Dutch newspapers at war:
An empirical study investigating how De Volkskrant and De Telegraaf covered the Dutch military mission in Afghanistan from 2006-2013 by drawing on theories of sourcing and
framing in times of war Naomi Horstkamp University of Amsterdam
11903554 Master’s Thesis
Graduate School of Communication Political Communication
Penny Sheets Thibaut 31 January 2020 7938 Words
Abstract
To critically analyse the journalistic standards of Dutch newspapers during wartime, this study draws on theories of framing, sourcing and war journalism. Previous studies showed that democratic journalistic standards cannot be taken for granted in times of conflict. Therefore, this study uses quantitative content analysis to explore how De Volkskrant (n = 192) and De Telegraaf (n = 196) covered the Dutch military mission in Afghanistan between 2006 and 2013. The analysis found that Dutch newspapers tend to use positive frames more often to cover the mission. Despite that, it seems like De Volkskrant reports more balanced in terms of critically using frames, whereas De Telegraaf uses more personalisation to cover the conflict. Furthermore, this study found that newspapers used elite sources more often in their coverage, but there was no significant difference. Overall, this study gives interesting insights into the democratic role of the top two national Dutch newspapers in wartime. The analysis supports the literature on sourcing and framing as well as to the theory of indexing hypothesis and the literature on national identity’s influence on the news.
Dutch newspapers at war:
An empirical study investigating how De Volkskrant and De Telegraaf covered the Dutch military mission in Afghanistan from 2006-2013 by drawing on theories of sourcing and
framing in times of war.
In December 2019, the “Afghanistan papers”, published by The Washington Post, revealed that the public has been consistently misled about an unwinnable war. Hundreds of interviews with key actors showed that U.S. officials failed to tell the truth about the
Afghanistan war, and the U.S. government used false information and hid evidence that the war became unwinnable (Whitlock, 2019). These papers illustrate that journalism is needed in times of war. However, fulfilling quality journalism in times of war is easier said than done. A quote from Dutch journalist Nathalie Righton, from an interview in the documentary Extreem Leven, clearly illustrates the problem war journalists are facing:
An injured girl is carried outside on a stretcher. In the letters that the Dutch
government has sent to the House of Representatives about the military mission in Afghanistan, the word ‘war’ did not even appear, the word ‘attack’ did not occur and the word ‘violence’ was not mentioned. Instead, the word ‘training’ appeared 140 times, the word ‘security’ occurred 64 times. For me, this has become a symbol that Defence Information Officers are saying that things are going the right direction, but this was literally not the case. I saw it happen in front of my eyes. (De Brouwer, 2013) The example raises the question of whether journalists can perform their basic principles such as fact-checking, striving for objectivity and adversarial journalism in times of war when situations are complex and dangerous. Furthermore, how can journalists maintain their professional standards when they do not receive complete information?
Media coverage in times of war has been an object of research for a long time. In most Western societies it is expected from a journalist to act as a watchdog and truth speaker by
reporting objectively, trying to inform the public in the best possible way and hereby, strive to serve the common good (Entman & Page, 1994; Taylor, 2003; Kristensen & Ørsten, 2007). Interestingly, even though scholars agree that media should be critical and independent, there is little evidence that media act this way during wartime (Bennett, 1990; DeCillia, 2018; Hallin, 1986). Their responsibility is often challenged by several factors such as the
availability of sources, journalistic routines and journalists’ ethical and cultural backgrounds (Schoemaker & Reese, 1996; Nossek, 2004). This is threatening because journalism in times of conflict is more needed than ever as a war is not only a battle of weapons but also a battle of opinions (Nord & Strömbäck, 2006). Furthermore, previous studies showed that political and military sources and their frames are prominent in the media during wartime (Bennett, 1990). This is remarkable, given that the study of Nord and Strömbäck (2006) found that these sources are trying to manipulate media coverage and cover the truth.
Since 2001 the Dutch military became active in the Afghan provinces of Uruzgan and Kunduz. This turned out to be the biggest contribution of Dutch soldiers since the Korean War (De Graaf & Dimitriu, 2016; Veteraneninstituut, 2014). Over time, Dutch citizens never supported the missions with an absolute majority, but the support was just a bit higher in the beginning of the mission in Uruzgan, than at the end in Kunduz (Rijksoverheid, 2014; Van Bommel, 2012; Van der Meulen & Vos, 2012). Even though the public is more than 5000 kilometres away from Afghanistan, they still have the right to get extensive information and facts which gives them the ability to make the best possible decision about the actions of the military, the society and their government (Kolodzy, 2013). As the public support stayed quite stable over time, it would be interesting to see how Dutch newspapers covered the conflict. For example, did news media report more positive about the mission? Investigating how Dutch media covered the conflict is needed as the public uses newspapers as their source of information (Cozma & Kozman, 2015).
Research into framing and sourcing in times of war is not new, however, previous studies did not investigate how Dutch media covered the military mission in Afghanistan. By the use of a content analysis, this study tries to gain more insight about what type of frames and sources news media used to cover the military mission. Therefore, the central goal of this paper is to have a critical look at the quality of Dutch media in times of war by looking at theories of framing and sourcing. As mentioned before, previous studies showed that media do not always fulfil their democratic responsibility in times of war. So, there are good reasons to reconsider the role of Dutch news media covering the Dutch military mission in
Afghanistan. This led to the following research question: How did Dutch newspapers cover the military mission in Afghanistan?
Theoretical Framework Role of media in democracy
One of the most discussed issues in the field of political communication is the independence of the press and their role in democracy. This is because not only does
journalism needs democracy, but democracy also needs journalism (McNair, 2009). Drawing on theories of framing and sourcing in news media, this study tries to investigate how Dutch media covered the military mission in Afghanistan and if Dutch media met their democratic responsibility or not.
It is important for media organizations in a democracy to act as a watchdog (Nord, 2007; Weaver & Willnat, 2012). The watchdog function suggests that media critically look over the ones in power, like the government, businesses or other influentials in society (McNair, 2009). Other important functions of media in a democracy are that they should strive to cover the best possible reflection of reality and logically inform the public. Furthermore, media should report news factually, balanced and critically (Bennett &
Taylor, 2003). But scholars also recognize that true neutrality is impossible; whenever the media covers an event, they must choose a certain angle from which they tell a news story. This is called framing. The question becomes, then, to what extent certain frames are capable of conveying factual, balanced and critical information in times of war.
Framing. The concept of framing has been widely discussed in the field of
communication and as the concept is complex, different authors do not agree on a clear-cut definition (Cacciatore, Scheufele, & Iyengar, 2016; Entman, 1993; Lecheler & De Vreese, 2011). However, most scholars agree that by framing, media choose how to tell and construct a story and hereby give meaning to series of events and help the audience to understand issues (Brewer & Gross, 2010; De Vreese, 2005; Gamson & Modigliani, 1989; McCombs, 2013). Moreover, Entman (1993) states that media provide audiences with schemas for interpreting events: “To frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communication text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation” (p.52).
An important element of framing is frame-building, which refers to factors that influence news frames. This can be internal factors such as journalistic routines, for example, the personal interpretation of a journalist of what the conflict is and journalists’ endorsement with the conflict can shape how news stories are selected. But also, external factors can play a role such as frames offered by important actors, like governmental or military officials, to inform journalists about the conflict (Bennett, 1990; Brüggemann, 2014; Gans, 1979; Philo & Berry, 2004; Schoemaker & Reese, 1996). Frames are a powerful tool for journalists. It contains a process which helps the audience to make sense of the world and it offers
journalists the ability to determine how the audience understands and remembers the conflict. In other words, frames determine how Dutch citizens are informed about the military mission in Afghanistan.
Sources. As described above, journalists have the power to present a certain view of reality to their audience. One means of doing so is to rely on specific news sources. Sources are the backbone of a news story because they offer information and give meaning to information (Cozma & Kozman, 2015). As a result, they have the power to shape and
structure the news production process and are part of the framing game (Gonen, 2018; Pan & Kosicki, 2001; Reese, 1991). Especially in times of international conflict news sources help to shape journalists understanding of the conflict, for example, because of language barriers (Seib, 2002). Previous research found that source diversity in media is important as it can not only affect the news frames but also the public perceptions of the covered issues, the
credibility of media and journalism as a profession (Cozma, 2014; Cozma & Kozman, 2015; Hansen, 1991). Moreover, the audience relies on information from the media to be self-governing. Therefore, it is important to have a closer look at the use of sources in Dutch news media as they can influence the information which the audience receives.
Role of media in times of conflict
As mentioned before, one of the most important responsibilities of journalists is to act as a watchdog. This becomes even more important in times of conflict because journalists are working in a complex political landscape full of tension and propaganda (Allan & Zelizer, 2004). However, previous studies showed that especially in times of war, the normative foundations of journalism are under pressure. Therefore, the following section will focus on the role of journalism in times of conflict.
Journalists are facing numerous problems when trying to report the truth and trying to be balanced and responsible (Allan & Zelizer, 2004; DeCillia, 2018; Kristensen & Ørsten, 2007). To illustrate, the availability of sources is low in times of conflict (Cooper & Kuypers, 2004). As a result, sources who have access to media can construct and frame the news depending on their power, which leads to less critical reporting (Bennett, 1990; Hänggli,
2012). For example, the study of Bennett, Lawrence and Livingston (2008) showed that, over the last couple of years, American newspapers focused too much on anti-terrorism and lost their critical tone of voice. But it was no coincidence as it was carefully constructed by the Bush administration.
The prominence of elite sources and frames is the news is one of the reasons that the power and agenda of news frames and sources have been examined often in mass
communication literature when addressing the news production process in wartime (Bennett, 1990; Gans, 1979; Kothari, 2010; Nygren et al., 2016). These studies mostly focus on
European and American corporations, experts and government officials. Findings show that Western news media tend to rely on official channels and the official sources as they are considered to be credible. On the other hand, these sources are also held responsible to
support their own side (Arif, Golan, & Moritz, 2014; Bennett, Lawrence, & Livingston, 2008; DeCillia, 2018; Kothari, 2010; Rowling, Sheets, & Jones, 2015). This is contradicting as media strive to be objective, but in times of conflict, they seem to narrow their view and let go of their journalistic standards. Therefore, the following section will give an explanation of why media tend to rely on official sources and are more likely to cover the mission in favour of their country. Moreover, what is expected to find in Dutch newspapers covering the military mission in Afghanistan.
Indexing hypothesis
One of the reasons that elite sources and their frames are more frequently present in news media can be explained by the indexing hypothesis. The indexing hypothesis suggests that official sources have privileged access to media because of their status or claims to have expert knowledge (Bennett, 1990). As a result, different perspectives from different elites are frequently represented in the news (Gans, 1979). One of the main critiques is that if news media use official and elite sources, they are rarely critical of issues or policy decisions. Since
elite sources are more frequently covered in news media in times of war, frames emphasised by these officials are also frequently confirmed in the press (Bennett, 1990; Rowling, Sheets, & Jones, 2015; Woods, 2007). To illustrate, the Canadian government and military officials used phrases as ‘reconstruction’, ‘hope’ and ‘restoring’ when mentioning the mission in Afghanistan to create support among the public (Woods, 2007).
As mentioned before, it is more likely to find official sources and views in news media which show alignment with the government’s standpoints about the conflict (Bennett, 1990). Therefore, it is expected to find the same for the Dutch government and military officials. From the start of the mission, the Dutch government and military phrased the aim of the mission by using ‘3D - Dutch approach’. They focused on 3 parts: 1) Development, 2) Diplomacy and 3) Defence (Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, 2019). In other words, when Dutch officials spoke about the mission, they focused on the reconstruction and development of Afghanistan. They stressed that the mission aimed to train Afghan police and helped by constructing civil projects. However, they did not mention that the mission could become a combat mission (Van der Lijn & Van der Berg, 2011; Van der Lijn, 2015). If the media cover these sources more often, this leads to less objective and critical reporting. Moreover, people may understand that both missions were related to the development of civil and democratic institutions in Afghanistan, and will know less about possible wrongdoing.
National identity
Not only are elite sources and their frames prominent in the news because of their relationship with the field and claims to be expert. The following section will give another explanation of why news media tend to be more supportive of the mission. Previous studies showed that national identity plays an important role in media coverage during wartime too (Gonen, 2018; Nossek, 2004). In other words, news media tend to be more national driven in their coverage in times of conflict. War coverage confronts journalist with a dilemma.
Journalists aim to stick to their professionality, but this is challenged by their ethical and cultural background which often leads to a more national focus in the news (Gonen, 2018; Nossek, 2004; Zandberg & Neiger, 2005). Whenever an event occurs, a journalist tries to define what has happened and decides how to present the story. In his study, Nossek (2004) argues that journalists and editors maintain two frames when covering foreign news, namely the professional frame and national frame. This national frame explains the domestication and localization of news stories, and determines whether a journalist covers the conflict as ‘ours’ or ‘theirs’. The personal pronouns such as ‘us’ and ‘we’ create a feeling of unity and sameness. Whereas pronouns such as ‘they’, ‘them’ and ‘theirs’ create a distance between groups (Kenix, 2015). Previous studies suggest that conflict tend to perceive more coverage when journalists use the ‘us-them’ narrative (Galtung & Fisher, 2013). But it can also be used as a tool to build a community and mobilize support among the public (Anderson, 1991; Sosale, 2010). However, when journalists are more national focused, they are more supportive towards their side and this leads to less professionalism (Allan & Zelizer, 2004; Baden & Tenenboim-Weinblatt, 2018; Nossek, 2004; Robinson, 2004).
To conclude, it is more likely that news media are more supportive of the military mission because of the indexing hypothesis and theory of national identity. During wartime, news media do not cover a range of different voices, stays close to governmental and military statements and support their own nation. It is, therefore, expected that Dutch newspapers use elite sources more often and frame stories by stressing the relevance of the mission based on frames supported by military and governmental institutions and report in favour of the Dutch military mission.
H1a: Dutch newspapers covering the military mission in Afghanistan rely more on elite
H1b: Dutch newspapers covering the military mission in Afghanistan use positive
frames more than negative frames. Differences per newspaper
It is possible, of course, that not only Dutch newspapers exhibit these patterns
uniformly. Scholars often distinguish, for example, between quality and tabloid journalism in terms of how coverage tends to look (Wahl-Jorgensen & Hanitzsch, 2019). There is no clear-cut distinction between quality and tabloid newspapers in the Netherlands (Bakker &
Scholten, 2011). However, previous studies showed that some types of newspapers focus more on quality and hard news (quality newspapers) and other types of newspapers give more attention to sensationalism and soft news (popular newspapers) (Aarts & Semetko, 2003; Walter & Vliegenthart, 2010). Furthermore, Boukes and Vliegenthart (2017) argue that people who read popular newspapers (e.g. De Telegraaf) are less interested in the news than people who read quality newspapers (e.g. De Volkskrant). Therefore, the focus of popular newspapers is more on the personification of news, whereas, quality newspapers strive to be objective and present different perspectives on an issue (Boumans, Boomgaarden, &
Vliegenthart, 2013; Landert, 2014).
When looking at media coverage in times of conflict, Carpenter (2007) found that popular newspapers are facing difficulties and challenges to report the conflict because they cannot enter the field easily. Therefore, popular newspapers rely more on regional (Dutch) sources and report on local dimensions of the war which translates into softer coverage like personalisation. On the other hand, quality newspapers tend to cover the event more balanced and use more resources because they can send reporters to the area of conflict (Carpenter, 2007; Dimitrova & Strömback, 2008). Previous studies showed that even though the number of official sources is relatively high in quality newspapers, journalists still strive to report a critical and balanced picture of reality, and are also more negative towards the military
mission (Dimitrova & Strömbäck, 2005; Dimitrova & Strömbäck, 2008). Based on these patterns, the following hypotheses arise:
H2a: De Volkskrant uses more elite sources to cover the military mission in
Afghanistan than De Telegraaf.
H2b: De Volkskrant uses more negative frames to cover the military mission in
Afghanistan than De Telegraaf.
H2c: De Telegraaf uses more personalisation to cover the military mission in
Afghanistan than De Volkskrant.
H2d: De Volkskrant challenges positive frames more when covering the military
mission in Afghanistan than De Telegraaf. Differences over time
Recent research suggests that factors such as globalization, commercialization, technology changes and the rise of social media led to a reduction of elite control in news media in times of conflict (Al-Ghazzi, 2014; Gonen, 2018; Mythen, 2010). Still, elite sources seem to be dominant in news media, but nowadays ordinary people can enter news media more easily (Gonen, 2018). To illustrate, the concept of ‘citizen journalism’ became
extremely popular since the rise of social media (Hermida, Lewis, & Zamith, 2014). Hereby, the public has an active role in the communication process because it gives the possibility to an individual to take over the role of a journalist by spontaneously participating in times of conflict, crisis, accident or tragedy (Allan, 2013; Bowman & Willis, 2003; Mythen, 2010). This said, newspapers will rely on political statements and expert opinions most, but it is expected to find a more critical voice in news media over time because of the rise of non-elite sources and the ability to a wider range of information (Gonen, 2018). As it is expected that the use of non-elite sources will increase over time, it is also expected that newspapers report more negative and critically about the mission.
H3a: Over time, newspapers use non-elite sources more often to cover the Dutch
military mission in Afghanistan.
H3b: Over time, newspapers use negative frames more often to cover the military
mission in Afghanistan.
H3c: Over time, newspapers will challenge positive frames more often to cover the
mission in Afghanistan. Context
Before proceeding to the methods section, a brief overview of the Dutch-NATO mission is warranted. After the 9/11 terror attacks, the United States started a military operation in Afghanistan which aimed to dismantle al-Qaeda and remove the Taliban from power to create a stable government in Afghanistan (BBC News, 2019). They only got support from NATO since 2003 (NATO, 2020). The Netherlands became active in
Afghanistan in 2001 but were mainly operating with military personnel between 2006 and 2013 in the provinces of Uruzgan and Kunduz (Ministerie van Defensie, n.d.; NATO, 2020).
From 2006 till 2010, the Dutch military was active in the Afghan province of Uruzgan after a request from NATO. This turned out to be the largest involvement of Dutch military since the Korean War (De Graaf & Dimitriu, 2016). According to the Ministry of Defence, the main aim of the mission was to ‘make Uruzgan safe’, ‘routing terrorists’ and ‘helping women and children’ (Ministerie van Defensie, n.d.; Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, 2019; Veteraneninstituut, 2014). However, the operation quickly escalated into a combat mission (Het Parool, 2007). Furthermore, parties in the government disagreed about the extension of the mission which led to the withdrawal of coalition partner PvdA and the fall of the Balkenende IV government (Nu.nl, 2010).
However, this was not the end of the Dutch military contribution to NATO missions in Afghanistan. From 2011 onwards, the Dutch military, police and other experts trained Afghan
police in Kunduz. Their input mainly focused on supporting and strengthening Afghan authorities and enforcing the rule of law in the region (Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, 2019; Veteraneninstituut, 2014). The mission was intended to run from 2011 until the summer of 2014. However, the police mission ended earlier because of several external influences (Rijksoverheid, 2014). For example, the German military left the province, as a result, the safety of Dutch military could no longer be guaranteed. From 2013 onwards, the Dutch military stayed active in Kunduz, but with significantly fewer numbers (Trouw, 2013).
Previous studies examining the Afghanistan mission focused on specific military forces rather than a NATO mission (DeCillia, 2018; Nord & Strömbäck, 2006). However, as the biggest contribution of the Dutch military was a partnership between different NATO Allies and partners, it would be interesting to see how Dutch newspapers mentioned the military mission at home. Did they more often report about the Dutch, NATO or another country’s mission? This contributes to the literature as it tries to identify how Dutch audiences were informed about the military missions in Afghanistan, and thus, understand and remember the mission (De Vreese, 2005). Therefore, the following research question was developed:
RQ1: If Dutch newspapers mentioned the military mission in Afghanistan, did they
explicitly mention this in connection to the Dutch troops, NATO troops in general, or troops from another country?
Methods Research Design
The hypotheses were tested through quantitative content analysis. Content analysis can be defined as “the systematic, objective, quantitative analysis of message characteristics” (Neuendorf, 2002, p.1). Furthermore, the research tool is often used to examine news content (Riffe, Lacy, Fico, & Watson, 2019). The strength of a content analysis is that it counts the media output and gives insights over time through the analysis of text. On the other hand, coding entails some interpretation and can be reductive. It can also fail to explain why
something gets covered as it only looks at the media output (Scheepers, Tobi, & Boeije, 2016). However, a content analysis fits this study the best as the topic showed its advantage in analysing news content, which fits the coverage of newspapers in wartime (DeCillia, 2018; Neuendorf, 2002).
Sample & Procedure
To develop the sample, several criteria needed to be established. First of all, the type of newspapers used to analyse the coverage needed to be selected. According to Boukes and Vliegenthart (2017), De Telegraaf can be seen as a popular news outlet, whereas De
Volkskrant is a quality newspaper. When looking at the Mediamonitor (n.d.), the most recent statistics of 2018 showed that the newspapers who reached the most people are 1) Algemeen Dagblad, 2) De Telegraaf 3) Metro and 4) De Volkskrant. In total, Algemeen Dagblad consisted of one national newspaper and seven regional newspapers. These news articles, however, were not suitable for usage in this study as there was a possibility that newspapers were to overlap. In addition to that, newspapers (could) have a specific tendency to focus more on regional news instead of political affairs. Metro is excluded as well because the content of the newspapers was less political and affairs-focused. This, in turn, does not fit the requirements of this study. After applying the criteria, the top two national newspapers – one quality, De Volkskrant and - one tabloid, De Telegraaf were selected for the analysis. By using the search string “Nederland AND missie OR NAVO AND Afghanistan OR Uruzgan OR Oeroezgan OR Kunduz” within the NexisUni database, for the period 01-01-1995 through 31-12-2020, 2660 articles were found. De Volkskrant published n = 1766 articles and De
Telegraaf n = 894. This constituted the sampling frame of all coverage of Dutch/NATO mission in Afghanistan since 1995.
Results of the study were made generalizable by the means of multi-stage sampling. The decision was made to use probability stratified sampling because this research is
interested in a specific time period for two specific newspapers. Within the sampling frame, most articles were published between the beginning of 2006 and the end of 2011. This is in line with the period were the Dutch military were the most active (Ministerie van
Buitenlandse Zaken, 2019). In the period from 2006 till 2010, the Dutch military joined NATO Task Force Uruzgan. From 2011 till mid 2013, the military actively joined the NATO safety mission in Kunduz (Veteraneninstituut, 2014). To make sure that these active years were selected, the sampling frame was narrowed to 01-01-2006 through 31-12-2013. This includes N = 1886 articles, consisting of n = 1254 from De Volkskrant and n = 632 from De Telegraaf.
From this narrowed sampling frame, simple random sampling without replacement was used to draw a sample from these two newspapers. To meet the requirements of .05 probability level used in this study, at least 126 Volkskrant and 64 Telegraaf articles should be analysed in this study, as this illustrates 10% of the total sample (DeCillia, 2018; King & Zayani, 2008). An overview of the number of articles per year can be found in Appendix I. After coding the articles, 12 news articles were deleted because their topic was not relevant or none of the frames were present. This made the total sample consist of N = 388 news articles from De Telegraaf (n = 196) and De Volkskrant (n = 192).
Codebook development
The unit of data collection was the entire news article, including the headline. In order to develop the codebook, frames and sources were identified based on previous literature and explanatory findings. More information on specific codes can be found in the following section. To improve the codebook, pilot training was performed by the researcher. After revisions and clarifications were made while training the second coder, a final coding scheme was developed. The codebook can be found in Appendix II.
In total, 10% of the articles (N = 40) were coded independently by a second coder, for intercoder reliability purposes (Neuendorf, 2002). The ICR was tested by Hayes macro for Krippendorff’s Alpha to estimate the reliability of the study (Hayes & Krippendorff, 2007). Alpha levels from >.67 onwards are seen as sufficient for this study; scores higher than >.90 are excellent. Values lower than .67 were critically analysed and should be interpreted with caution as this is the threshold of good reliability (De Swert, 2012). The specific values for each subframe will be presented in the following sections alongside the explanation of each subframe.
Measures
Media coverage was operationalized in this study as both frames and sources. Frames. First of all, the study tried to investigate if there was a difference in the frames used to cover the conflict. These frames were divided into 3 categories; the first one was ‘Positive frames’ which includes the subframes of reconstruction, mentoring, diplomacy, international status and decrease of violence. These frames were derived from reports which reflected on the Dutch military missions and using an inductive approach by exploring patterns in news articles (Van der Lijn & Van der Berg, 2011; Van der Lijn, 2015). The frames include, for example, that the Dutch mission aims to reconstruct Afghanistan and wants to create a better future for the citizens or when an article mentions that Dutch military help Afghan police to become stronger.
The second cluster of frames was ‘Personalisation’, which included the subframes of brave soldiers and personalisation. This includes for example, when an article mentions that a fearless soldier got wounded (coded as brave soldiers) or when an article includes an
interview with the family of the soldier (coded as personalisation).
Finally, a cluster of ‘Negative frames’ included the subframes doubts about the mission, the downfall of the mission, Afghanistan is becoming less safe and a combat mission
(DeCillia, 2018). This latter frame includes, for example, when the article mentions that the military mission turned out to become a combat mission instead of its intended peacekeeping purpose. All frames except for personalisation and doubts were measured on a 3-point scale: 0 = not present, 1 = present and frame is challenged, and 2 = present and frame is not
challenged. A frame was considered ‘challenged’ when it includes the subframe but it was also contradicted in some way. For example, when an article mentioned that the mission aimed to restore democracy in Afghanistan (reconstruction frame) but also showed numbers which illustrated that the military had difficulties to achieve this. A frame was considered ‘not challenged’ when an article mentioned only the subframe. For example, when an article mentioned that mission helped to reconstruct democracy in Afghanistan (reconstruction frame). Such coding allowed me not only to gauge the presence of frames across news but also to see how journalists – through their own framing or that of other sources – challenged or resisted these frames. The Personalisation and Doubts frames were only measured by 0 = not present and 1 = present because it was not relevant or feasible for articles to challenge these frames. An explanation of the recoded variables used for analyses will follow in the results section to be sure that the analyses will be understood correctly. The ICR values for these frames ranged from .66 to .98, as can be seen in Table 1. Afghanistan is becoming less safe frame only scored .66, but as it is on the edge of acceptable and was merged into a cluster, the variable was included but should be carefully interpreted.
Table 1
Intercoder reliability and frames
Krippendorff’s Alpha
Reconstruction frame .95
Mentoring frame .98
Diplomacy frame .88
International status frame .87
Decrease of violence frame .97
Brave soldiers frame .76
Personalisation frame .77
Doubts frame .75
The Downfall of the mission frame .85
Afghanistan is becoming less safe frame .66
Combat mission frame .84
Note. ICR is calculated by Hayes macro for Krippendorff’s Alpha
Sources. Type of sources was measured by the number of elite and non-elite sources. The number of Dutch, other Western, Afghan and other elite and non-elite sources was simply counted, as it was aimed to indicate the number of elite and non-elite sources in the articles (Bennett, 1990; Bennett, Lawrence & Livingstone, 2008; DeCillia, 2018; Nossek, 2004). The categories were based on previous literature; in general, elite sources were considered to be governmental/military official, an expert or academic of the field and political parties. Non-elite sources were all other sources which were not Non-elite. Again, the unit of data collection here was the article; each article was coded for each type of source, and the value was the number of sources that were present in the article (0 if there were none, 1 if there was one, etc.). The categories and ICR results for these variables ranged from .84 to .99, as seen in Table 2.
Table 2
Intercoder Reliability and sources
Krippendorff’s Alpha n
Dutch elite-sources .88 963
Other Western elite-sources .94 181
Afghan elite-sources .99 51
Other elite-sources .99 12
Dutch non-elite sources .84 412
Other Western non-elite sources .96 38
Afghan non-elite sources .99 24
Other non-elite sources .99 6
Note. ICR is calculated by Hayes macro for Krippendorff’s Alpha
Focus mission. To investigate whether newspapers covered the mission as a Dutch, NATO or as another countries’ military mission, each of the frames assed above was
additionally coded as to whether it was tied to a specifically Dutch mission, a NATO mission, and/or another country’s military mission. Frames could be tied to each of these options, as each was coded on a 0 = no, 1 = yes scale. ICR results ranged from .62 to 1.0, an overview can be found in Appendix III. Variables were deleted when the Alpha level was below .67.
Results Sources
H1a stated that Dutch newspapers covering the military mission in
Afghanistan will rely more on elite sources than non-elite sources. As it was aimed to look at newspapers (independent variable) and if they used elite sources (dependent variable) or non-elite sources (dependent variable) more often, a MANOVA was used because the test allowed investigating the influence of one independent variable on two dependent variables. A
MANOVA revealed that there was no significant difference in the use of elite sources (M = 2.67, SD = 2.92) and non-elite sources (M = 1.11, SD = 2.20), F (2, 385) = 1.52, p = 0.220; Wilk’s Λ = 0.99, η2= 0.008. However, it is interesting that the mean number of elite sources was 2.7 per article, versus 1.1 non-elite sources. In other words, more than 2.5 times as many
elite sources as non-elite sources were used in the sampled articles. The hypothesis is thus not supported, though the difference is in the expected direction.
H2a explored the patterns between papers, expecting that De Volkskrant used more elite sources to cover the military mission in Afghanistan than De Telegraaf. Therefore, an independent samples t-test was conducted to examine whether De Telegraaf or De Volkskrant used more elite sources to cover the conflict. The Levene's test for equality of variances was not significant F = 2.33, p = .128. Results revealed that De Volkskrant used slightly more elite sources (M = 2.80, SD = 3.10) than De Telegraaf (M = 2.54, SD = 2.74), t(386) = -0.92, p = .358, 95% CI [-0.85, 0.31] d = 0.09, but again this difference was not significant. The hypothesis is therefore rejected.
Frames
To test if Dutch newspapers used positive frames more often to cover the mission than negative frames (hypothesis 1b), each frame was recoded to a scale of the total presence of the frames in the news (= total presence of frames). Variables of the subframes were recoded as 0 (not present) = 0 (not present), 1 (present and challenged) = 1 (present) and 2 (present and not challenged) = 1 (present). The frames were then summed into indices according to the conceptual clusters in the method section – meaning for example, that the five positive frames were summed up and divided by five so that each news article received an average score for the presence of positive frames. An overview of the mean scores can be found in Appendix IV.
Then, a chi-square test was conducted. Results revealed that positive frames were present in 61.2% of the articles and there is a significant relationship between newspaper type and presence of positive frames X2 (1, N = 388) = 7.61, p = .006, τ = 0.02. In particular, De Volkskrant used more positive frames than De Telegraaf, this is an unexpected finding. Moreover, 38.7% of the newspapers included negative frames, and, contrary to expectations,
De Telegraaf used significantly more than De Volkskrant (X2 = (1, N = 388) = 5.75, p = .017, τ = 0.02), an overview can be found in Table 3. Hereby, hypothesis 2b is rejected as De Telegraaf used negative frames more often than De Volkskrant. It appears that, while both papers were, in general, more positive than negative framing the conflict, this difference was particularly pronounced in De Volkskrant; coverage in De Telegraaf was more balanced in terms of the valence of the frames.
Table 3
Total presence of frames
De Telegraaf (n = 196) De Volkskrant (n = 192) Total (N = 388)
Positive Frames 54.6% 68.2% 61.2%
Negative Frames 45.4% 31.8% 38.7%
To test if De Telegraaf used personalisation more often than De Volkskrant (hypothesis 2c), another independent samples t-test was conducted. The Levene’s test for equality of variances was significant F = 37.43, p = <.001, the results should be interpreted cautiously. Results revealed that De Telegraaf (M = 0.45, SD = 0.50) used indeed the personalisation frames more often than De Volkskrant (M = 0.29, SD = 0.45),
t(383.81) = 3.46, p = .001, 95% CI [0.07, 0.26], d = 0.39. This was the largest difference, in terms of effect size, seen so far in the sample. So, the hypothesis is accepted.
For H2d it was examined to which the extent each newspaper challenged the positive frames. Again, the original variables were recoded but this time into a scale of challenged frames (= challenged frames). Variables of the subframes were recoded as 0 (not present) = 99 (missing), 1 (present and challenged) = 1 (present and challenged) and 2 (present and not challenged) = 0 (not present).1 The variables were only recoded for positive frames.
1 To test the ‘challenged frames’, only the subframes for positive frames were recoded because all other subframes could not be measured as ‘present and challenged’ (like Doubts and Personalisation) or it was not relevant to challenge the subframes (like Combat mission or Afghanistan is becoming less safe)
Therefore, the higher the score on the 0-1 scale, the more challenging the article was to the positive frames. Overall, newspapers do not very often challenge the positive frames in their articles (N = 388, M = 0.39, SD = 0.49).
In order test if De Volkskrant or De Telegraaf challenged positive frames more often, another independent samples t-test was conducted. The Levene’s test for equality of variances was significant F = 12.96, p = <.001, so again the results should be interpreted with caution. Results revealed that De Volkskrant (M = 0.44, SD = 0.50) indeed challenged the positive frames significantly more often than De Telegraaf (M = 0.34, SD = 0.48), t(384.35) = -1.94, p = 0.046, 95% CI [-0.19, -0.01], d = 0.20. Therefore, the hypothesis is accepted.
Differences over time
The last hypotheses focused on the difference in coverage over time. Hypothesis 3a stated that over time, newspapers were expected to use more non-elite sources than elite sources to cover the Dutch military mission in Afghanistan. Pearson’s correlation between the number of non-elite sources and years showed a very small non-significant relationship, r = 0.03, p = 0.624. In other words, newspapers did not significantly use non-elite sources more often over the years. Looking at differences per newspaper, there is no significant difference in the use of non-elite sources over time for De Telegraaf (r = -0.01, p = 0.132) and De Volkskrant (r = 0.09, p = 0.222). See Figure 2 and 3 in Appendix V for an overview.
Another Pearson’s correlation was conducted to see if newspapers used negative frames more over time (hypothesis 3b) and if newspapers challenged positive frames more often over time (hypothesis 3c). Results revealed that there was no significant difference in the use of negative frames over time. Here, however, we see that this correlation masks a significant difference between papers: De Telegraaf used fewer negative frames over time, whereas, De Volkskrant remained steady in its coverage. Furthermore, there was no
overview. So, newspapers did not significantly use negative frames more over time and did also not challenge positive frames more often. Therefore, the hypotheses are rejected, see Figure 4 and 5 in Appendix V for an overview of the use of frames over time.
Table 4.
Correlation use of frames over time
De Telegraaf (n = 196) De Volkskrant (n = 192) Total (N = 388) r p r p r p
Positive frames challenged over time 0.11 .131 0.02 .787 0.06 .213 Total presence negative frames over time -0.18 0.012 0.002 .981 -0.07 .381
Lastly, it was explored whether Dutch newspapers mentioned the military mission more explicitly as Dutch, NATO or in regards to another country. As shown in Table 5, Dutch newspapers very consistently tied each frame to the Dutch military mission specifically; in fewer articles was NATO mentioned in connection to these frames – similar to the mention of other countries.
Table 5
Frequency mentioning military mission in Afghanistan in connection to frames
De Telegraaf De Volkskrant Total
Dutch military mission (N = 368) 99.5% 91.1% 95.3%
NATO military mission (N = 53) 7.2% 20.4% 13.8%
Other country military mission (N = 54) 8.8% 19.4% 14.0%
Conclusion & Discussion
The overall purpose of this study was to investigate how Dutch newspapers reported about the mission in Afghanistan in terms of framing and sourcing. Hereby it was aimed to critically look at the democratic responsibilities of Dutch media in times of war. Overall, Dutch newspapers tend to be positive about the military mission in Afghanistan and used elite sources more often than non-elite sources to cover the conflict. When looking at the
– though the use of negative frames decreased over time in this news outlet. On the other hand, De Volkskrant used positive frames more often, but they also challenged the frames they used more frequently. In the following sections, the outstanding results of this study will be discussed.
First of all, Dutch newspapers use elite sources more often than non-elite sources when covering the military mission in Afghanistan, but this difference was not significant. This is surprising as previous studies found that news media tend to use elite sources more often in times of war (Bennett, 1990; Kothari, 2010; Nossek, 2004). The insignificant results could be explained by the fact that the sample size was too small, as only n = 192 articles were coded for De Volkskrant and n = 196 for De Telegraaf. A wider sample may have led to significant results. Nevertheless, even if there was not a significant difference, the high difference in the use of elite sources and non-elite sources illustrates a contrast which is worth mentioning. As the number of elite sources is relatively high in newspapers, they also have to power to influence the news frames in the frame-building process (Bennett, 1990; Brüggemann, 2014). This is threatening because frames will become a powerful tool for elite sources because frames help the audience to understand and remember the conflict (De Vreese, 2005; McCombs, 2013).
Secondly, results showed that positive frames were mostly used by newspapers to cover the mission. Furthermore, I did not find a decrease in the use of positive frames over time. The reason why Dutch newspapers seem to be elite-orientated and report in favour of their government could be explained by the concept of war journalism (Galtung & Fisher, 2013). In his study, Galtung (2005) argues that most news media are more war-orientated because they are reactive, focus on the visible effects of violence and focus only on the conflict area. Hereby, the focus too much on elites. Instead, he suggests that news media
should look at peace in general. News media should provide solutions to the public and expose untruths on all sides, so the public can make their own decisions.
Thirdly, differences per newspaper showed that De Telegraaf used personalisation as well as negative frames more often. The higher presence of negative frames in De Telegraaf could be explained by the political state of the Netherlands. From February 2007 till October 2010, the Dutch cabinet was formed by political parties CDA, CU and PvdA (Rijksoverheid, n.d.). In that time, Bert Koenders, member of the left orientated party PvdA, was responsible for the Ministry of Development Coordination. As De Telegraaf is known as a popular, right-leaning newspaper, it might be that they were more negative towards the actions of this minister, and therefore, use negative frames more often (Akkerman, 2011).
Lastly, when looking at how newspapers used frames to cover the conflict, De Volkskrant tended to challenge positive frames more often than De Telegraaf. This is in line with previous research which suggests that quality newspapers try to be more balanced when reporting about conflict (Dimitrova & Strömbäck, 2008; Carpenter, 2007). This said it can be concluded that De Volkskrant tried to report the military mission in a balanced way as almost 50% of their news articles included a frame that also challenged that frame. Being a watchdog on elite and government by questioning and criticising them has always been seen as crucial to democracy (McNair, 2009). However, the findings of my study also show that this cannot be taken for granted. It has implications for the credibility of the media as well as for the public as the public cannot seek information themselves. Therefore, it is expected from the media that they search for information and strive to objectively report about the conflict (Benyahia, Gardner, & Rayner, 2004).
Even though this study found some patterns, there are a couple of limitations. First, it should be mentioned that a few subframes did not score higher than .67 on the intercoder reliability tests. Therefore, several subframes were deleted and the cluster negative frame
should be interpreted with caution as it includes Afghanistan is becoming less safe frame which scored only .66.
Furthermore, the strength of a content analysis is that it counts the media output and it allows the researcher to investigate over time by looking at texts. However, one of the
disadvantages is that it fails to explain why something got covered and why not (Neuendorf, 2002; Riffe, et al., 2014). Consequently, this study cannot indicate if journalists intended to challenge frames or not. Furthermore, since The Afghan Papers were revealed, it allows future studies to have a critical look at Dutch officials and the way they framed the mission and informed journalists, public and other governmental organisations. Did Dutch journalists know about the restraint of information by American officials? And did Dutch officials do the same? It would be interesting for future research to conduct a mixed-method study. By
combining content analysis and interviews, a future study can examine if journalists are aware of their use of frames and possibly misleading information from officials. Moreover, the study can investigate if there are differences in frames presented in official documents about the mission and frames present in news media.
Moreover, when looking at the results, Dutch related content continued to appear quite substantial. To illustrate, media used a high number of Dutch elite sources and when they mentioned the military mission in Afghanistan, they mostly referred to this as the Dutch military mission. This is noteworthy because both missions were an international partnership between different NATO Allies and partners. By focusing on Dutch related content, news media try to present distant events as relevant to their audience, which is called domestication (Taradai, 2014). Moreover, domestic stories are constructed in a way that they are
reconcilable with the culture and dominant ideology of the foreign country (Gurevitch, Levy, & Roeh, 1991). Hereby, journalists’ standards shift from being objective to being subjective (Tumber & Prentoulis, 2003). This type of coverage can have implications for how Dutch
citizens received messages. For example, people may have felt like they understood the war in Afghanistan, but because of the presented picture of reality by media, they only got
information on a few aspects of reality. This has not only implications for their own knowledge, but also on their decision-making about the military actions and government. Therefore, it is suggested for future research to further investigate the role of domestication in Dutch news media when covering the military mission in Afghanistan.
To conclude, this study showed that journalism in times of conflict is facing difficulties and the democratic responsibility of the press cannot be taken for granted. Due to different circumstances, media are struggling with their use of frames and sources when covering the military mission in Afghanistan. Not only are they mostly supportive of the mission, but they also do not offer a platform for multiple opinions. As Nord & Strömbäck (2006) stated: “International conflicts of our time are usually not only a battle of weapons but also a battle of opinions” (p.1). It is, therefore, the duty of the media to be transparent and inform the public the best way possible. Media do not have the power to win the war in Afghanistan, but the media do have the power to win this battle of opinions. By acknowledging that they rely more often on elite sources and positive frames, this is a first step in changing media coverage during wartime. Distance should not be a boundary, but an opportunity. Performing
journalism in times of conflict should trigger journalists to perform according to their democratic standards and be eager to find the truth. It is time that news media take their responsibility and turn into a watchdog again.
References
Aarts, K., & Semetko, H. A. (2003). The divided electorate: Media use and political involvement. Journal of Politics, 65(3), 759-784. doi:10.1111/468-2508.00221 Akkerman, T. (2011). Friend or foe? Right-wing populism and the popular and the popular
press in Britain and the Netherlands. Journalism, 12(8), 931-945. doi:10.1177/1464884911415972
Al-Ghazzi, O. (2014). Citizen journalism in the Syrian uprising: Problematizing western narratives in a local context. Communication Theory, 24(1), 435-454.
doi:10.1111/comt.12047
Allan, S. (2013). Citizens witnessing: Revisioning journalism in times of crisis. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Policy Press.
Allan, S., & Zelizer, B. (2004). Reporting war: Journalism in wartime. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
Alonso, S., & Kranenburg, M. (December 10, 2019). Haagsongemak over missie in Afghanistan. NRC Handelsblad. Retrieved at January 15, 2019 from
https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/12/10/haags-ongemak-over-missie-in-afghanistan-a3983360
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London, United Kingdom: Verso.
Arif, R., Golan, G. J., & Moritz, B. (2014). Mediated public diplomacy: US and Taliban relations with Pakistani media. Media, War & Conflict, 7(2), 201-217.
doi:10.1177/1750635214538619
Baden, C., & Tenenboim-Weinblatt, K. (2018). The search for common ground in conflict news research: Comparing the coverage of six current conflicts in domestic and
international media over time. Media, War & Conflict, 11(1), 22-45. doi:10.1177/1750635217702071
Bakker, P., & Scholten, O. (2011). Communicatiekaart van Nederland: Overzicht van media en communicatie (ed.8). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
BBC News. (September 8, 2019). Why is there a war in Afghanistan? The short, medium and long story. BBC News Asia. Retrieved at November 1, 2019 from
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-49192495
Bennett, W. L. (1990). Toward a theory of press-state relations in the United States. Journal of Communication, 40(2), 103-127. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1990tb02265.x
Bennett, W. L., Lawrence, R. G., & Livingston, S. (2008). When the press fails: Political power and the news media from Iraq to Karina. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Benyahia, S. C., Gardner, A., & Rayner, P. (2004). Media studies: The essential resource. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
Boukes, M., & Vliegenthart, R. (2017). A general pattern in the construction of economic newsworthiness? Analyzing news factors in popular, quality, regional, and financial newspapers. Journalism, 21(2), 1-22. doi:10.1177/1464884917725989
Boumans, J. W., Boomgaarden, H. G., & Vliegenthart, R. (2013). Media personalisation in context: A cross-national comparison between the UK and the Netherlands, 1992-2007. Political Studies, 61(1), 198-216. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12013
Bowman, S., & Willis, C. (2003). We media: How audiences are shaping the future of news and information. New York, NY: Media Centre.
Brewer, P. R., & Gross, K. (2010). Studying the effects of issue framing on public opinion about policy issues: Does what we see depend on how we look? In P. D’Angelo
(Eds.), Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 159-186). New York, NY: Routledge.
Brüggemann, M. (2014). Between frame setting and frame sending: How journalists contribute to news frames. Communication Theory, 24(1), 61-82.
doi:10.1111/comt.12027
Cacciatore, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Iyengar, S. (2016). The end of framing as we know it… and the future of media effects. Mass Communication and Society, 19(1), 7-23. doi:10.1080/15205436.2015.1068811
Carpenter, S. (2007). U.S. Elite and non-elite newspapers’ portrayal of the Iraq War: A comparison of frames and source use. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(4), 761-776. doi:10.1177/107769900708400407
Cooper, S.D., & Kuypers, J.A. (2004). Embedded versus behind-the-lines reporting on the 2003 Iraq War. In R. Berenger (Eds.), Global media go to war (pp. 161-172). Spokane, WA: Marquette Books.
Cozma, R. (2014). Were the Murrow boy warmongers? The relationship between sourcing, framing, and propaganda in war journalism. Journalism Studies, 16(3), 433-448. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2014.882098
Cozma, R., & Kozman, C. (2015). The Syrian crisis in the news. Journalism Practice, 9(5), 669-686. doi:10.1080/17512786.2014.982940
De Brouwer, S. (May 12, 2013). Extreem leven. Hilversum, the Netherlands: VPRO. Retrieved at December 30, 2019 from
https://www.vpro.nl/speel~VPWON_1196295~standplaats-afghanistan-extreem-leven~.html
De Graaf, B., & Dimitriu, G. (2016). Fighting the war at home: Strategic narratives, elite responsiveness, and the Dutch mission in Afghanistan, 2006-2010. Foreign Policy Analysis, 12(1), 2-23. doi:10.1111/fpa.12070\
De Swert, K. (2012). Calculating inter-coder reliability in media content analysing using Krippendorff’s Alpha. University of Amsterdam. Retrieved at January 22, 2020 from
https://www.polcomm.org/wp-content/uploads/ICR01022012.pdf
De Vreese, C. H. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal, 13(1), 51-62. doi:10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre
DeCillia, B. (2018). But is it not getting any safer!: The contested dynamic of framing Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 155-177. doi:10.1017/S0008423917000634
Dimitrova, D. V., & Strömbäck, J. (2005). Mission accomplished? Framing the Iraq war in elite newspapers in Sweden and the United States. International Communication Gazette, 67(5), 399-417. doi:10.1177/0016549205056050
Dimitrova, D. V., & Strömbäck, J. (2008). Foreign policy and framing of the 2003 Iraq war in elite Swedish and American newspapers. Media, War & Conflict, 1(2), 203-220. doi:10.1177/1750635208090957
Entman, R. (1993). Framing – Towards a clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51-58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
Entman, R.M., & Page, B.I. (1994). The news before the storm: The Iraq war debate and the limits of media independence. In T. Mayer (Eds.), The Gulf War, the media, and U.S. foreign policy (pp. 82-101). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Galtung, J. (July 8, 2005). The missing journalism on conflict and peace in the middle east. Retrieved at January 25, 2020 from https://www.transcend.org/files/article570.html
Galtung, J., & Fisher, D. (2013). John Galtung: Pioneer of peach journalism. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(11), 1-37. Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news: Story suitability. Society, 16(3), 65-77.
doi:10.1007/BF02701600
Gans, H. J. (1998). What can journalists actually do for American democracy? International Journal of Press/Politics, 3(4), 6-12. doi:10.1177/1081180X98003004003
Gonen, Y. (2018). Journalist-sources relationship in violent conflict coverage: Shifting dynamics. Sociology Compass, 12(7), 1-13. doi:10.1111/soc4.12595
Gurevitch, M., Levy, M. R., & Roeh, I. (1991). The global newsroom: Convergences and diversities in the globalization of television news. In P., Dahlgren (Eds.).
Communication and citizenship (pp. 195-216). London, United Kingdom: Routledge. Hallin, D. C. (1986). The “uncensored war”. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Hänggli, R. (2012). Key factors in frame building: How strategic political actors shape news
media coverage. American Behavioural Scientist, 56(3), 300-317. doi:10.1177/0002764211426327
Hansen, A.K. (1991). Source diversity and newspaper enterprise journalism. Journalism Studies, 11(5), 630-633. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2010.502787
Hayes, A.F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Method and Measures, 1, 77-89.
doi:10.1080/19312450709336664
Hermida, A., Lewis, S.C., & Zamith, R. (2014). Sourcing the Arab Spring: A case study of Andy Carvin’s sources on Twitter during Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3), 479-499.
Het Parool. (April 20, 2007). Soldaat gedood in Afghanistan. Het Parool. Retrieved at January 27, 2020 from https://www.parool.nl/nieuws/soldaat-gedood-in-afghanistan~b28ac8ed/
Kenix, L. J. (2015). You are either with us or with us: Constructing a Samoan national identity through inclusion at the Samoa Observer. Journalism, 16(4), 553-570. doi:10.1177/1464884914525557
King, J. M., & Zayani, M. (2008). Media, branding and controversy: Perceptions of Al-Jazeera in newspapers around the world. Journal of Middle East Media, 1(4), 27-43. Kothari, A. (2010). The framing of the Darfur conflict in the New York Times: 2003-2006.
Journalism Studies, 11(2), 209-224. doi:10.1080/14616700903481978
Kristensen, N. N., & Ørsten, M. (2007). Danish media at war: The Danish media coverage of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Journalism, 8(3), 323-343.
doi:10.101177/1464884907076458
Landert, D. (2014). Personalisation in mass media communication: British online news between public and private. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Lecheler, S., & De Vreese, C. H. (2011). Getting real: The duration of framing effects. Journal of Communication, 61(5), 959-983. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.01580.x McCombs, M. (2013). Setting the Agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Cambridge,
United Kingdom: Polity Press.
McNair, B. (2009). Journalism and Democracy. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitzsch. (Eds.). The handbook of journalism studies (pp. 237-249). New York, NY: Routledge.
Mediamonitor. (n.d.). Dagbladen in 2018. Retrieved at December 17, 2019 from
Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken. (October 24, 2019). Nederland ondersteunt Afghanistan. Retrieved at November 1, 2019 from
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/internationale-vrede-en-veiligheid/nederland-ondersteunt-afghanistan
Ministerie van Defensie. (n.d.). Missie in Afghanistan. Defensie. Retrieved at November 1, 2019 from https://www.defensie.nl/onderwerpen/missie-in-afghanistan
Mythen, G. (2010). Reframing risk? Citizens journalism and the transformation of news. Journal of Risk Research, 13(1), 45-58. doi:10.1080/13669870903136159
NATO. (January 14, 2020). NATO and Afghanistan. Retrieved at January 27, 2020 from
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_8189.htm
Neuendorf, K.A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Nord, L. W. (2007). Investigative journalism in Sweden: A not so noticeable noble effort. Journalism, 8(5), 517-521. doi:10.1177/1464884907081045
Nord, L. W., & Strömbäck, J. (2006). Reporting more, informing less: A comparison of Swedish media coverage of September 11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Journalism, 7(1), 85-110. doi:10.1177/1464884906059429
Nossek, H. (2004). Our news and their news. The role of national identity in the coverage of foreign news. Journalism, 5(3), 343-368. doi:10.1177/1464884904044941
Nu.nl. (February 21, 2010). Reconstructie val van kabinet Balkenende IV. Retrieved at January 28, 2020 from https://www.nu.nl/politiek/2189534/reconstructie-val-kabinet-balkenende-iv.html
Nygren, G., Glowacki, M., Hök J., Kiria, I., Orlova, D., & Taradai, D. (2018). Journalism in crossfire. Journalism Studies, 19(7), 1059-1078.
Onze missie in Afghanistan. (n.d.). Missie in Afghanistan kostte tenminste 2,5 miljard. BNN/VARA. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from
https://missieafghanistan.bnnvara.nl/alleberichten/2016/11/24/missie-afghanistan-kostte-ten-minste-25-miljard
Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. (2001). Framing as a strategic action in public deliberation. In S.D. Reese (Eds.), Framing Public Life: Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of the Social world (pp. 35-66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Philo, G., & Berry, M. (2004). Bad news from Israel. London, United Kingdom: Pluto Press. Reese, S. D. (1991). Setting the media’s agenda: A power balance perspective. Annals of
International Communication Association, 14(1), 309-340. doi:10.1080/23808985.1991.11678793
Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. (2014). Analyzing media messages, Using quantitative content analysis research. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
Riffe, D., Lacy, S., Fico, F., & Watson, B. (2019). Analyzing media messages. Using quantitative content analysis in research (4rd ed.) New York, NY: Routledge. Rijksoverheid. (2014). Eindevaluatie geïntegreerde politiemissie. Retrieved at January 25,
2020 from
https://www.tweedekamer.nl/debat_en_vergadering/commissievergaderingen/details?i d=2014A00975
Rijksoverheid. (n.d.). Kabinetten sinds 1945. Retrieved at January 29, 2020 from
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/regering/over-de-regering/kabinetten-sinds-1945
Robinson, P. (2004). Researching US media-state relations in twenty-first century wars. In S. Allan (Eds.). Reporting War: Journalism in wartime. (pp. 96-112). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
Rowling, C. M., Sheets, P., & Jones, T. M. (2015). American atrocity revisited: National identity, cascading frames, and the My Lai massacre. Political Communication, 32, 310-330. doi:10.1080/10584609.2014.
Schoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content. New York, NY: Longman.
Seib, P. M. (2002). The global journalists: news and conscience in a world of conflict. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Sosale, S. (2010). Rallying around the flag: Journalistic constructions of a national mediascape in a global era. The International Communication Gazette, 72(3), 211-227. doi:10.1177/1748048509356948
Taradai, D. (2014). How news domestication may blur conflict: Coverage of the 2008 South Ossetia War in Ukraine. Central European Journal of Communication, 7(12), 67-81. Taylor, P.M. (2003). Journalism under fire. In S. Cottle (Eds.), News, public relations and
power (pp. 63-79). London, United Kingdom: Sage.
Trouw. (March 8, 2013). Missie in Kunduz stopt deze zomer, F16’s blijven langer. Retrieved at November 1, 2019 from https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/missie-in-kunduz-stopt-deze-zomer-f16-s-blijven-langer~b07777fd/\
Tumber, H., & Prentoulis, M. (2003). ‘Journalists under fire: Objectivity and emotional literacy’, in D. Thussu & D. Freedman (Eds.) War and the media: Reporting conflict 24/7 (pp. 215-230). London, United Kingdom: Sage.
Van Bommel, H. (November 1, 2012). ‘Onze missie in Afghanistan is mislukt. De
Volkskrant. Retrieved at January 20, 2020 from https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/onze-missie-in-afghanistan-is-mislukt~bced63bd/
Van der Lijn, J. (2015). Comprehensive approaches, diverse coherences: The different levels of policy coherence in the Dutch 3D approach in Afghanistan. Small Wars &
Insurgencies, 26(1), 72-89. doi:10.1080/09592318.2014.959773
Van der Lijn, J., & Van der Berg, P. (2011). 3D ‘The next generation’: Lessons learned from Uruzgan for future operations. Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. The Netherlands: The Hague.
Van der Meulen, J., & Vos, A. (2012). Uruzgan: het politieke gewicht van draagvlak. Retrieved at January 15, 2020 from
https://www.atlcom.nl/upload/Artikel_Van_der_Meulen___Vos_AP_2012_nr__7.pdf
Veteraneninstituut. (October 2, 2014). Afghanistan. Retrieved at November 1, 2019 from
https://www.veteraneninstituut.nl/missie/afghanistan/
Wahl-Jorgensen, K., & Hanitzsch, T. (2019). The handbook of Journalism Studies (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Walter, A.S., & Vliegenthart, R. (2010). Negative campaigning across different communication channels: Different ball games? International Journal of Press Politics, 15(4), 441-461. doi:10.1177/1940161210374122
Weaver, D. H., & Willnat, L. (2012). The global journalist in the 21st century. New York:
Routledge.
Whitlock, C. (December 9, 2019). The Afghanistan papers: A secret history of the war. The Washington Post. Retrieved at December 24, 2019 from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/
Woods, A. (February 17, 2007). To sell Canada on war, try hope but not liberty: Focus groups advised Harper not to echo Bush. The Star. Retrieved at November 11, 2019 from
https://www.thestar.com/news/2007/02/17/to_sell_canada_on_war_try_hope_but_not _liberty.html
Zandberg, E., & Neiger, M. (2005). Between the nation and the profession: Journalists as members of contradicting communities. Media, Culture & Society, 27(1), 131-141. doi:10.1177/0163443705049073
Appendix
Appendix I – Overview total number of news articles per newspaper
Figure 1. Distribution of Dutch newspaper articles from 2006-2013.
T ot al num be r of a rt ic le s
