characterizing “the enemy”: zionism and islamism in the iranian and israeli press

Communication, Culture & Critique ISSN 1753-9129

ORIGINAL ART ICLE

Characterizing ‘‘the Enemy’’: Zionismand Islamism in the Iranian and Israeli Press

Adam Klein

Department of Mass Communication and Media Studies, Howard University, Washington, DC 20059

This research sought to identify how 2 news outlets, Israel’s Ynetnews and Iran’s IslamicRepublic News Agency (IRNA), framed the Iranian nuclear issue and Israeli-Palestinianconflict beyond the scope of objective reporting. The study examines the embedded strategyof journalists to spiritually elevate a national cause against the assumed enemy nation.Fifty-two news stories were examined under the chosen pretext of international conflictreporting. The findings show that IRNA typically framed the nation of Israel as a ‘‘savageregime,’’ Zionist oppressors, and general enemies of Islam. Ynetnews demonstrated a morenarrow characterization of Iran’s president rather than his countrymen, regularly castingthe Iranian leader as the chief supporter of Islamic terrorist action and immediate threat tothe Jewish State.

doi:10.1111/j.1753-9137.2009.01045.x

In November 2007, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that‘‘Western countries have rushed to the Middle East region to plunder its oiland gas reserves and the Zionist regime is the main cause of insecurity in theregion’’ (‘‘Ahmadinejad: Iran,’’ 2007). The ‘‘Zionist regime’’ referred to here is theJewish State of Israel whose own state officials have also raised concerns over Iranianintentions to build a ‘‘nuclear weapons’’ program. Earlier that year, Israeli Ministerfor Strategic Affairs, Avigdor Lieberman, said, ‘‘If the world doesn’t stop the Iranians,we’ll witness a huge nuclear arms race in the Middle East. I don’t want to think aboutthe implications of that, because the situation will be out of control’’ (Meranda, 2007).

From the broad standpoint of the international community, these exchanges ofgovernment rhetoric signify a lit fuse seemingly en route to igniting warfare betweenIran and Israel. In a political climate where vilifying accusations between Iranianand Israeli officials occupy international headlines every week, evidence within

Corresponding author: Adam Klein; e-mail: [email protected] G. Klein is a Ph.D. candidate in the Mass Communication and Media Studies programat Howard University. He is currently with the Ralph Bunche Center for International Affairsas a Sasakawa Fellow.

Communication, Culture & Critique 2 (2009) 387–406 �c 2009 International Communication Association 387

Characterizing ‘‘the Enemy’’ A. Klein

each nation’s respective news media further indicates a growing litany of negativestereotypes and characterizations emanating from the journalists themselves. Thisstudy examines that trend with particular regard to the news framing of two timelyissues in the Iranian and Israeli press: Iran’s nuclear energy program and theIsraeli–Palestinian conflict.

On the surface, these news stories showcase an ongoing narrative of internationalconflict. Beneath that surface, however, the news story itself becomes a merecomponent of the actual story of how these two countries view each other politically,but most of all, ideologically. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the Jewish Stateof Israel each share the distinction of being nations defined by religious identitiesand history. The complex relation that exists between Iran and Israel is furthercomplicated by those religious undertones that infiltrate their Islamic and Zionistpresentation of each other to the public through various media, primarily newsoutlets. Put back into the context of international conflict, this research contendsthat the framing of relevant news items along the lines of faith and nationalism is theintended strategy of the journalist and/or publication, meant to spiritually elevate thenational cause against the ‘‘enemy’’ nation.

The research sought to identify how two news outlets, Israel’s Ynetnews, the cyberedition of their most-read newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth, and Iran’s government-run Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), framed the Iranian nuclear issueand Israeli–Palestinian conflict stories beyond the scope of objective reporting bypotentially infusing ethnic undertones and stereotypes in a manner that negativelyreflected a people rather than the issues involved. In all, 52 news stories were examinedfrom these two sources to determine the form of news frames that characterized Iranand Israel as Islamic and Zionist states, respectively, under the chosen pretext ofinternational conflict news reporting. The nuclear program and Israeli–Palestinianissues, in particular, provide a compelling platform for examining potential mediastereotypes framed by and about Iran and Israel, as these conflicts continue to unfoldin the world news media, thus shaping other global perspectives about these issues.In this sense, mainstream news outlets like Iran’s IRNA and Israel’s Ynetnews havean ability to influence the promotion or the resolution of an international conflictdepending upon how they choose to frame the opposing nation.

In international reporting, news frames can provide a journalist with a mechanismfor presenting an issue along binary terms to a world audience, ultimately suggestingthe virtue of one position over another. This study focused particular attention on theimbedded framing of Zionism and Islamism as contrasting ideologies within certainaspects of the IRNA and Ynetnews’ coverage of the aforementioned news stories. Anews frame, as defined by Entman (2003), ‘‘entails selecting and highlighting somefacets of events or issues, and making connections among them so as to promote aparticular interpretation, evaluation, and/or solution’’ (p. 417). From a preliminaryreview of Iranian and Israeli news articles, contextual evidence suggested that boththe IRNA and Ynetnews sources utilized strategic news frames which conveyedinterpretations, evaluations and, in some cases, even underlying solutions to the

388 Communication, Culture & Critique 2 (2009) 387–406 �c 2009 International Communication Association

A. Klein Characterizing ‘‘the Enemy’’

growing threat of the opposing nation. Specifically, this study sought to answer thefollowing:

RQ1: How did the IRNA and Ynetnews frame Zionism and Islamism under thepretext of international conflict?

RQ2: How did each news source present the Israeli–Palestinian conflict andIranian nuclear program news stories to the public?

These questions provided the initial framework for analysis. However, this studyaptly begins with a discussion of the Zionist and Islamic media, followed by a briefoverview of the press philosophies of each nation as a telling extension of their ownsociety, government, and values.

Literature review

Zionism and Islamism are important aspects to this frame analysis, for behind eachpowerful ideology lies an ancient faith, a modern cause, and a set of mobilizedinitiatives. Zionism is commonly defined as ‘‘the movement for national revival andindependence of the Jewish people in ‘Eretz Yisrael’’’ (Israel by its biblical name)(Rolef, 1993, p. 343). Beller (2007) contends that Zionism is an ‘‘ethnonationalistideology’’ built upon the fundamental belief that ‘‘Israel is the expression of theJewish people’s right to national self-determination’’ (p. 226). In this way, Zionisticvalues in Israeli culture, such as those found in the media, often reflect the expressedright of Israel’s existence and willingness to protect it. Qeimari (2003) describes acommon tone of Zionist media discourse as often ‘‘wrought with patriotic fervor,’’and, at times, ‘‘militant’’ in the name of nationalism, especially when related to theIsraeli–Palestinian conflict (p. 23).

The themes of militancy and nationalism were present in this study throughnews frames that carried underlying stereotypes about the Israel–Palestinian conflict.Similar stereotypes reflect earlier studies that revealed some Israeli perspectives aboutthe Arab community. Bar-Tal and Labin’s (2001) research of 119 Israeli adolescentsfound that this group shared negative perceptions of its Arab neighbors in that theywere often perceived as violent and cruel (p. 275). Said’s (1997) extensive work onIslamic representations in the media specifically cited three common ‘‘caricatures’’of Arab men as the oil suppliers, terrorists, and bloodthirsty mobs (p. 6). The presentresearch, however, is unique to the subject of Islamic representations in the Israelipress in the sense that Iran, though an Islamic Republic, is not an Arab nation. Itshistory and people are predominantly Persian. In fact, Israel and Iran are the onlytwo predominantly non-Arab nations in the Middle East, and have long shared whatRolef (1993) described as ‘‘an under the table’’ passive coexistence (p. 158). Whileon the international circuit, as well as within the media, war rhetoric has often beenuttered by political leaders, Israel and Iran have never engaged in direct battle sinceIsrael’s birth as a nation in 1948.



Like Zionism, Islamism is also an ethnically based political movement. However,as an ideology, Islamism traditionally encompasses the entire global community ofMuslims, or ummah, thus it aims at ‘‘refounding an Islamic order within Muslimcommunities’’ worldwide (Sayyid, 2004, p. 280). As a spiritual movement, Islamismhas helped rebuild the modern nation of Iran into an Islamic Republic when thereligious and working-class communities overthrew the Shah, and returned Persianpolitical power to the clergy. In addition to their religious objectives, Islamists aim tofurther mobilize and reconnect the Muslim Diaspora around the world. Accordingto Karim (2004), ‘‘followers of Islam constitute a vast diversity of peoples residingin almost all countries of the world . . . Muslims view themselves as belongingto a global community’’ (p. 107). As such, Islamic nations like Iran increasinglyturn to their media to act as the vehicle for disseminating the Islamic cause to otherMuslims. Mowlana (1997) recognized early on an emerging Islamic ‘‘communicationsnetwork’’ that was bringing together a ‘‘large number of Islamic countries under aunified system of information’’ (p. 202). This research will demonstrate that networkat work in the IRNA, the broad Islamic Republic news provider that often framed itscontent along themes of a unified Muslim front.

In addition to conveying a strong connection with the greater Muslim community,the Islamic media in Iran have also been described by some to be anti-Western inmessage. In fact, the anti-Western theme of Iran’s media culture is both an origin of itsnational reconstruction and an ongoing institution of its legally bound press system.Mahdi (2003) writes, the 1979 revolution ‘‘set in motion a process of Islamicizationof Iranian society. Islamicization was meant to cleanse the country of a decadentWestern culture . . . to return Iran to its roots, to a traditional culture’’ (p. 58). Thissentiment would be echoed with regard to the national media by Iran’s first SupremeLeader Ayatollah Khomeini, and later by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who publiclydeclared that he would not accept a press that ‘‘would become a mouthpiece ofRadio Israel or Radio America’’ (Hossein, 2007, p. 66). Just as Herman and Chomsky(1988) once defined ‘‘anticommunism’’ as a filter of American news media content,‘‘anti-Westernism’’ became an organizing principle of Iran’s media system, and notsimply the recurring news cycle of its press.

Although much has been written of Iran’s anti-Western stance in the media(Hossein, 2007; Semati, 2007), little research to date has examined in depth thecontent of the anti-Zionist theme in the Iranian press, although it is evident thatIsrael is a major part of Iran’s regular political rhetoric. Trita Parsi, President ofNational American Iranian Council, offered this analysis:

Throughout the existence of the Islamic Republic, the Iranian theocracy hasadopted a harsh, provocative, and uncompromising rhetoric on Israel to boostIran’s credentials as a leader of an imaginary Islamic bloc and use the anti-Israelcard to bridge Iran’s difficulties with Arab states. (Hossein, 2007)

Parsi’s analysis suggests a strategic merging of the global Islamic communitywith an anti-Israel movement. As both of these elements, Islamic unity and Israeli



condemnation, are indicative of Iranian government rhetoric, this research examinedtheir contextual relationship in Iran’s state-run press outlet, the IRNA.

Although it is evident that Zionism and Islamism celebrate different faith-basedinitiatives, these religious ideologies reveal two notable similarities in their politicalhistories. First, each is built upon the notion of ‘‘revival.’’ Not the revival of anancient religion, but rather the return to a faith-based community, both politicallyand socially. Second, each ideology has been instrumental in the mobilization of areligious diaspora and the rebuilding of a nation (Israel in 1948 and Iran in 1979).But how are these two similar political ideologies defined by each other? This is thequestion at the heart of this study. To answer it, the Iranian and Israeli media providea unique window into the language, rhetoric, and voices that commonly frame thetopics of Islamism and Zionism, Islam and Judaism, Iran and Israel. However, inorder to understand the nature of a nation’s news media system, one must begin byexamining the laws of the society that produced it.

Press systems in Israel and Iran

The Iranian and Israeli media systems operate upon two very different pressphilosophies. On a media spectrum, Iran would fall into the authoritarian endof government-influenced press, whereas Israel embraces the Western free press orlibertarian approach. However, as is the case with most nations, neither Israel norIran fit perfectly into this theoretical bracket of ‘‘libertarian’’ and ‘‘authoritarian’’ asdefined by media scholars.

Israeli mediaIsrael’s media system is a reflection of its turbulent history. Immediately following thepartition of Palestine that facilitated Israel’s becoming a country in 1948, the neigh-boring Arab community sent in the welcoming parties. Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon,and the area formerly known as Transjordan invaded from all sides with one intentionin mind—to annihilate the Jews. The War for Independence and survival was miracu-lously won by the young Jewish State, but there would be others to follow. The Six DayWar (1967), Yom Kippur War (1973), and Lebanon War (1982) were just some of themajor conflicts that defined the development of Israel as a nation ever on the defen-sive. For the last 60 years, the constant possibility of being attacked by a regional Arabcountry created Israel’s ever present concerns over national security. As a developingnation, these concerns infiltrated all aspects of Israeli life, including the media.

Although the Israeli press is free to operate as private entities, the Ministry ofInterior and the military can take precedent over that freedom in the name of nationalsecurity. The Press Ordinance gives the Ministry of Interior the power to close anynewspaper that prints a story that could potentially jeopardize the public’s safety,whereas the Emergency Defense Regulation grants the military the right to close pub-lications and to ‘‘request a review for all material intended for publication’’ (Lehman-Wilzig & Schejter, 1994, p. 120). As Israel has continually grown into a more secureand stable nation over the last half-century, the press have gradually gravitated toward



a freer system with very little government or military interference and restriction.The Israeli press is not only composed of Hebrew newspapers, but Arabic and Persiandailies as well, both of which are subject to the same freedoms and regulations.

Whether referred to as the Jewish State or the Zionist nation, Israel is still verymuch considered a Jewish homeland. Although this religion is a very significant partof Israel’s identity, it does not legally govern the land, nor to that end, the press.As a whole, the Israeli population is composed of Jews, Muslims, and Christians,and other religious sects, who are all actively engaged in a diverse range of media.However, regardless of its sectarian media practices, some scholars still contend thatIsrael’s press is far from a libertarian system. Qeimari (2003) writes:

Despite appearances, and although it is often called ‘‘free,’’ the Israeli media arefar from being so. In the hot atmosphere of the Israeli–Palestinian struggle, theIsraeli media seem to have been swept by the current of boiling conditions intoassuming a very ‘‘patriotic’’ role, deeply committed and strongly recruited to the‘‘national’’ cause of Israel. (p. 23)

Iranian mediaLike Israel, Iran’s media philosophy is also a reflection of its countrymen and women’sway of life. However, unlike most authoritarian press systems, governed by the rulesof national law, Iran’s press is controlled by an even higher power—the laws ofIslam. Like the government itself, all life and social institutions in Iran are designed instrict accordance with the teachings of traditional Islamic faith. The Islamic Republicof Iran was restructured in the 1979 Islamic Revolution that saw the return of theAyatollah Khomeini from exile and a national embrace of Islamic law to governevery aspect of everyday life (Najjar, 2004, p. 259). ‘‘In a 1979 national referendum,the overwhelming majority of Iranians voted in favor of adopting an Islamic formof government and thus brought more than 4,000 years of a monarchial system ofgovernment to an end’’ (Malek & Rad, 1994, p. 74). While many aspects of Iraniangovernment are democratic, such as a legislature who are elected by the people, thoseleaders and the laws they create are of a theocratic mission—‘‘to ensure compliancewith Islamic laws’’ (p. 76). As such, the print media, which also function as privateenterprises, are at the same time constitutionally bound to maintain Islamic law andpropagate its values. Further, to strictly maintain social institutions built upon thetenets of Islam, the Iranian government does not allow any aspects of Western mediaand culture to infiltrate into its society. In fact, according to Malek and Rad, ‘‘movietheatres were [once] perceived as a symbol of Western domination responsible forthe moral decay of Islamic society’’ (p. 87). During the Revolution in 1979, over 100Iranian movie theaters were burned and destroyed by the people, thus sending alasting message to those easily influenced by Western culture.

Today, there is no Western media in Iran, nor are there any films or print ormagazines that are sexually suggestive or gratuitously violent as clerical leadershipand constitutional law prohibit it (Najjar, 2004, p. 271). While many free pressadvocates condemn Iran’s heavy censorship of its media, other scholars respect the



Persian nation’s position to actively maintain its own culture by choosing not to beled by Western ideals. Mahdi (2003) makes a powerful statement to this point whenhe writes, ‘‘Islamic states like Iran, who are determined to stay away from Westerninfluences, find themselves fighting not foreign armies and imperialist tanks andwar machines but McDonald’s sandwiches, Hollywood movies, Disney images, andWestern pop musical icons’’ (p. 49).

Frame analysis: Alignment and binary discourse

Frame analysis lends itself well to this study about news and editorial contentbecause much of the process of framing deals with the politics, ideologies, and socialgatekeepers of a society—the same forces that often guide our news and popularculture. Miller defines framing as ‘‘the process through which the media emphasizesome aspects of reality and downplay other aspects (Miller, 2005, p. 275).’’ This,Miller suggests, is an extension of second-level agenda setting, whereby the newsmedia essentially tell the public what to think about issues. A more cynical, andperhaps revealing, notion of framing views it as a form of political communicationmeant to present ‘‘events, issues, and actors in ways that promote perceptions andinterpretations that benefit one side while hindering the other’’ (Entman, 2004,p. 417). Both of these definitions imply the manipulation of ideas that formulate ournews content. In a word, it is about power.

Depending upon the system of media, the framing of news stories is a functionof either the government or apparatus that controls the press or the editors and thepublic that can influence it. In a free press system, the media operate as a power ofthe people. In an authoritative system, the media operate as a power over the people.This is important to note before administering any frame analysis of a national mediasystem because the news source itself is never as simple as words on a page. Thesewords chosen to characterize a culture, or define an international event, derive fromIran’s Islamic laws of governance and Israel’s nationalistic social values. The frameitself, however, works the same either way.

Once it has been established that a news story’s content has been crafted to framea particular stance on an issue or entity, the systematic analysis of that frame begins.Essentially, this study focused on the ways in which the aforementioned news issueswere positioned but, more notably, the presentation of Zionist and Islamic referenceswithin them. To interpret the findings, two forms of analysis were applied: framealignment and binary discourse.

According to Snow and Benford (1988), frame alignment is a process intendedto persuade recipients to identify with a particular social movement. This isaccomplished through any one of four forms of alignment meant to systematicallyproduce a resonance with a target audience thus connecting them with the desiredcause. The investigation of the IRNA and Ynetnews considered one method ofalignment known as frame bridging. Frame bridging is the process of linking twoseparate ideologies into one unified cause. In some cases, a cause can encompass



an entire culture or belief system into its own mission to present the illusion ofunilateral support. This form of news framing is strategic in international conflictnews reporting for publicizing the appearance of global alliances under a commoncause. Examples of frame bridging were noted repeatedly throughout the study, mosttypically with regard to the Iranian nuclear issue.

Binary discourse in news media is the process of presenting a news story alongthe lines of two binary terms or concepts such as good and evil, peaceful andaggressive, right and wrong. These dialectic frames allow the journalist to constructtheir news stories with a heightened sense of importance and, of course, conflict.However, binary discourse also gives a news story the ability to ‘‘represent the worldas dichotomized absolutes’’ where one side is usually given a ‘‘moral power’’ overthe other—a sustaining value with which the reader can associate (Coe, Domke,Graham, John, & Pickard, 2004, p. 235). When this is done in the vein of religion,or on the brink of war, the media wields an extremely dangerous power. The useof binaries to effectively draw sides on issues of faith was exhibited with particularregard to news stories about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Naturally, this conflictalready had the built-in dichotomy of Israel versus Palestine, but the purposefulframing and polarization of each entity along vilifying characterizations of faith isthat point where the press abandons factual news reporting for sheer inflammatoryrhetoric. History has shown that wars have been incited in this way.

Methodology

The selection of news stories, which was a purposive sampling of the two chosensources, Ynetnews and the IRNA, commenced on October 5, 2007 through November5, 2007. This particular period of analysis was marked by a resurgence of news storiesstemming from two timely and publicized events. The first, International Qods Day,fell on October 5. This annual Muslim ‘‘resistance day’’ originated in Iran, butits message of a Palestinian revolution over the Zionist state is meant to resonatethroughout the Muslim community worldwide. This year, that message was deliveredby the Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, who said, ‘‘The InternationalQods Day is the resistance day for the entire Islamic Umma, and their strong objectionagainst the oppression and injustice observed by the Zionists and their supporters’’(‘‘Supreme Leader,’’ 2007).

For the Israelis, the event that renewed a mass of coverage and attention onIran also occurred within that same time period. On September 24, 2007, IranianPresident Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University in his widely publicized visit tothe United States. Many pro-Israel supporters demonstrated outside this event whereAhmadinejad asked a captive world audience, ‘‘Why should the Arabs pay the priceof the Holocaust carried out against the Jewish people in Europe?’’ Many interpretedthis statement to be a direct indictment of Israel’s formation as a nation after theHolocaust. Each of these pivotal events set the timely backdrop for this research,demanding significant coverage in both the IRNA and Ynetnews outlets throughout



the course of this 4-week collection of articles. Prior to this period, however, anumber of sources and news sections were preanalyzed in order to determine thebest examples of Iranian and Israeli news content accessible to this study.

The three main criteria for selecting the news sources were accessibility, nationalreflectivity, and popularity. In order for a news source to be accessible to this research,it had to offer a web-based edition of its daily news content made available in anEnglish language version. Although the national languages of Iran and Israel arePersian and Hebrew, respectively, there are several news media outlets offered inEnglish-version formats via the Internet. The Tehran Times and the Jerusalem Postare two prominent examples that were previewed along with the rest. However, thenational reflectivity criterion of the selection process was the overall deciding factorhere. As this study is also in many ways an examination of two countries’ mediaphilosophies, the research sought two examples of the press that were reflections ofthe national standard, rather than exceptions to it. Therefore, the chosen news sourceshad to exemplify aspects of the Israeli free press values and Iranian Islamic law. Finally,the research sought two news sources that were widely read, and therefore, trulyinfluential within each country’s highly literate societies. The IRNA and Ynetnews,each accessible online, also reflected their national media standards and are currentlyamong the most widely read news providers in their respective countries.

The IRNA, as it was renamed in 1979, is Iran’s official news agency under theMinistry of National Guidance. As the national communicative outlet, the IRNA isa vast media network that operates along a set of guidelines that are outlined on itswebsite. The first of these guidelines is to provide ‘‘Mass production and disseminationof news and informative material taking into account its main objective of promotingthe interests and objectives of the Islamic Republic of Iran’’ (‘‘About IRNA,’’ 2007).This mission certainly reflects the underlying goals of the Iranian government as oneto honor Islamic law and values above all else. It is also interesting to note two otherlisted guidelines. First, the ‘‘dissemination of news stories of the Islamic world ingeneral,’’ and second, the ‘‘promotion of the Islamic culture as far as possible andencountering the cultural onslaught of enemies of the Islamic Revolution.’’ The firstof these missions speaks to a political feature of Islamism mentioned earlier—thedesire to reach the Islamic Diaspora beyond national borders. As an internationalcommunicative outlet, the IRNA does just that working in cooperation with variousworld news providers while personally servicing all regions of the globe with itsPersian, Arabic, and English-version websites (‘‘About IRNA,’’ 2007). However, themission also speaks to the IRNA’s expected encounter with cultural ‘‘enemies’’ ofthe Islamic Revolution. Although the Ministry does not specify who such ‘‘enemies’’might be, the research found the news stories themselves provided a culturally distinctidentity to this unnamed entity.

Like the IRNA, Ynetnews is the English language version of a much larger newsnetwork. Owned and operated by the Yedioth Group, Ynetnews is the website editionof Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel’s most-read newspaper (‘‘About us,’’ 2007). Gordon’s(2004) study described Yedioth Ahronoth as a ‘‘major’’ Israeli newspaper that tends



to reinforce the ‘‘government line’’ on policy issues (Gordon, 2004, p. 320). In 2006,a BBC News survey listed Yedioth Ahronoth as the most-read newspaper betweenHebrew and Arabic speakers: ‘‘[Yedioth Ahronoth] boasts the country’s largestcirculation and most popular internet site, Ynet . . . The paper offers the reader a widerange of views, giving space to commentators from the political right and left’’ (‘‘Pressin Israel,’’ 2006). Ynetnews.com reflects its parent newspaper’s claim of objectivityin its own mission statement. Ynetnews ‘‘produces original material and works withquality news and community organizations to cover the Jewish world . . . Ynet iscommitted to upholding the rules of ethics of the Israeli Journalism Council andthe Israeli Association of Journalists.’’ Like IRNA, Ynetnews puts in the foregroundof its mission the desire to be a beacon of information for the Jewish communityworldwide. Unlike the IRNA, however, Ynet holds itself to the standards of journalisticorganizations committed to the free press system, and not to a higher Jewish order.

Over the consecutive 4-week period, the select news stories were collected using thefollowing keyword searches: Zionism, Islamism, Zionist, Islamic, Jewish, Palestinian,nuclear program, and uranium enrichment. Within each article, the select unitsof analysis were the quotes and adjectives chosen by the journalists, and used todescribe the two central concepts of Zionism and Islamism. Further, the research wasconcerned with the structuring of each news story to determine if and when binarieswere imposed. Finally, it is important to note that both the news and opinion sectionsof each source were considered during the analysis to ensure that these findingswould reflect both the information that the IRNA and Ynetnews purported to befactual as well as those news pieces provocatively motivated in nature. The findingswould ultimately determine if there was really a difference between the two.

Findings

Of the 52 articles collected (see Appendices A and B), Ynetnews covered 10 storiesregarding the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and 17 articles solely concerning Iran’snuclear energy program. The IRNA findings demonstrated a stronger emphasis onthe Israeli–Palestinian issue yielding 17 news articles and produced 8 news storiesabout their own country’s nuclear program. The findings have been organized intothree categories that reflect the dominant news framing of Zionism and Islamism,the Iranian nuclear issue, and finally the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

Ideological framingYnetnews’ framing of Islamism was most commonly tied to a militant/extremist framethat linked the radical actions of groups like Hezbollah with an Islamic identity. Onthe surface, most references to Islam, Islamism, or Islamic were found in contextwith militant actions (rather than religious ones) such as the story of an ‘‘IslamicJihad terror group’’ that had recently produced new rockets to reach deep withinIsrael (Ghadry, 2007). With some notable exceptions, most of these stories typicallyrevolved around Islamic terrorist groups working on the fringe definition of the



Islamic faith. The most frequent adjectives attached to the term ‘‘Islamic’’ included‘‘radical,’’ ‘‘extremists,’’ and ‘‘militant.’’ In some cases, Islamic fundamentalism wasreferred to as a movement, and a recent one that aimed at ‘‘global terror’’ (Sofer,2007a). In this way, the pairing of ‘‘Islam’’ with radical groups in the Middle Eastsuggested an extremist aspect of the faith itself as contributing to larger themesof global terrorism. One such article referred to the ‘‘radical Islam growing in theMideast and threatening world peace’’ (Sofer, 2007a). A later article by the samejournalist refers to ‘‘a recent rise in anti-Semitic incidents in Europe, some due toIslamic extremism’’ (Sofer, 2007b). Both statements tend to suggest that Islamicfundamentalism is a major contributor to terrorism and anti-Semitism in the region.

From the opinion section, similar sentiments pitted ‘‘the Islamic world’’ as‘‘looking to obtain nuclear arms’’ (Haber, 2007), thereby drawing links betweenIslamic extremism and Iranian nuclear intentions. It is important to note that thesestatements, some offered by officials and others by journalists, were the subjectiveadditions to stories that initially centered on a specific news event. As such, thebroader framing of Islamism in connection with terrorism or nuclear terror takes theactual issue at hand and conflates it to include a larger, more vilifying characterizationof Islam. It is also important to note that most references to Islam were stronglyconnected to political groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, often deemed as terroristorganizations. This is significant in this comparative study because it demonstratesYnet’s militant/extremist frame of Islam not as a characterization of faith, but ratheras a group in context. As one article demonstrated:

According to Art. 13 of the Hamas Charter, ‘‘Initiatives, and so-called peacefulsolutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles ofthe Islamic Resistance Movement . . . There is no solution for the Palestinianquestion except through Jihad.’’ (‘‘Hamas,’’ 2007)

A few notable news stories spoke of Islamic/Jewish relations with a tone ofoptimism, and even of peaceful coexistence as suggested by one journalist. However,the dominant news frame of these stories reflected the militant tone of Zionist media,mentioned earlier. By connecting Islamic fundamentalism with Jihadist intentions,the implication is one of imminent danger for the Israelis. Thus, this observationreflects Said’s earlier assessment of Islamic characterizations in the ‘‘Western press’’as tending to relate to ‘‘terrorism.’’ However, as these news frames were directedexclusively toward militant and/or political groups, a case cannot be made for theemergence of a general stereotype about Islamism or Islamic society.

Conversely, the IRNA’s characterization of Zionism did represent a caricatureof Israel’s faith-based movement frequently casting Zionists as oppressors andtheir nation as a regime. The oppressive regime frame described Zionists by suchterms as ‘‘enemies of Islam,’’ ‘‘hostile,’’ ‘‘inhumane,’’ ‘‘terrorists,’’ ‘‘conspirators,’’‘‘destructive,’’ ‘‘aggressors,’’ and ‘‘a threat to the world.’’ Such descriptors weredrawn from the hands of journalists who, on separate occasions, referred to Israelis as‘‘savages,’’ as well as from politicians like President Ahmadinejad who only referred



to the Jewish State as ‘‘the Zionist regime.’’ In fact, it was rare to find Israel everrecognized as a country by name. Further, it was quite common to find quotes andcontexts that demonstrated Zionism as an ‘‘evil empire’’ of ‘‘oppressors’’ with Islamicnations being their primary target: ‘‘The establishment of the Zionist regime 60 yearsago has posed a serious security threat to the world, and particularly to the MiddleEast region’’ (‘‘Turkey-Iranians,’’ 2007).

The depiction of the Zionist as the oppressor, a ‘‘maniacal regime,’’ was commonlyshowcased through references to Zionist conspiracies, plots, and propaganda.On the opposing end of that characterization is the Islamic resistance, humanrights, and unity movement. It is here that the first binary discourse begins toemerge. Unlike the Ynetnews stories that tended to focus an Islamic connectionsolely on the fundamentalist groups, the IRNA drew definite lines of counteringopposition between Islamism and Zionism itself. Although Zionists were pitted asthe perpetrators of an illegal conspiracy, the IRNA then used terms like ‘‘heroicresistance,’’ ‘‘innocent,’’ ‘‘divine,’’ and ‘‘faithful’’ to describe the players in the‘‘Islamic revolution.’’ Thus, we revealed a second, more suggestive frame of binarydiscourse where Zionism is being presented as the oppressor and Islam the oppressed.This form of journalism can be perceived as intentionally provocative when it injectswhat was earlier referred to as ‘‘dichotomized absolutes’’ that, in this case, suggest onefaith or ideology is a threat to the other (Coe et al., 2004). Under one article headlined‘‘Zionism is enemy of mankind,’’ the Interior Minister of Iran declared, ‘‘Zionism,especially the occupying regime of Qods, is enemy of mankind and humanity, andpeople worldwide should stand [up to] its inhumane crimes’’ (‘‘Minister,’’ 2007).This statement reveals the power and purpose of the oppressive regime frame asbeing one to mobilize an uprising against Zionists. The function of this frame seemsto strategically play on themes of ‘‘revolution’’ whereby Islam is being transformedfrom a religion into a rally cry.

The Iranian nuclear issueYnetnews and the IRNA presented notably different coverage of the Iraniannuclear program. In both instances, each news source amplified one or twokey concepts intended to embody the stance of each nation. For Ynetnews, thatconcept was manifested in the worst case scenario that could come of Iran’s nuclearaccomplishments—atomic weaponry. Often this sentiment was presented as a globalconcern rather than a lone threat to Israeli national security, thus bridging togetherWestern alliances within the context. One journalist wrote, ‘‘[Iran’s nuclear] problemis not Israel’s alone. It poses a threat to the entire world. The world, headed by theUS, will deal with it; the world will solve the problem’’ (Barnea, 2007). WhileYnetnews often included some variation of Tehran’s position on their self-described‘‘nonaggressive’’ nuclear program, such statements were often contested by Ynetjournalists who personally referred to Iranian intentions ‘‘to build atomic bombs’’and to ‘‘develop nuclear weapons’’ as an ‘‘incitement,’’ a ‘‘crisis,’’ and ‘‘an existentialthreat.’’ It is, again, significant to note that this form of heightened rhetoric was



usually attributed directly to the plans, policies, and intent of the Iranian presidentdirectly, and not to the country as a whole.

Within every ‘‘nuclear program’’ news article, President Ahmadinejad’s namebecame synonymous with what Ynetnews (Yedioth Ahronoth) presented as Iran’snuclear weapons program. Often, the same quote from the Iranian President wascited. His now widely quoted call for ‘‘Israel to be wiped off the map’’ accompaniedmost articles as the underline behind his nuclear ambitions. From an article on theQods Day rallies in Tehran: ‘‘the Iranian president suggested holding a referendumon the transfer of Israel’s Jews to Europe, Canada, or Alaska (‘‘Ahmadinejad: US,’’2007). This, along with frequent associated references to Ahmadinejad’s anti-Westernharangue, placed the Iranian President in the starring role of this debate, and Ynet’sgrave depiction of the issue. Within those stories that positioned the Iranian nuclearprogram against the will of the West, the UN, or even Russia, all were underlinedby the subtext of Ahmadinejad versus Israel. In one article, U.S. President GeorgeW. Bush was quoted as saying, ‘We’ve got a leader in Iran who has announcedthat he wants to destroy Israel’ (‘‘Bush Warns,’’ 2007). At times, the framing ofAhmadinejad as the forbearer of Iran’s nuclear program allowed Ynetnews to presentunilateral concerns about the Iranian president. Ynet made repeated references tothose external parties who opposed him, including the Russian government to whomhe owes money for nuclear fuel, and the Iranian people to whom that money actuallybelongs (Levi, 2007). One article reported on a protest led by ‘‘dozens of students’’ atTehran University where President Ahmadinejad was addressing a nearby audience(‘‘Iran students,’’ 2007). The journalist added that a protest such as this was ‘‘rare’’in Iran, noting further that ‘‘death to the dictator’’ was chanted by the students butquickly quieted down with tear gas. Another article expanded on the theme of internalrifts to include regional ones relating directly to Iran’s nuclear intentions. It asserted,‘‘Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries—Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, and theUnited Arab Emirates—share Western concerns that Iran’s nuclear energy programwill lead to it acquiring atomic bombs’’ (‘‘Report: Gulf,’’ 2007). These growing riftswere included by Ynetnews to challenge Ahmandinejad’s purported Islamic front byexposing those elements within it that oppose him. In this way, we can see what Parsireferred to earlier as Iran’s ‘‘credentials as a leader of an imaginary Islamic bloc’’being challenged here by an Israeli journal’s emphasis on regional divisions from theIslamic Republic, rather than upon a unification under its guidance.

The IRNA’s positioning of the Iranian nuclear program was also strategic inits message, which can best be characterized in the word most commonly used todescribe it—‘‘peaceful.’’ This was the underlying concept that amplified the IRNA’sframing of the story and the message behind it. In fact, over the 4-week period, theterms used to describe the nuclear program included ‘‘humanitarian,’’ ‘‘historic,’’and ‘‘legitimate.’’ These were the words offered by the state-monitored journaliststhemselves. As for the quotes selected to highlight the cause, the stories gathered arange of supportive comments from within Iran and outside of it, to further illustratethemes of unified and accepted peace. In one article, a Kuwaiti permanent envoy to the



United Nations ‘‘expressed satisfaction with the recent agreement between Iran andthe International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and noted that it is an important steptowards addressing concerns over the peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear program’’(‘‘Kuwait Calls,’’ 2007). This reference to ‘‘addressing concerns’’ was as close as any ofthese articles came to acknowledging the growing Western challenge to the program.Although the Ynet coverage seemed to center on the growing global front againstwhat they deemed a ‘‘weapons program,’’ the IRNA hardly mentioned the West, andeven less so the United States. In those few instances where the ‘‘Zionist regime’’was mentioned, such references were constructed to reveal the hypocrisy of Israel forengaging in its own ‘‘nuclear activities’’ (‘‘Arab League,’’ 2007). These elements ofopposition as well as the concept of opposition were noticeably absent in the framingof these stories. Also conspicuous by his absence was the Iranian president himself.

President Ahmadinejad was mentioned only once throughout these news stories,perhaps suggesting the intent of the government-run news agency to distance theirleader from any harbingers of nuclear controversy or dissent. In his place, the IRNAcarefully presents a bridging of goodwill to underscore ‘‘Iran’s peaceful nuclearactivities.’’ They accomplished this by building stories around those countries andfigures that do support their program, and their global right to have one. The majorityof these news stories were framed around the theme of unilateral support, highlightedby quotes from political spokesmen from countries such as Turkmenistan, India,China, Hungary, Germany, Kyrgyzstan, Britain, Palestine, and Russia. Although mostof these references derived from quoted individuals, the bridge alignment the IRNAappeared to create was one of a larger ‘‘international support,’’ hereby illustratingthe promotion of a ‘‘unified’’ Islamic network. Conversely, this is the very oppositestrategy of the Ynetnews coverage that systematically depicted those nations thatopposed the nuclear program. In addition, there was also a clear difference in tonefrom the two news sources. Although the Israeli source presented the nuclear storyalong a definite tone of imminent peril and immediacy, the IRNA maintained a softervoice of benevolence and goodwill. The Israeli–Palestinian conflict story would paintan entirely different picture.

The Israeli–Palestinian conflictThe final analysis of coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict reveals the contrastingpositions that these two news sources present about one of the oldest continuousrifts in human relations. Ancient in its origins, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict hasassumed global implications as this issue continues to affect the face of internationaldealings, alliances, and disputes. Comparatively, Ynetnews and the IRNA representopposite ends of this highly polarized debate. For the leading Israeli news group,Ynetnews presents Palestine as composed of two entities, deliberately separatedwithin the context of each news story. One of those entities, Hamas, is thematicallycast as the militant wing of religiously based terrorism. Hamas currently holds themajority party in Palestine, however, Ynetnews’ depiction of the group was anythingbut political. Its common references to Hamas include words like ‘‘terrorists,’’



‘‘extremists,’’ ‘‘murderous,’’ ‘‘anti-Semitic,’’ and ‘‘killers.’’ Ynetnews reflects theIsraeli government’s position that Hamas is a terrorist organization and not anaccepted spokesman for Palestine. To convey this point, Ynet’s articles frequentlyillustrated the divide of international alliances between Hamas and Israel. Amongthose positioned in line with Hamas, terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda andHezbollah were frequently mentioned, as well as one of its top funding supporters,the Islamic Republic of Iran, who reportedly provides ‘‘$20 million to $30 million peryear’’ to the party (‘‘Hamas,’’ 2007). On many occasions, Ynetnews also positionedthose countries whose views on Hamas were in line with Israel’s: ‘‘Hamas is listed asa terrorist organization by Australia, Canada, the European Union, Israel, Japan, theUnited Kingdom, and the United States, and is banned in Jordan’’ (Sofer, 2007c). Thissegmenting of viewpoints, meant to demonstrate a larger alliance of world powersagainst a smaller culture of terrorism, exemplifies a bridge alignment of opposingideologies as demonstrated by Ynetnews.

Like the division drawn between Hamas and external world powers, Ynetnewsfurther depicted an internal division between the leading Palestinian party and itsown people. The Israeli news source employed a similar strategy in their earlierapproach to the Iranian nuclear issue. Here, the Palestinian people are legitimatelyrecognized by Ynet journalists who often presented this young nation as part of thesame struggle against extremism. References to Islamic extremists battling ‘‘Israeland Palestinian forces’’ were common, whereas other stories centered on events thatshowed Hamas targeting those Palestinians ‘‘that engaged in what the Arabs refer toas ‘haram,’ or ‘sinful activities’ (Levi, 2007). These ‘deadly intra-Palestinian conflicts’were covered as tragedies, and its firebombed Arab victims as casualties of fanaticism.Further, a tone of optimism and hope for the future of Israel-Palestinian relationswas strongly expressed by the majority of quoted officials. Israel’s Foreign MinisterTzipi Livni said Israel ‘normalized ties’ with Palestine when it pulled out of Gazaand ‘adopted the two-state vision—Israel as a national home for the Jewish peopleand Palestine as a home for Palestinians wherever they may be’’’ (Tal, 2007). The‘‘peaceful coexistence’’ between the neighboring countries became the diplomaticframe frequently expressed by Israeli politicians. Further, Palestinian perspectiveswere also covered by Ynet, expressing views both for and against Israeli policies.

Conversely, the IRNA reflected a strongly one-sided viewpoint of the ‘‘Palestinianproblem.’’ Although the IRNA’s coverage of the nuclear program was expressedthrough passive tones of neutral diplomacy, the Israeli–Palestinian news storyrevealed a decidedly more hostile IRNA, aimed not at placating the issue, but ratherinflaming it. The conflict was characterized as a revolutionary struggle of the Pales-tinian people against the ‘‘evil oppressor Zionist regime.’’ The framing of a Zionistregime in this context presented Israel as a nation governed by its will to control thePalestinian people. Zionism, as was defined earlier, is an international movement toreturn the Jewish people to the land of Jerusalem. However, the IRNA positions thatmovement, and the country it built, as an ongoing tyranny. In this frame, the Pales-tinian is both the victim and the hero, fighting in the name of Islam and human rights.



The theme of human rights is central to the IRNA’s telling of the story, illustratedhere in terms clearly meant to compel an international response. This is evidentby the use of such words that describe the Israeli regime as ‘‘conspirators,’’‘‘oppressors,’’ ‘‘propagandists,’’ and ‘‘violators of human rights.’’ Juxtaposed tothis tyranny, the IRNA presents the Palestinian movement as a ‘‘resistance’’ of the‘‘oppressed,’’ the ‘‘defenders,’’ the ‘‘Islamic revolutionaries.’’ These descriptors paintthe picture of a humanitarian cause aimed at striking chords of empathy with aninternational audience by using globally recognizable metaphors like ‘‘Apartheid’’and ‘‘Berlin Wall’’ to describe Israel’s enclosed occupation of Palestine (‘‘Germany-Politics,’’ 2007).

The IRNA’s intention to garner global support for the Palestinians was againdemonstrated by repeated references to other supporting nations and cultures. Withinthe 4-week period, the IRNA ran stories that spotlighted the growing internationalstand against Israel, constantly citing new partnerships with such nations as Cuba,Syria, Venezuela, Argentina, Germany, and Lebanon as well as entities like Hamas,‘‘world youth’’ groups, Arab media outlets, sympathetic German clergy, and evenBritish football players. Many of these stories were not about the Israeli–Palestinianconflict but simply an Islamic connection across borders, often cultural, againutilizing this media outlet to speak to the greater Muslim community. However, theIRNA’s framing of such stories always spotlighted an anti-Zionist/pro-Palestinianresistance undercurrent wherever one could be produced.

Coupled with the religious overtones of Zionism versus Islam, these news storiesshowcased a mixture of political bullying and religious persecution at the hands ofthe Israelis. For Iran’s part, the IRNA positioned the Islamic Nation as leading thecall to arms in support of ‘‘the resistance.’’ This mobilization against Israel oftenpresented overt suggestions to eradicate the ‘‘enemies of Islam.’’ Although the IranianPresident was absent from those articles pertaining to the nuclear issue, his presencewas more than felt in these articles. In one instance, the Iranian President called forthe Palestinian government ‘‘to recruit pious, brave, and faithful individuals’’ forstaging the ‘‘withdrawal of Zionists from the holy Palestinian territory’’ (‘‘Presidentcondemns,’’ 2007). In plain and simple terms, a takeover.

Discussion

The final analysis of these sources describes two strikingly different ideologies—ofthe press. The Israeli Ynetnews, which strived to honor ‘‘the rules of ethics of theIsraeli Journalism Council,’’ largely exhibited that allegiance to such journalisticpractice by maintaining a wide representation of official sources and perspectives.Further, on a few occasions, the news reports were critical of Israeli policies and oftenprovided opposing remarks from within the Israeli–Arab community. However, themilitant/extremist frame still demonstrated a tendency of this journal to associatemost Islamic references with terrorist group actions. Though Ynetnews appearedto keep such references within the event and context of the Islamic militant group



mentioned, there were rarely any positive Islamic representations offered throughoutthese articles.

The IRNA, which cited its ‘‘main objective of promoting the interests andobjectives of the Islamic Republic of Iran,’’ also held true to that cause. Althoughthe news reports themselves were thorough and often full of official information, noattempts were made to provide voices that countered Iranian policy. The overridingconcern of the IRNA journalists appeared more so to be the presentation ofinternational support for Iran’s leaders than it was to provide the viewpoints of theirown citizenry or any attempt to offer a form of public opinion. The majority ofreferences to the Islamic faith were mostly found in binary terms that strategicallyevoked themes of ‘‘resistance’’ against ‘‘oppressive Zionism,’’ or within stories thatchallenged Israel’s continued existence in the name of Islam.

When framing the Iranian nuclear story and Israel–Palestinian conflict, eachnews source employed methods aimed at shaping messages that were calculated,often times strategic and, sometimes, ethnically targeted. It was evident that theIsraeli news source was concerned with debunking Iran’s ‘‘international support’’by publicizing those elements and countries opposed to its nuclear program andPresident Ahmadinejad. The Iranian Republic News Agency was less concernedwith framing single entities or leaders of Israeli politics, and more so focused onstigmatizing an entire people—the Zionists. Future studies of such news contentmight consider analyzing alternative Iranian and Israeli news sources that are notrepresentational of their common press philosophies, but rather exceptions to it,thereby reflecting the potential left-wing perspectives of each society. Further, othernews sections such as popular culture could provide more liberal representations ofthe Zionist and/or Islamic ideologies, while more likely reflecting the viewpoints ofcitizens. This study, however, was concerned with reflecting the viewpoints of thoseleaders whose opinions can exert the most influence over the international court ofpublic opinion from mainstream headlines.

At face value, news frames appear no more dangerous than a simple exaggerationor clever word choice. But when the words chosen or exaggerations given are intendedto shape religious ideologies, and further the goals of a political conflict, then historyhas proven that such rhetoric can quickly turn into tirade and news stories intopublic action. Although factual reporting should always come first within any newsstory, the media themselves do have the unspoken ability to shape public thoughtwithin their presentation of issues and events. When this happens, powerful religiousideologies like Zionism and Islamism can take on political forms beyond their ownmeanings. To the influenced society, these terms can now represent a belief systemto be revered or a movement to be defended.

References

About IRNA: The Islamic Republic News Agency in retrospect. (2007). Retrieved March 2, 2007,from http://www2.irna.com/en/content/view/menu-240/id-24/.



About us Ynetnews: The real Israel in real time. (2007). Retrieved March 1, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3028645,00.html.

Bar-Tal, D., & Lapin, D. (2001). The effect of a major event on stereotyping: Terrorist attacksin Israel and Israeli adolescents’ perceptions of Palestinians, Jordanian and Arabs.European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 265–280.

Beller, S. (2007). In Zion’s hall of mirrors: A comment on Neuer Antisemetismus? Patterns ofPrejudice, 41, 215–238.

Coe, K., Domke, D., Graham, E. S., John, S. L., & Pickard, V. W. (2004). No shades of gray:The binary discourse of George W. Bush and an echoing press. Journal ofCommunication, 54, 234–252.

Entman, R. M. (2003). Cascading activation: Contesting the White House’s frame after 9/11.Political Communication, 20, 415–432.

Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreignpolicy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gordon, N. (2004). Rationalising extra-judicial executions: The Israeli press and thelegitimisation of abuse. International Journal of Human Rights, 8, 305–324.

Herman, E, & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the massmedia. New York: Pantheon Books.

Hossein, S. (2007). Journalism in Iran: From mission to profession. New York: Routledge.Karim, K. H. (2004). War, propaganda, and Islam in Muslim and western sources. In Y. R.

Kamalipour & N. Snow’s (Eds.), War, media, and propaganda: A global perspective(pp. 107–115). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Lehman-Wilzig, S., & Schejter, A. (1994). Israel. In Y. R. Kamalipour & H. Mowlana (Eds.),Mass media in the middle east: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 109–125). Westport, CT:Greenwood Press.

Mahdi, A. A. (2003). Iranian women: Between Islamicization and globalization. InA. Mohammadi’s (Ed.), Iran encountering globalization: Problems and prospects. London:RoutledgeCurzon.

Malek, A., & Rad, M. M. (1994). Iran. In Y. R. Kamalipour & H. Mowlana (Eds.), Mass mediain the middle east: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 74–108). Westport, CT: GreenwoodPress.

Meranda, A. (February 28, 2007). Israel can deal with Iran alone. Retrieved March 20, 2007from http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3370968,00.html.

Miller, K. (2005). Communication theories: Perspectives, processes, and contexts. New York:McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Mowlana, H. (1997). Global information and world communication: New frontiers ininternational relations. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

Najjar, O. A. (2004). The middle east and north Africa. In A. S. de Beer & J. C. Merrill (Eds.),Global journalism: Topical issues and media systems (pp. 257–298). Boston: PearsonEducation.

Press in Israel. (2006). Retrieved October 15, 2008, fromhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4969714.stm.

Qeimari, A. (2003). Israeli media: Serving the ‘‘Patriotic’’ cause. Palestine–Israel Journal ofPolitics, Economics & Culture, 10(2), 23–29.

Report: Gulf Arabs offer to provide uranium to Iran (2007). Retrieved November 5, 2007 fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3466752,00.html.

Rolef, S. H. (Ed.). (1993). Political dictionary of the state of Israel. Jerusalem: The JerusalemPublishing House Ltd.



Said, E. W. (1997). Covering Islam: How the media and the experts determine how we see therest of the world. New York: Vintage Books.

Sayyid, S. (2004). Islamism and the politics of Eurocentrism. In M. Semati (Ed.), New frontiersin international communication theory (pp. 279–292). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

Semati, M. (2007). Media, the state, and the prodemocracy movement in Iran. In I. Blankson& P. Murphy’s (Eds.), Negotiating democracy: Media transformations in emergingdemocracies. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.

Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participationmobilization. In B. Klandermans, H. Kriesi, & S. Tarrow (Eds.), International socialmovement research: From structure to action (pp. 197–218). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Appendix A: IRNA articles

Ahmadinejad: Iran calls for effective, comprehensive ties with Russia. (2007). RetrievedNovember 5, 2007, from http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-17/0710110025153721.htm.

Ahmadinejad: US President is gravely mistaken. (2007). Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-16/0710081550152033.htm.

Arab League official slams Israel’s nuclear arms program. (2007). Retrieved November 5, 2007,from http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-20/0710271085110337.htm.

Germany-Politics-Qods Day/WRD Berlin Qods Day marchers condemn German support forZionist regime. (2007). Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-16/0710065819192111.htm.

Kuwait calls for collective efforts to resolve Iran nuclear issue. (2007). Retrieved November 5,2007, from http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-17/0710304248155058.htm.

Minister: Zionism is enemy of mankind. (2007). Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-17/0710054640135801.htm.

President condemns Israeli crimes against Palestinians. (2007). Retrieved November 5, 2007,from http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-17/0710050049115353.htm.

Supreme leader: Int’l Qods Day, Islamic Ummah’s call of resistance. (2007). RetrievedNovember 5, 2007, from http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-17/0610138101181229.htm.

Turkey-Iranians-Qods Day Iranians residing in Ankara commemorate Int’l Qods Day. (2007).Retrieved November 5, 2007, from http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-16/0710054489174041.htm.

Appendix B: Ynetnews articles

Ahmadinejad: Referendum on transfer of Israel to Europe. (2007). Retrieved November 5,2007, from http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3456554,00.html.

Barnea, N. (2007). Iran is our problem. Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3457510,00.html.

Bush warns of World War III if Iran goes nuclear. (2007). Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3461069,00.html.

Ghadry, F. (2007). Writing Arab history with Jewish blood. Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3463179,00.html.



Haber, E. (2007). The gathering storm. Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3455178,00.html.

Hamas, the Islamic resistance movement. (2007, March 15). Retrieved March 20, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3377113,00.html.

Iran students chant ‘death to dictator’ ahead of ahmadinejad speech. (2007). RetrievedNovember 5, 2007, from http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3457422,00.html.

Levi, J. (2007). The power of folly. Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3456606,00.html.

Sofer, R. (2007a). Israel, EU to hold Holocaust conference in 2008. Retrieved November 5,2007, from http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3461580,00.html.

Sofer, R. (2007b). Foreign Ministry head: IAEA is a hindrance in effort against Iran. RetrievedNovember 5, 2007, from http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3468086,00.html.

Sofer, R. (2007c). New eastern front. Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3466756,00.html.

Tal, R. (2007). Weigh all considerations. Retrieved November 5, 2007, fromhttp://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3462136,00.html.


刻画“敌人”：伊朗和以色列媒体中的犹太复国主义和伊斯兰教

Adam Klein

霍华德大学大众传播和媒体研究系

摘要

本研究试图鉴别两个新闻机构——

以色列的Ynetnews和伊朗的伊斯兰共和新闻社（Islamic Republic News

Agency，IRNA)是怎样超出客观报道的范围来框架伊朗核问题和以巴冲突的。

本论文研究了新闻记者如何利用嵌入式策略，大力倡导他们对敌对国的国家立

场。

通过选择有关于国际冲突的报道，本文对52条新闻进行了分析。结论表明，伊

斯兰共和新闻社(IRNA)将以色列框架为“野蛮政权”、拥护犹太复国运动者和伊

斯兰教的敌人。而Ynetnews对伊朗总统而非对该国人民进行了了更加狭隘的刻

画，一般将伊朗的领导人刻画为伊斯兰恐怖行为主要支持者和对犹太国家的直

接威胁者。

Die Beschreibung des „Feindes“: Zionismus und Islamismus in der iranischen und israelischen Presse Vorliegende Untersuchung versucht herauszuarbeiten, wie zwei Nachrichtenquellen, die israelische Ynetnews und die iranische Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), die iranische Nuklearthematik und den Israelisch-Palästinensischen Konflikt über eine objektive Berichterstattung hinaus geframed haben. Die Studie untersucht die eingebettete Strategie der Journalisten, spirituell einen nationalen Zweck gegen die angebliche Feindnation zu konstruieren. 52 Nachrichtenbeiträge wurden mit Blick auf den gewählten Fokus der internationalen Konfliktberichterstattung untersucht. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass IRNA die Nation Israel typischerweise als ein „unzivilisiertes Regime“, als zionistische Unterdrücker und Feind des Islam dargestellt hat. Ynetnews zeigte eine kleinlichere Beschreibung des iranischen Präsidenten als seine Landsleute, indem sie den iranischen Führer regelmäßig als Unterstützer islamischer Terrorhandlungen und als ultimative Bedrohung für den jüdischen Staat darstellten.

Characterizing ‘‘the Enemy’’: Zionism

and Islamism in the Iranian and Israeli Press

Adam Klein

어떻게 적을 특징화하는가:

이란과 이스라엘 언론의 시온주의와 이스람주의에 관하여

Department of Mass Communication and Media Studies, Howard University, Washington, DC

20059

요약

본 연구는2개의 뉴스출구인 이스라엘의 Ynetnews 과 이란의 Islamic

Republic News Agency (IRNA)가 어떻게 이란 핵무기문제와 이스라엘-팔레스티나 갈등에

있어 객관적인 보도의 영역을 넘어서 형성하고 있는가를 연구한 것이다. 본 연구는 상상된

적대국가에 반대, 국가적 원인을 정신적으로 고양하기 위한 언론인들의 내재된 전략들을

연구하였다. 국제적 갈등보도의 사전 선택된 문맥하에서 52개의 뉴스들이 연구되었다.

발견들은 IRNA가 전형적으로 이스라엘을 야만적 정권, 시온주의 말살자들, 그리고

이스람세계의 일반적 적으로 프레임하고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 반면, Ynetnews 는

규칙적으로 이란 지도자를 이스람 테레주의자들의 주요 지지자로, 그리고 유대국가들에

대한 직접적인 위협으로 기술하고 있다.

Caracterizando al “Enemigo’’: El Sionismo y and el Islamismo en la Prensa Iraní e Israelí

Adam Klein

Department of Mass Communication and Media Studies, Howard University, Washington, DC

20059

Resumen

Esta investigación buscó identificar cómo 2 distribuidores de noticias, el Ynetnews de Israel y la

Agencia de Noticias de la República Islámica de Irán (IRNA), encuadraron el asunto nuclear

iraní y el conflicto de Israel-Palestina más allá del alcance de un reporte objetivo. Este estudio

examina la estrategia subyacente de los periodistas para elevar espiritualmente una causa

nacional contra la nación enemiga asumida.

Cincuenta y dos historias fueron examinadas bajo el pretexto elegido del reporte de conflictos

internacionales. Estos hallazgos muestran que el IRNA encuadra típicamente a la nación de

Israel como un ‘‘régimen salvaje, ’’ lde opresores Sionistas, y los enemigos generales del Islam.

Ynetnews demostró una caracterización más estrecha del presidente de Irán más que de sus

compatriotas, asignando regularmente al líder Iraní como el jefe que apoya la acción terrorista

del Islam y la amenaza inmediata del estado Judío.

Adam Klein

Caractériser « l’ennemi » : le sionisme et l’islamisme dans les presses iranienne et israélienne

Cette recherche avait pour but d’identifier la manière dont deux bureaux de presse, Ynetnews

d’Israël et l’Agence de presse de la République islamique (APRI) d’Iran, ont cadré la question

nucléaire iranienne et le conflit israélo-palestinien au-delà du reportage objectif. L’étude examine

la stratégie intégrée des journalistes pour élever spirituellement une cause nationale contre la

nation ennemie présumée. 52 reportages furent examinés sous le prétexte choisi de la couverture

des conflits internationaux. Les résultats montrent que l’APRI cadrait habituellement la nation

israélienne comme un « régime sauvage », formé d’oppresseurs sionistes et dans l’ensemble

ennemis de l’islam. Ynetnews montrait une caractérisation plus limitée du président iranien plutôt

que de ses compatriotes, présentant régulièrement le chef iranien comme étant le principal

promoteur de l’action terroriste islamique et une menace immédiate à l’État juif.

characterizing “the enemy”: zionism and islamism in the iranian and israeli press

Documents