re-read the material as many times as necessary to satisfy himself
that the inference favoured was consonant with all the relevant portions and
characteristics of the original communication material. Qualitative analysis was
used by taking notes through preliminary readings of communication material for
the purpose of research, making observations, writing impressions about content
characteristics, and finally by developing the frames (themes, ideologies,
portrayals, metaphors, phrases, key words) and identifying their directions.
"Framing" is the term researchers use to refer to how an
event is portrayed in a particular news story. Hackett (1984) pointed out that
the conflict in El Salvador was framed as a "National Security" issue and that
other frames were possible, such as a "Rich-versus-Poor Frame". Media analysts
have also used the term "Frame". Chomsky used this term in an interview (Szykowny
1990) to refer to the way "The New York Times" introduced a news story. Chomsky
argued that the NYT's story marginalized the Iraqi offer by opening its story
with a statement from the US government which discredited the Iraqi offer
(Tankard et al, 1991:1).
Islam is a misunderstood and misinterpreted religion in the
West. According to Kamal Husain, `usually Muslim groups are labelled as
"Terrorists", "Aggressors", "Insurgents" or "Separatists" and not as "Freedom
Fighters" and the phrase of "Militant Islam" is more often used instead of the
"Reawakening of Islam" which is more neutral.' (Adnan, 1989:67)
The literature on Islam and the Western media concludes
that the Western media was not only critical towards Islam, but also helped
promote stereotypes about the Muslim World and Islamic values (Said, 1961, Kamal
cited in Mohd. Hamdan, 1989; G H Jansen, 1979; Richter, 1988 and Shaheen, 1990.
The NYT took a critical stance on the silence of the US
administration and the West regarding the military coup in Algeria which
demolished the electoral mandate of the FIS. It (NYT) further suggests: `If the
Bush Administration is sincere about encouraging democracy in the Arab world, it
has a responsibility to press Algeria's army to reverse its reckless course
before the damage gets worse.'
The NYT very cautiously condemned the military coup and
called it a "Clumsy" one. It warned that repressive action by the military
against "Fundamentalists" would radicalize an already aggrieved people and
promote Islamic extremism.
The NYT recognized that the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS)
was being denied a fair chance at the polls based on the assumption about its
intentions, not its deeds. Those intentions might well be undemocratic, but it
was not the Islamic opposition that brazenly avoided the elections and pushed
the nation towards extremism.
The editorial reads: `...Repression and hysteria offer no
remedy to the obvious discontent of jobless and hungry Algerians. Fear of
fundamentalism does not justify reversing the gradual democratizing moves that
since 1988 have given Algerians their first taste of political freedom. An
ambivalent Washington and a worried France have hesitated to make plain their
discomfort; the year-long state of emergency should finally untie tongues.'
However, it showed its skepticism about FIS future agenda
louder than its criticism of US silence. It reinforced the view of the
apologists that the "FIS Fundamentalism" would cause isolation and the
emigration of the moderates to France and other European countries, radicalize
its foreign policy, dilute market reforms, cause the human rights of non-Muslims
to be abused, and would exclude women from work. The NYT portrayed the attitude
of the West as remarkably shortsighted and
framed the Bush administration's attitude as "shamefully reluctant" to
condemn an illegitimate and unwise move to demolish democracy in Algeria.
In its two editorials,
the NYT clearly voiced its concerns and skepticism of FIS for following the path
of Iranian-style fundamentalism in Algeria. It (NYT) advised the FIS leadership
not to repeat the barbaric actions of Iranian "mullahs" against their political
adversaries. It also advised US officials and Westerners to treat Algeria's
democratically elected Islamic government on the basis of its performance in
office, not the deeds of fundamentalists elsewhere.
"The Washington Post" (Post) condemned the military coup in
Algeria while it expressed its skepticism about the future agenda of the
victorious FIS. It took a position against "Extremism" of any kind, whether
religious or secular.
The Post tried to portray army action against Islamists as
a legitimate one and framed this action of the army as "Constitutional".
It justified the action of the army and anticipated that the "Islamic
Fundamentalists" would stop the democratic process after coming into the power.
The Post's column writers adopted an aggressive tone
against Islamic Movements. Jim Hoagland in one of his editorials did not even
accept the fairness in Algeria's first democratic election. He feared that
anti-democratic forces would come up through democratic practices, although he
portrayed Islam as the "New Global Enemy" of America. Like Jim Hoagland, Richard
Cohen also seemed reluctant to respect the democratic process in Algeria and
stated that it was just mindless to insist that any result, democratically
arrived at, had to be accepted like some change in the weather.
Amos Perlmutter warned the West not to make any
mistake:`... The FIS in Algeria would not become democratic any more than the
fundamentalists of Jordan and Gaza would become democratic should they reach
that stage. Lenin had not become a democrat when he came to power.'
Graham E. Fuller's article was one of the few which gave a
balanced analysis and took a supportive position for the victorious FIS and
advised the West to come to terms with Islamic politics, whether they like it or
not. He portrayed the phenomenon of "Islamic Fundamentalist" as politically
tamable. He further advised that an Islamic victory should not be grounds for
panic and the election must not be annulled. He suggested that it was time to
demystify the phenomenon of "Islamic Fundamentalism" and to see it for what it
was: a movement that is both historically inevitable and politically tamable.
Over the longer run it even represented ultimate political progress towards
greater democracy and popular government. He
further asked for concessions for the fundamentalists and opined that only
second and third elections would inform us whether Islam really had the "Right
Stuff" to operate on the political scene for long.
Like the NYT and the Post, the LAT also criticized the
military coup, but showed its optimism towards the co-existence of Islam and
democracy. However, the
LAT published a few editorials (signed and unsigned both) on this topic and
distinctively focused on growing "Iranian Islamic Fundamentalism" in Central
Asian Muslim States after the fall of the Soviet Union. The LAT drew the
attention of the US administration to keep an eye on the anticipated influence
of Iranian fundamentalism on these States and advised it to reinforce the
influence of moderate Muslim countries like Turkey and Egypt.
Discussion and Conclusion
It is surprising that the US elite press did not fairly
analyze the question of democracy in Algeria. On one side, they expressed their
fears about FIS but on the other hand, they did not give deserving recognition
to the choice of the people of Algeria. Zaidi (1992) raises the question that if
the Algerians are the citizens in their own country and if the majority of these
citizens decide to adopt a certain course of action at a given point in time,
should they not have the right to do so? Why have only the elected leaders of
Algeria been portrayed as "Fundamentalists" and FIS as a "Threat to Democracy"
and why not as human rights activists or freedom lovers or pro-democracy
Islamists. During those days, the Post ran a story under the headline "Christian
Knights Claim Key Role in Georgia". The president of that former soviet State,
Ziyad Gamsakhurdia, had been democratically elected and had played a leading
role in the human rights movement in the Soviet Union by associating himself
with the Helsinki Group. He was toppled by an armed group of 1,000 people who
saw themselves as `defending a Christian fortress nation'. Nowhere in the news
story were these people called terrorists, militants or even Christian
fundamentalists. Their leader is not a "Terrorist" but a self-styled "Knight"
who simply `helped overthrow the elected president of Georgia' for, as he put
it, his people and Christianity. Why? Because he thought that the democratically
elected government was corrupt. Apparently these "Knights" are acceptable, but
the Algerians who took the peaceful, civilized course of an electoral process to
demonstrate their majority are to be given no opportunity to prove that their
critics are wrong.
The Post suggested that a moderate form of Islam could help
Algeria shape the contacts with the West essential to its modernization. The
question was whether its cultural tradition and its current polarization, the
latter as reflected by the assassination and the reprisals that would no doubt
follow, would enable Algeria to find that moderate form.
In several signed editorials, the Post took a negative
position against the democratic process in Algeria. Jim Hoagland portrayed the
democratically elected FIS as a danger to the welfare and livelihood of millions
of middle class and secularized Algerians. The fact of the matter is that, at
the time of the election, the Algerian economy was suffering badly and fourteen
million people were living under the poverty line (Abdullah, 1993). As a result,
there was growing dissatisfaction amongst the Algerian youth about the economic
and political policies of the ruling party. These factors tremendously helped
FIS to achieve a landslide victory. Moreover, no evidence was found that any of
the FIS leaders made anti-Western statements. Instead, after the victory of FIS,
its leaders issued statements explaining their views of the West. They assured,
in their statements, that the West should have nothing to fear, that the FIS
would work closely with Algeria's Western neighbours and would pose no threat to
Western culture. It is incomprehensible that a party (FIS) which came up with a
welfare programme and won the election could go against the welfare of their own
people. Surprisingly, all
the papers neglected this aspect of the story. This discussion supports the
thesis of Said (1981) that the West has its stereotypes and bias against Islam
Cohen recommended in the Post's editorial that the US had
an obligation to assert its own fundamental beliefs in democracy, but also in
"Unalienable Rights" that no majority could abrogate. It
seems as if that editorial advises US officials to recognize and collaborate
only with "Safe Democracies" which will work for the interests of the US.
Several column writers of the elite press expressed their
fears about the status of women in Algeria and anticipated that, if the FIS came
to power, women's emancipation would be jeopardized. None of the editorials paid
any attention to the choices of Algerian women. Scores of women would be
"brought down" -- one million women to prove their solidarity and support for
their Islamic leadership. If this is not proof of the women of Algeria's
solidarity with Islam, what does it take to convince the world? The
US press totally ignored this aspect of the Algerian society. Further, none of
the editorials exposed the atrocities and human rights violations of the
military and authoritarian rulers. The elite press did not mention the brutal
killings of young people by Algerian security forces and the shooting of
hundreds of innocent civilians in January 1991 and February 1992 (Nait-Ameur,
The fears about the FIS's future agenda expressed by the
editorials of the US elite press clearly indicate a lack of depth in their
analyses. The editorials lacked any cultural and historical background on the
issue. They were negligent not to inform their readers about the welfare
programme and the manifesto of the FIS which reads in part: `The FIS has come
into existence in a part of the world where people have been through different
frustrating experiences at all levels of human life. The political programme of
FIS aims at institutionalizing a stable governing system. A system which ought
to be representative of the fabric of the Algerian society. The means to achieve
this is through political pluralism which fully guarantees, implements, and
preserves minority rights. The economic programme is based on the principle of
growth. The FIS aims at building a balanced society where the right of life,
right of health and welfare benefits, the right to education at all levels are
guaranteed' (Arfi, 1993).
The Post in its signed editorials took a negative stance
against Islam. Amos Perlmutter in his 10240-word editorial described Islamic
Fundamentalism as anti-West and anti-democracy. He insisted that Islam cannot be
compatible with liberal, human-right oriented, Western-style representative
democracy. Amos compared Islamic Fundamentalism with an aggressive revolutionary
movement as militant and violent as the Bolshevik, Fascist and Nazi movements of
the past. The Jordanian, Pakistani, Algerian and Egyptian movements have managed
to deceive the experts into believing that once they are in power, they will
become "Reformist", "Gradualist" and eventually will rule by law. It
(the Post) further portrayed the threat of Islamic Fundamentalism as the new
threat that was `as evil as the old Evil Empire.'
Two editorial writers of the Post framed "Islamic
Fundamentalism" as a "New Global Menace" that will replace Communism. They said
that there were too many diverse currents in both modern and traditional Islam,
and too many national problems and conflicts in those countries where
fundamentalists hold or threaten to take power.
The major reasons for this treatment might be the
prevailing ignorance of Western journalists about Islam, the silence of scholars
on this issue, the historical aspect of the religion, the anti-Islam and
pro-Israel lobby (Hammond, 1987; Mughees, 1991) and indifference and negligence
of the Muslim community, which has never made a serious effort to build its
image in the Western media. Moreover, Islam has always been seen as belonging to
Said (1981) speculates that some stereotypes and
misunderstandings about Islam are unintentional and some are intentional, based
on cultural and ideological biases against Islam (Pg. 4). These stereotypes seem
valid in the 90s, and an anti-Islam bias is still working in the US media.
Anti-Islamic groups have seized this case as an opportunity to whip up hatred.
The US elite press, in its unsigned editorials, conveyed
cool attitudes towards the army coup in Algeria. However, the analysis of the
data indicated that the NYT was more critical than the Post and the LAT on this
subject. The NYT called the military action "Clumsy", whereas the Post portrayed
it as a "Legitimate Action". The LAT surprisingly gave the least coverage to
this topic. However, in opinion editorials overall, these papers were unfair not
to criticize the military action in Algeria as they should have done.
All the papers, in their signed and unsigned editorials,
showed their skepticism about the future agenda of FIS anti-West, anti-women,
causing immigration of moderates to Europe and France, a radical foreign policy,
market economy, human rights etc. Very few editorials suggested that the US and
the West should give the FIS a chance to give their performance. Few
advised against treating FIS on the basis of the activities of the
Fundamentalists elsewhere but rather on the basis for their deeds, while one
advised the West to wait for more than two elections.
It is interesting to note that, in the past, the term
"Terrorist" had been used mostly for left-oriented freedom fighters (e.g., the
PLO). It has been noticed that, for the last decade, this image has been
switched from socialists or secular radicals to Islamists, in particular those
Islamists who are working in a democratic frame and using the democratic process
instead of adopting other non-democratic methods to come into the power (e.g.
Algeria, Jordan, Egypt and Pakistan). These few editorials portrayed Islam as
the "New Global Enemy" of the West. Some column writers warned the West that
these "Islamic Fundamentalists" were coming into power through democracy and
speculated that Islam was a "New Global Menace" which would replace Communism.
Some argued that the US seems always in need of some identifiable international
menace. If it is not Communism, it is Terrorism. If it is not Terrorism, then it
is Islam (Nubar Hovsepian).
The present consistent pattern in the portrayal of Islam in
the US media supports the theory of Hackett (1991) that, after the end of the
Cold War, Islam will be the next "Threat Candidate" for the US media. Since one
year's data after the end of the Cold war is not enough to make a valid
judgement about Hackett's ideas, the next half-decade will make things clearer
and show whether or not an anti-Islamic element has been substituted for
"anti-Communism" as the "National Religion" in the US media.
Abdullah, D. (January 1993). Algeria: A Chronology of
Events, Message International.
Ajani, Joseph (1982). A Content Analysis of the Coverage of
the Israeli Raid against the Iraqi Nuclear Reactor by Four Elite American
Newspapers. MA thesis, Ohio State University.
Amiri, Taher (march 1993). US Media put Muslims on Trial in
Arab News, Pg 8.
Arfi, Badredine (January 1993). What Islamists were going
to give Algeria. Message International, Pg 23.
Brewda, Joseph (1990). Superpowers prepare Mideast War,
"final solution" to Arab "problem". In Executive Intelligence Review, July 20,
Daughterty, D. and Warden, M. (179). Prestige Press
Editorial Treatment of the Mideast during 11 Crisis Years. Journalism Quarterly,
56, Pgs 776-782.
Galtung, J. (1987). US Foreign Policy: As Manifest
Theology. La Jolla, CA: Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation. University
of California at San Diego.
Ghareeb, Edmund, ed. (1983). Split vision: The Portrayal of
Arabs in the American Media. Washington D.C.: The American Arab Affairs Council.
Gitlin, T. (1970). Prime Time Ideology: The Hegemonic
Process in Television Entertainment. Social Problems, 26 (3): Pgs 251-266.
Gitlin, Toad (1980). The Whole World is Watching. Los
Angeles University of California Press.
Hackett, R. A. (1984). Decline of a Paradigm? Bias and
Objectivity in News Media Studies. In M. Gurevitch and M. R. Levy (eds) Mass
Communication Review Yearbook, V, 251-274.
Hackett, R.A. (1991). News and Dissent: The Press and the
Politics of Peace in Canada. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Haddad, Y. (1991). A Television Interview with Bill Moyers
on PBS, 1991.
Haddam, Anwar N. (January 1993). Algeria Today. Message
International, 16 (8).
Hall, Stuart (1975). Introduction. In A.C.H. Smith et al.,
eds., Paper Coverage in the New York Times and the Washington Post (1980-1985).
Master's thesis, University of Texas in Austin.
Holsti, Ole R. (1969), Content Analysis for the Social
Sciences and Humanities. Addison Wesely Company.
Jansen, G.H. (1979), Militant Islam. Pan World Affairs.
Kurian, George Thomas, ed., (1982). World Press
Encyclopaedia, N.Y, Facts on File.
Lerner, Richard M. (1992), Final Solution: Biology,
Prejudice and Genocide, University of Park: Pennsylvania State University Press,
Lewis, B. 1990), Origins of Muslim Rage. Atlantic Monthly.
Maslog, Crispin (1971). Images and the Mass Media.
Journalism Quarterly, Autumn, P. 519-525,
Merril John C. (1964). US Panel Names World's Ten Leading
`Quality Dailies'. Journalism Quarterly, pp. 586-572.
Mughees-uddin (1991). The Relationship between a Nation's
Foreign Policy and its Press: The Case of Pakistan and the New York Times and
the Times of London in 1980. Unpublished paper, presented at the AEJMC
Convention in Montreal (Canada) on August 7, 1992.
Nait-Ameur, Adnan (January 1993). Algerian Military:
Defence or Delusion. The Message International.
Nixon, Richard M. (1988). Victory Without War..., N.Y.:
Simon and Schuster, Pg 336.
Richlin, A. (1988). News as a Hegemonic Reality: American
Political Culture and the Framing of News Accounts. New York: Praeger
Rachty. G. (1980). The Arab Image in the American Media.
Paper presented at the World media Conference, New York.
Richter, William L. (1988). Pakistan's Domestic and Foreign
Policy. In Scalpino, Robert A., Sato, Seizabnro, Wanandi, Jusuf & Han, Sung-Joo,
eds. Asia and Major powers: Domestic Politics and Foreign Policy. Institute of
East Asia University of California.
Rifai, Salwa Shtieh (1987). The Palestinian Guerrilla's
Image in the New York Times during the Jordan Crisis 1970. Nortridge: California
Said, Edward (1981). Covering Islam: How the Media and the
Experts Determine how We See the Rest of the World, London.
Semmel, Andrew K. (1976). Foreign News in Four US Elite
Dailies: Some Comparisons. Journalism Quarterly, 53, PP. 732-736.
Seymour-Ure, Coiin (1974). The Political Impact of Mass
Media, London: Constable.
Shaheen, Jack (November 1985). Media Coverage of the
Middle-East, Perception and Foreign Policy. Analysis of the American Academy of
Shaheen, Jack (1990), Our Cultural Demon: the `ugly Arab'.
Des Moines Register, August 25, Pg 7A.
Siddiqi D.A. & Alkhfai, Abbaas F. (1992). The Gulf war:
Implications for Global Business and Media. Closson Press, Apollon,
Stemple, Guido H. and Westley, Bruce H., Appollo,
Stemple, Guido H. and Westely, Bruce H., eds. (1981).
Research Methods in Mass Communication. N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Suleiman, M.W. (1983). The effects of American Perceptions
of Arabs on Middle East Issues. In E. Ghareeb, ed., Split Vision: The Portrayal
of Arabs in the American Media, Pgs 337-344.
Suleiman, Michael E. (1965). An Evaluation of Middle East
News Coverage in Seven American Newsmagazines. July-December 1956. Middle East
Forum., SLI: Pgs 9-30.
Syzkowny, R. (November-December 1990). The Humanist
Interview: Bewildering the Herd. The Humanist. Pgs 8-17.
Tankard, James W and Hendrickson, Silberman, Jackie, Kris
Bliss and Salma Ghanem (1991). Media frames: Approaches to Conceptualization and
Measurement. Unpublished paper presented at Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication Convention, Boston, Massachusetts, August
Terry, Janice and Gordon Mendenhall (1974). 1973 US Press
Coverage on the Middle East. Journal of Palestine Studies, IV, Pgs 120-133.
Wright L. (September 7, 1989). Peace: Living Without
Enemies. Rolling Stones, 560: Pgs 54-65, 82-88.
Zaidi, Nayyar (June 1992). Islam, Muslims and the US Media.
The Message International. New York: ICNA Publications.