ICMPA | University of Maryland

Home | Contact

What did the world press say about the Hezbollah-Israel war?

Hezbollah won.
Israel was the victim.
Deaths were mere stats.
Qana was the turning point.

The Summer 2006 Conflict Between Hezbollah and Israel, One Year Later...

Understanding Results

Study Methodology

Authors

The study used five categories to evaluate the news outlets:

Authority: Was the coverage first-hand & from the battlefield?

Depth: How comprehensive, complex & diverse was the coverage?

Source Balance: How balanced was the use of sources?

Frame Balance: Was one side given more focus than the other?

Empathy: How personal & compassionate was the coverage of victims?

	Excellent
	Very Good
	Average
	Poor
	Not Acceptable

COMPARING MEDIA

The table below shows how each news source fared in the coverage of the war. Each newspaper was evaluated and ranked according to the five categories of Authority, Depth, Source Balance, Frame Balance, and Empathy (See Understanding Results for details on those categories).

	Overall Score	Authority	Depth	Source Balance	Frame Balance	Empathy
1. Washington Post	3.4
2. The Guardian (UK)	3.0
3. Irish Times	2.8
4. Financial Times (UK)	2.6
4. LA Times	2.6
5. New York Times	2.4
6. The Independent (UK)	2.0
7. S. China Morning Post	1.8
7. The Nation (Pakistan)	1.8
8. Press Trust (India)	1.6
8. Herald Sun (Australia)	1.6
9. Jerusalem Post (Israel)	1.4
9. Daily Star (Lebanon)	1.4
9. Turkish Daily News	1.4

Overall Coverage:

Coverage Over Time

A center of the Philip Merrill College of Journalism and the School of Public Policy. Copyright © 2006 International Center for Media and the Public Agenda. 1117 Journalism Building, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742