This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt [1 ed.] 9783954895106, 9783954890101

Citation preview

Annika Witzel

This is what they tell US

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt

Anchor Academic Publishing disseminate knowledge

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Annika Witzel This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt ISBN: 978-3-95489-510-6 Fabrication: Anchor Academic Publishing, an Imprint of Diplomica® Verlag GmbH, Hamburg, 2013

All rights reserved. This publication may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publishers.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Die dadurch begründeten Rechte, insbesondere die der Übersetzung, des Nachdrucks, des Vortrags, der Entnahme von Abbildungen und Tabellen, der Funksendung, der Mikroverfilmung oder der Vervielfältigung auf anderen Wegen und der Speicherung in Datenverarbeitungsanlagen, bleiben, auch bei nur auszugsweiser Verwertung, vorbehalten. Eine Vervielfältigung dieses Werkes oder von Teilen dieses Werkes ist auch im Einzelfall nur in den Grenzen der gesetzlichen Bestimmungen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in der jeweils geltenden Fassung zulässig. Sie ist grundsätzlich vergütungspflichtig. Zuwiderhandlungen unterliegen den Strafbestimmungen des Urheberrechtes. Die Wiedergabe von Gebrauchsnamen, Handelsnamen, Warenbezeichnungen usw. in diesem Werk berechtigt auch ohne besondere Kennzeichnung nicht zu der Annahme, dass solche Namen im Sinne der Warenzeichen- und Markenschutz-Gesetzgebung als frei zu betrachten wären und daher von jedermann benutzt werden dürften. Die Informationen in diesem Werk wurden mit Sorgfalt erarbeitet. Dennoch können Fehler nicht vollständig ausgeschlossen werden und der Verlag, die Autoren oder Übersetzer übernehmen keine juristische Verantwortung oder irgendeine Haftung für evtl. verbliebene fehlerhafte Angaben und deren Folgen. © Diplomica Verlag GmbH http://www.diplomica-verlag.de, Hamburg 2013

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

     

Table of Contents 

1.  Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1  1.1.  The 2011 Egyptian revolution ..................................................................... 4  1.2.  The papers.................................................................................................... 9  1.3.  Methodology.............................................................................................. 12  2.  Analysis ............................................................................................................ 14  2.1.  Editorial .................................................................................................... 14  2.1.1.The Wall Street Journal ........................................................................... 15  2.1.2.New York Times ....................................................................................... 16  2.1.3.San Francisco Chronicle ......................................................................... 18  2.1.4.The Washington Times............................................................................. 20  2.1.5.Conclusion ............................................................................................... 22  2.2.  News story ....................................................................................................... 24  2.2.1.The Wall Street Journal ........................................................................... 24  2.2.2.New York Times ....................................................................................... 27  2.2.3.San Francisco Chronicle ......................................................................... 29  2.2.4.The Washington Times............................................................................. 31  2.2.5.Conclusion ............................................................................................... 33  2.3.  Letter to the Editor ......................................................................................... 35  2.3.1.The Wall Street Journal ........................................................................... 36  2.3.2.New York Times ....................................................................................... 37  2.3.3.San Francisco Chronicle ......................................................................... 40  2.3.4.The Washington Times............................................................................. 41 

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

2.3.5.Conclusion ............................................................................................... 43  3.  Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 44  4.  Works Cited .................................................................................................... 47  4.1.  Primary sources .............................................................................................. 47  New York Times ................................................................................................ 49  San Francisco Chronicle .................................................................................. 55  The Washington Times...................................................................................... 57  4.2.  Secondary sources........................................................................................... 59   

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

1.

Introduction

“Lotus Revolution” (Egypt State Information Service1), “18-Day Revolution” (Armbruster 2011), “Nile Revolution” (Murdock February 8, 2011), “Facebook Revolution” (Herrera February 12, 2011) – what happened in Egypt at the beginning of 2011 was given many different titles. Some even call it “the most unexpected development in modern Egyptian history” (Sharp 2011b: 2). After 18 days of protests in Cairo and other cities all over Egypt, the Egyptian people made their President Hosni Mubarak resign. He had been ruling the country for almost 30 years and his people wanted to get rid of him and his regime. That was their goal and that is what they achieved. Of course there were international reactions to the uprisings from all over the world. “Numerous press reports […] have recounted feelings of popular empowerment and pride inspired by the exploits of Egypt’s young protesters” (Sharp 2011b: 5). During the revolution, European leaders urged “Egypt’s transition to a new government” at the beginning of February (Murdock February 4), while China blocked the word “Egypt” from a twitter-like micro blogging website, according to Associated Press (quoted by Al Jazeera 2011).Further, when considering recent developments in Libya and Syria, other Middle Eastern countries seem to be inspired by the revolutions in both Tunisia and Egypt. After Mubarak had stepped down on February 11, the reactions were even stronger – “Today, we are all Egyptians”, stated Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and David Cameron suggested “We should teach the Egyptian revolution in our schools” (ESIS 2011). However, the United States seem to keep a particularly eager eye on the most populous country of the Middle East. Souad Mekhennet, New York Times and ZDF correspondent, states in an interview with the German medium magazine that “curiously, the American media reacted much faster than the European” when it comes to reporting about the Egyptian revolution (Milz 2011: 20). Moreover, she adds that the large US

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

media outlets’ reporting on the topic is “much more continuous and broader” (ibid.), giving a lot more background information on the region. This special attention is most likely due to the fact that for the United States, Egypt is a highly important actor when it comes to foreign policy in the region. Egypt is, behind Israel, the second-largest recipient of military aid from the US (cf. Armbruster 2011: 48), receiving an annual amount of $1.3 billion (Sharp 2011b: preface). To the United States, this form of support “has long been framed as an investment in regional stability […], sustaining the March 1979 Egyp                                                             1

 Abbreviated ESIS from this point onwards

1 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

tian-Israeli peace treaty” (ibid.). With the fall of Mubarak the United States saw this stability crumbling. Ever since the “Greater Middle East Initiative” was introduced by George W. Bush in 2005, the United States has been trying to export democracy to other Arab countries, including Egypt (Armbruster 2011: 48). However, when the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist party, managed to reach a relatively high percentage of votes in Egyptian elections, the US backed off again because “they preferred Mubarak over the feared Brotherhood” (ibid). Hosni Mubarak was long considered a stalwart ally to the US and during the revolution, when Mubarak’s reign was close to over, it was uncertain which system and which people would follow the President. The United States feared that Egypt might become an anti-American Islamic state, ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood (cf. Sharp 2009: 12). On the other hand, democracy is a concept that has always been promoted by the United States and it would have felt wrong to them not to support it in Egypt when people are demonstrating for it. For these reasons, the United States government was facing a dilemma when confronted with the uprisings in Egypt. Should they support Mubarak or the people in the streets? This was one of the most discussed aspects in various news reports at that time and will be the main focus of this analysis. One problem when looking at the Western way of reporting such events is that stereotypes and prejudices can often get in the way of suitable and just reporting. Ulrich Kienzle, an expert when it comes to reporting from and about the Middle East, recalls in the German medium magazin that the revolution at first seems “typically Egyptian” to him (Kienzle 2011: 25). “I thought the demonstrators would smash everything for two or three days, venting their anger, and then back down again. As always” (ibid.). However, that was not the case and many Western journalists, Middle East experts and politicians were taken by surprise by the fact that the protests just did not stop. “Very often, clichés are stronger than reality – also among correspondents”, says Kiezle. Not being able to maintain the journalistic objectivity actually required when reporting on such an event, is not an uncommon problem. Michael Schudson starts his book Discovering the news with

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

the sentence “American Journalism has been regularly criticized for failing to be ‘objective’” (1987: 3). However, the question is whether it is even possible to produce a news text which is completely objective. “Letting the news speak for themselves also produces news reports which are evaluative and judgmental” (Harrison 2008: 39). This is based on the fact that journalists are almost free to decide which news coming from which source are going to be in the text and which are not. Therefore, the selection alone of what is considered newsworthy, contributes to a newspaper article never being completely objective. 2 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

Nonetheless, this study is more concerned with the political bias US newspapers are said to have and carry through their news reporting. Many papers are said to lean towards the liberal or conservative side and this is reflected in their reporting. This study investigates whether this also holds true for US coverage on the Egyptian revolution of 2011. How did the US print media depict the 2011 revolution in Egypt? Are there any differences in reporting within the media landscape? This study aims at answering these questions by looking at four newspapers from the United States and their news coverage throughout the 18 days of the revolution in Egypt2. Of course, these problems with biased media outlets are not only to be found in the United States. As Danuta Reah states about the press in the United Kingdom, “[t]he problem of bias in the press is not a matter of who, or of what system, is supported. The problem is that the bias exists [...]” (2002: preface). Even so, as the relationship between the United States and Egypt is particularly tense due to the reasons explained above, this research aims at looking at US print media rather than any other country’s press. The medium chosen for this analysis are newspapers. Although the number of people who read a newspaper on a daily basis has decreased strongly in the last years due to the development of Internet news platforms, tablet PCs and smartphones, newspapers are, indeed, not an extinct species. Especially when it comes to features, profiles, or just extensive news reports, newspapers are still highly respected by people looking for news and information (Linden 2010:12). According to Linden, the Internet often serves as a direct news informant, delivering the most important information fast, direct and impersonal, while newspapers have enough room to produce background stories (ibid.). Danuta Reah even takes it a step further, stating that newspapers “present the reader with aspects of the news, and present it often in a way that intends to guide the ideological stance of the reader” (Reah 2002: 50). Of course it would also be interesting to investigate different broadcasting stations delivering news about the revolution in Egypt. However, newspaper articles are easier to access from any country in the world.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

In addition to that, one can expect to find a greater variability of reporting in newspapers than e.g. on TV, due to the fact that print journalists can work and research undercover more easily, while TV journalists often have to rely on wire reports or pictures from other stations. That would probably have led to the problem of a lot of TV stations showing the same pictures about the revolution, which would have made a comparison rather difficult.

                                                             2

A more thorough description of the methodology can be found in chapter 1.3.

3 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

The following chapter gives an overview of the 2011 revolution in Egypt. It is important to understand the background and the development of this ‘homegrown’ revolution. Therefore, the reasons for the Egyptian people to demonstrate against their country’s regime are outlined and followed by a relatively detailed chronology of events.  

1.1.

The 2011 Egyptian revolution

Strictly speaking, the 2011 revolution in Egypt already started on June 7, 2010. That day, a young man named Khaled Said was heavily beaten up by policemen in Alexandria, resulting in numerous fractures of his face and skull that led to his death (Armbruster 2011: 17). “The events leading to Khaled’s killing originated when he supposedly posted a video of two police officers allegedly dividing the spoils of a drug bust” (Herrera February 12, 2011). That kind of citizen journalism was the only way for young Egyptians to react to their corrupt guardians of the law (ibid.). The state-ruled media outlets were highly corrupt and biased. After beating him to death, the Alexandrian police told everyone Khaled Said was a drug addict who died because he swallowed a pack of drugs. Although everyone knew that was a lie, the policemen never even had to justify themselves in court. “That’s the way things are in authoritarian Egypt” (Armbruster 2011: 17.). However, Khaled Said and his tragic brutal death were not forgotten, especially not among the members of Egypt’s young Internet generation. The facebook group “We are all Khaled Said” started distributing pictures of Said’s smashed face and connected with other oppositional groups, such as “Kefaya”3, the “April 6 movement”, the “Socialist Revolutionaries”, the “Muslim Brotherhood” (Egypt State Information Service 2011) and the “National Association for Change” founded by Nobel Peace Prize holder Mohammed El-Baradei (Armbruster 2011: 17) in order to plan a “Day of Rage4, a march against ‘Torture, Corruption, Poverty and Unemployment’ for January 25, 2011” (Herrera February 12, 2011). The opposition groups did not chose this day by chance, for January 25 is also the day chosen by the Egyptian government to honor and celebrate EgypCopyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

tian police (ibid.). One could say that Khaled Said’s death was only the tip of the iceberg to the young Egyptians. They had numerous reasons to be enraged about the living conditions in their country. Approximately 20 percent of Egypt’s 80 million inhabitants live in poverty and “international estimates suggest that up to 40 percent of Egyptians live on less than $2 a                                                              3

Translates to ‘enough’ (Armbruster 2011: 48)  In numerous other sources, the Day of Rage is referred to as the Day of Revolt, which is why these two terms are used interchangeably in this study.  

4

4 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

day” (Sharp 2009: 21). The only people who were able to live in prosperity during the years of Mubarak’s reign were military generals and high-ranked officers. “In Egypt, it is an open secret that not all of [the military aid from the United States] was invested in the military budget” but went in their private pockets (Armbruster 2011: 36). In addition to living in poverty, about 30 percent of all Egyptians are illiterate, due to an underdeveloped education system (Armbruster 2011: 26). According to the 2004 Arab Human Development Report, submissiveness is drummed into the students’ brains. “There are hardly any possibilities for free thinking and criticism. All they do is learning things by heart” (ibid.). One reason for the violence and attacks of policemen is the so-called Emergency Law, which “was imposed during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War and […] has been continuously extended, every three years since 1981” (ESIS 2011). The law extends police powers, suspends constitutional rights and legalizes censorship (ibid.). Among other reasons, it was due to this law that “[i]nternational human rights organizations have […] documented instances of torture, arbitrary detainment, and discrimination against women, homosexuals and Coptic Christians in Egypt” numerous times (Sharp 2009: 24). The Emergency Law is not an exception to the rule, as independent analysts claimed the Egyptian legal system to be “a labyrinth of codes and procedures that can be twisted to the state’s benefit when necessary” (Sharp 2009: 9). Moreover, Transparency International, a global organization fighting corruption, rates Egypt as being one of the most corrupt countries of the Middle East. On the global list, the country is ranked 115th out of 180 (Armbruster 2011: 25). Last but not least, the Parliamentary elections of 2010, resulting in the National Democratic Party (NDP, Mubarak’s party) winning 95 percent of the seats, also triggered “feelings of frustration and disillusionment amongst the public” (ESIS 2011). It further proves observations that “the Mubarak government has tightened its grip on power and cracked down on domestic opponents” over the course of the last years (Sharp 2009: 9). For these reasons, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians took to the streets on Jan-

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

uary 25, in Cairo, Alexandria and other cities all over Egypt (Armbruster 2011: 17). The demonstrations “came out in far greater numbers than initially envisioned” (Sharp 2011a: 2). The protesters were not only young and Internet-savvy Egyptians, but people of all age groups and professions – students who know they have no real future and will probably never get a well-paid job; engineers who have to work as part-time taxi drivers in order to earn enough money to get their families through the day; newspaper editors and reporters wanting to write and publish what they really and truly think; and simply Egyptians who are sick of bribing civil servants to get a certificate of any kind (Arm5 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

bruster 2011: 25). “They all have one goal: Mubarak and his system have to go. Otherwise things cannot get better” (ibid: 18). The demonstrations on January 25 remained largely peaceful, however, “The official Middle East News Agency [reported] three protesters killed and 49 wounded in Cairo and Suez” (ESIS 2011). Despite the fact that Hosni Mubarak tried to stop the oppositional groups by greatly suspending Internet and text-messaging services (ibid.), demonstrations continued over the next few days and on Friday, January 28, the peacefulness of the demonstrations came to an end when “hundreds of thousands of protesters throughout the country clashed with riot police and central security forces” (Sharp 2011a: 2). In Cairo alone, an estimated 100,000 people filled the streets and Tahrir Square (ibid.). The Ministry of the Interior had given the security forces the order to get rid of the protesters at whatever cost. The police threw grenades of tear gas and beat the demonstrators with rubber clubs. There were even some snipers placed around Tahrir Square. “The demonstrators responded by throwing bricks and forming barricades, setting police cars and police stations on fire” (Armbruster 2011: 20). They plundered the National Democratic Party’s headquarters (ESIS 2011), never stepping aside from their initial demand – “We won’t leave Tahrir Square until Mubarak has stepped back” (Armbruster 2011: 21). While Egyptian officials reported only three deaths that day, Human Rights Watch announced 26 lives lost (Armbruster 2011: 21-23). Finally, the police, overwhelmed by the protesters’ resistance, surrendered and the army was deployed, warmly embraced by the protesters (Sharp 2011a: 3). After the chaos caused by the police, the army tried to secure the city again, placing tanks all around Tahrir Square (Armbruster 2011: 22). However, some “speculated that the withdrawal of police from urban areas was a deliberate policy by the government, a scare tactic intended to sow chaos in order to remind Egyptians that a strongman like Mubarak is needed (Sharp 2011a: 3). A hint to that accusation is provided by the fact that on January 28, thousands of prison inmates all over Egypt were freed by armed forces breaking into the prisons, setting free “Islamist extremists, many

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

violent criminals, rapists and men sentenced for terrorism” (Armbruster 2011: 22). Freeing criminals to destabilize the protesters seems to be a very common tactic for dictators like Mubarak, as Saddam Hussein had done it before in 2002 and Muammar Gaddafi was about to do the same later in February 2011 (ibid: 23). The next day, January 29, President Mubarak gave a speech, announcing he would dissolve his government and a little later he appointed Ahmed Suleiman, Chief of Intelligence, as his Vice President (ESIS 2011). He was the first vice president ever appointed during the reign of Mubarak (Sharp 2011a: 3). However, the demonstrators were 6 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

not satisfied, for they did not want small concessions but a whole new system in their country. Indeed, “[t]he moves failed to calm public anger, and the weekend of January 29-30 witnessed looting, protests and near-total chaos” (ibid.). However, the army stated on January 31 that “it would not use force against Egyptians” and peaceful demonstrations (Sharp 2011a: 5). One day earlier, the international community had stepped in, with Britain, France and Germany issuing a joint statement, urging Mubarak to allow the “democratic transformation process” to happen, starting by allowing free elections (ESIS 2011). Also, “US President Barack Obama [told] Mubarak he should take concrete steps to honor his commitments to reform” (ibid.). “On Tuesday, February 1, an estimated quarter of a million protesters turned out in downtown Cairo for the 8th consecutive day of public protest against the rule of Hosni Mubarak” (Sharp 2011a: 6). Many of them were practically living on Tahrir Square by now – setting up toilets, tents, and even keeping the square clean with brooms and by picking up garbage (Armbruster 2011: 31). However, the most striking thing is probably how the army acted around the protesters. “Children are playing on the tanks surrounding Tahrir Square, demonstrators and soldiers are sharing their drinking water. One could think the army has switched sides” describes Jörg Armbruster (2011: 32). When Hosni Mubarak delivered a speech later that day, promising he would not run for the next presidential term in the upcoming September elections, the crowd was enraged (ESIS 2011), chanting “leave” and “we are not leaving” (Sharp 2011a: 6). The next day, massive clashes took place again on Tahrir Square between Mubarak supporters and demonstrators. Jeremy M. Sharp describes it the following, “In what appeared to be an orchestrated show of force, a huge crowd of proMubarak strongmen, some riding on horses and camels, stormed Tahrir Square […] and attacked anti-government protesters with metal rods, stones and sticks. A storm of stones rained down on both sides of the battle, as participants tore metal sheeting from nearby construction sites and shops for protection” (2011a: 7).

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Horses and camels are political symbols for Mubarak’s National Democratic Party (Armbruster 2011: 34), enriching the assumption that many of the pro-Mubarak fighters were government-instructed and paid men willing to use violence on the one hand and also some of the freed prison inmates on the other. Some others accused them of being policemen in plain clothes (cf. Sharp 2011a: 7). The Egyptian government heavily denied these charges (ESIS 2011). The army surrounding Tahrir Square did not do anything but watch the fights. “Supposedly they had the order of just waiting and watching how the battle was unfolding” (Armbruster 2011: 34). Finally, on February 3, the fights 7 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

were over and the pro-Mubarak fighters stepped back. It was not until then that the military helped the protesters on Tahrir Square. “Apparently, the army did switch sides when it became clear that Mubarak’s recruited thugs would not be able to remove the demonstrators (ibid.: 36). The same day, Vice President Omar Suleiman tried to talk to the protesters, promising them Mubarak’s son wouldn’t candidate in the upcoming elections either (Sharp 2011a: 8). Hosni Mubarak himself “claimed that if he resigned now, chaos would ensue” (ibid.). However, that did not satisfy the protesters, they were determined to stay, at whatever cost. The next day, Human Rights Watch reported three hundred people dead since the beginning of the protests on January 25 (Armbruster 2011: 35). In the following days, “[t]he regime [crumbled] under the pressure” (ESIS 2011). On February 6, state television reported that the government had decided to abolish the Emergency Law and “banks and law courts, closed since January 27, [opened]” (ibid.). However, protesters were still not content. Record numbers of people flooded Tahrir Square after “Wael Ghonim, a young Google executive who had been detained by authorities for 12 days” was released on February 9 (Sharp 2011a: 10). He, who revealed being the founder of the facebook group “We are all Khaled Said”, gave moving speeches on television, renewing the people’s anger on Tahrir Square (ibid.). On February 10, a military general stepped onto Tahrir Square, telling the demonstrators that all of their demands would be fulfilled, President Mubarak would hold a speech later that day to tell them everything (Armbruster 2011: 44). However, when Mubarak announced that even though he would hand over his powers to Vice President Suleiman, he would not step back and leave Egypt until he was “buried in the ground” (Sharp 2011a: 10), “catcalls started going off on Tahrir Square” (Armbruster 2011: 45). The demonstrators were disappointed, angry and mad. Nevertheless, they remained calm and peaceful, claiming, “we will stay” (ibid.). They would have to wait one more day. On February 11, the demonstrators were marching towards the President’s Palace in Heliopolis, some of them were blocking the “headquarters of lies”, as they titled the Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Egyptian state television (ESIS 2011), when they learned Mubarak had left his palace with a helicopter (Armbruster 2011: 52). Around 5 p.m. “Vice President Suleiman announced that President Mubarak had resigned and the Supreme/Higher Council of the Egyptian Armed Forces had taken control of the country” (Sharp 2011a: 11). After setting a historical basis in this chapter, the following section will now turn to the four newspapers considered in this analysis.  

 

8 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

1.2.

The papers

The papers chosen for the analysis are The Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the San Francisco Chronicle and The Washington Times. In the following section, the four papers are briefly presented and it is explained why they were considered suitable for the analysis at hand. The Wall Street Journal is a nationally published daily newspaper (excluding Sundays), printed in New York City. It is considered “one of the world’s most respected print newspaper[s]…” (Franklin 2008: 4) and has a circulation of 2,177,7915, which makes it the biggest newspaper in the United States by circulation. However, one has to take into account that this figure includes about 414,000 paid subscribers for The Wall Street Journal’s electronic edition, “including its Web site and other systems like the Kindle” (Plambeck 2010). This is particularly important because “most newspapers do not charge for their Web sites and their online readership is not included in the circulation bureau’s calculation” (ibid.). The Wall Street Journal is famous for its extensive economy and stock market section, also reflected by the paper’s name. It “primarily covers US and international business, and financial news and issues” (Shepherd 2011: 114). This study will therefore also investigate whether this focus on economic topics somehow influenced the coverage of the revolution in Egypt. The paper is considered very influential both internationally and nationally and has won 33 Pulitzer Prizes to this date (ibid.). In a 2005 report on media bias in the United States published in The Quarterly Journal of Economics, The Wall Street Journal was found to be the most liberal of all news outlets that were measured in the study. Groseclose and Milyo developed a special score ranking from 0 to 100 with 0 being conservative and 100 being liberal. The Wall Street Journal reached a score of 85.1 (Groseclose, Milyo 2005: 1212). However, the two re-

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

searchers seem surprised by these findings, noting that “this estimate […] refers only to the news of The Wall Street Journal; we omitted all data that came from its editorial page. If we included data from the editorial page, surely it would appear more conservative” (ibid). In addition to that, the study was carried out before Rupert Murdoch was able to “win control” (Franklin 2008: 4) over the Journal. Rupert Murdoch is widely known for other media outlets presenting a very conservative view, such as Fox News (cf. Groseclose,                                                              5

 Unless not marked differently, all circulation numbers are taken from the Audit Bureau of Circulation 2011.

9 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Milyo 2005) and is often accused of using his media outlets for distributing a conservative worldview. However, when confronted with the concerns regarding The Wall Street Journal, Murdoch responded in an editorial published on August 1, 2007, that he “intended to maintain the values and integrity of the Journal” (Shepherd 2011: 122). However, it will be interesting to see if the content analyzed in this study hints at a more liberal or conservative slant and if so, which genres particularly reflect a certain bias. It will also be of interest to investigate if the editorial pages convey a different picture than the news stories, as suggested by the study carried out by Groseclose and Milyo. The New York Times, with a circulation of 916,911 on weekdays, is on rank three of the US’s biggest newspapers. It has, however, the highest circulation on Sundays, selling more than 1.3 million copies. The paper’s nickname is “The Gray Lady” due to its longstanding position in the news business and because “it was one of the last newspapers to adopt color photography” (Shepherd 2011: 87). The paper was founded in 1851 and is therefore the oldest newspaper of all four used in this analysis. The New York Times received 104 Pulitzer Prizes, outdoing any other news organization (ibid.). The paper is said to have a political bias in their news reporting towards the Democratic Party. One example for that is the Bay of Pigs invasion in the 1960s, where the Times helped to downplay the disastrous story in cooperation with the Kennedy administration (cf. Schudson 1978: 172). The sentiment of the New York Times reporting in favor of the Democrats has survived until to today. Most scholars see this proven in politically charged times and not only in the editorial section but also in the news stories that are supposed to be politically objective. Neil Weinberg, for instance, editorial writer at Forbes, notes in an article in 2010 that “perhaps it’s pure coincidence that a little over a week before readers go to the polls to decide the fate of Congress, the liberal [New York] Times [leads] with stories that just happen to paint [its] owners’ political foes as buying the election” Additionally, the study on media bias by Groseclose and Milyo also places the New York Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Times near the liberal end of the scale, giving it a score of 73.7 (2005: 1211). In 2004, a piece by the newspaper’s public editor at the time, Daniel Okrent, was published, in which he stated that the New York Times had a liberal bias when it comes to certain social issues like same-sex marriages. “He claimed that this bias reflected the paper’s cosmopolitanism, which arose naturally from its roots as a hometown paper of New York City” (Shepherd 2011: 95).

10 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

San Francisco Chronicle’s weekday circulation is 235,350, putting the paper on the list of the 25 biggest newspapers in the United States. Around the west coast, the paper is seen as an icon of the region. Even though it is primarily focused on the San Francisco Bay Area, it is “distributed throughout Northern and Central California” and also maintains a bureau in Washington, DC (Shepherd 2011: 99-101). However, due to the media crisis of the last years, the Chronicle’s readers have been increasingly disappointed by the loss of quality, which makes them reach for the New York Times more and more often (Lindner, Knop 2009). Just like the Times, the San Francisco Chronicle is considered politically liberal and is the largest newspaper in Northern California (ibid.). Its nickname is therefore “The Voice of the West” (Shepherd 2011: 99). It was very important that the analysis investigated at least one newspaper which is not based in the east of the United States in order to add some regional balance to the analysis. The Washington Times’ circulation is very hard to determine since “[t]he paper stopped reporting to the Audit Bureau of Circulation in 2008” (Shapira 2010). At that point, the paper’s weekday circulation was 86,710. Times executives claim The Washington Times has a current circulation of 42,000 copies (ibid.). However, one can say that The Washington Times is the smallest paper by circulation considered in this study. Additionally, it is also the youngest one. The paper was founded by Reverend Sun Myung Moon of the Unification Church in 1982 and is often said to be “a mouthpiece for Moon’s religious movement […] or, at best, a public relations outlet for conservative values and the Republican Party” (Ahrens 2002). In Groseclose and Milyo’s 2005 report on media bias in the United States, The Washington Times was ranked the most conservative news outlet out of 20 (cf. 2005: 15). After presenting the newspapers, it becomes obvious that they vary in size, region, and, probably most importantly, in political affinities. Now it is interesting to find out if these differences influence the way of reporting of the papers. This study attempts to find out whether the political slant the papers are often accused of having is reflected in the covCopyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

erage on the Egyptian revolution of 2011. The following section provides an overview of how the material used for this analysis was researched and organized and how the analysis is pursued in the further course of the study.

11 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

1.3 Methodology Before starting to analyze the different articles, it was important to define the time frame to be covered in this study. As mentioned above, the revolution is technically rooted in June 2010 and cannot really be declared completed until the parliamentary elections in November have taken place and the country starts over with a new government (cf. Sharp 2011b: 3). This study, however, is only concerned with the time frame from January 25, the “Day of Revolt” to February 11, the “Friday of Departure” (cf. Armbruster 2011). As this study deals with print media, implying a time period of one day for the paper to be printed and published, the time frame chosen and analyzed is January 26 to February 12 20116. The next step was to search for articles published within this time frame in the four papers chosen for the research. Using the search database LexisNexis, all articles in the four papers that include the word ‘Egypt’ were selected. The search was kept very vague in order to not miss any article that might be important for the matter. After that, the total of 615 findings were categorized according to their genres and content – this time the selection was conducted very strictly, so that only the articles really concerned with the revolution itself and therefore suitable for the analysis would remain. The three genres picked for analysis are the editorial, the news story and the letter to the editor7. However, due to the fact that every newspaper has a different structure and might therefore place the news stories on different pages and in different sections of the paper, only the news stories appearing on the papers’ front pages during the 18-day time period were considered in the analysis, meaning all articles carrying an ‘A1’ in the section line. Some newspapers in the United States tend to start articles on one page and end them on another, maybe not even continuous page. Regardless of whether the complete article was printed on the front page or whether it just started on the first page and continued somewhere else in the paper, it was still included in the analysis. This in par-

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

ticular holds true for the articles taken from the New York Times since the articles printed on A1 are all very long and it seems unlikely that two, or sometimes three, complete stories would fit on one page as a whole. Front page stories are supposed to attract the                                                              6

Since all articles (including all editorials, news stories and letters to the editor) analyzed were published in the year 2011, the parenthetical citation gives the exact date of publication for reasons of better visibility. 7

 A short overview of the three genres and a more thorough explanation as to why they were picked for the analysis can be found in chapter 2. 12 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

reader’s attention and were considered newsworthy, relevant and appealing enough by the editors to represent the paper when it is on display. Concerning the following analysis, many different factors have to be taken into account. One of them is the principle of selectivity. According to Timothy E. Cook, selectivity in news reporting can lead to bias when “day in and day out, certain kinds of political actors, political stories and political issues become more covered and more favorably reported than others” (1997: 87). In the present case, one can assume that the central topic – the Egyptian revolution – will be the same in every article. However, there are many different angles from which one can look at the revolution and it is examined whether some angles are preferred by specific newspapers. Following Cook’s thoughts on selectivity, it will also be interesting to see if some newspapers tend to always quote the same experts for their articles. If so, this might be an indication of onesided reporting. Another aspect to consider is the choice of words. Peter Linden states that “just the sound of a word alone can create and influence a reader’s feelings and can set free associations in the reader’s mind” (2008: 21). This choice of words also plays a significant role in the headline of a news story. Especially since this analysis deals with front page articles, the headline is not only supposed to sum up the story and grab the reader’s attention for the article, but it should also “attract the reader to the paper” (Reah 2002: 13). Some headlines, according to Allan Bell, also “focus on a secondary event or a detail” (1991: 189). In these cases, the headline puts another emphasis on the news story and can “re-weigh the news values” (ibid). It is necessary to note, however, that not all aspects are thoroughly analyzed in every genre and every article. It has to be considered, for example, that the headline is probably not as important in the letter section as in the news articles and that the source of information plays a minor role in the editorials than in the news stories. The newspa-

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

pers are looked at en bloc in each article and the analysis will show whether some kind of ‘red thread’ is recognizable in the different genres.

13 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

2.

Analysis

In the following, the four newspapers picked for this study are analyzed based on their articles on the 2011 revolution in Egypt. Since the research is concerned with three different genres, first of all, the genres are briefly presented to give an overview of what is characteristic for the genres and why they are an important part of newspaper business and newspaper reporting. Previous studies and claims by scholars are presented and taken into account when analyzing the articles.  

2.1.

Editorial

Karin Wahl-Jorgensen stresses the importance of the editorial as follows: “[t]he editorial and op-ed […] pages are central to a newspaper’s identity. They are the only place in the paper where journalists are authorized to express opinion, often guided by the political leanings of the newspaper.” (2008: 70) The main difference between a commentary and the editorial is that in a commentary the single personality of the author with all his or her feelings and thoughts on a special matter is represented. In an editorial, on the other hand, the writer basically represents the newspaper’s opinion on the matter. The journalist, as an individual, is not of high importance, which is also why editorials do not usually give the author’s name. Of course, one can never fully detach from one’s own thoughts but in the editorial, the writer is not representing himself as a person but serves as the newspaper’s voice. This is also the reason why the editorial was chosen over the commentary in this analysis at hand. The aim of the study is to compare four different newspapers and not the journalists employed at these papers. Therefore, the editorial is the much more suitable choice. Although there is this very important distinction to be made, an editorial is an opinion piece and follows the same guidelines and difficulties as any other commentary. Any form of opinion journalism is based on the factor of perspective. If one wants to

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

comment on an event like the Egyptian revolution, one must not be too personally involved in the matter. Peter Linden states that, only the journalist (or in this case, the paper) “with a healthy level of detachment, can draw conclusions, form connections to other possible outcomes and judge and evaluate about what is going on” (2008: 80). However, besides keeping this personal distance, the writer has to be emotionally touched or moved by the events he or she is commenting on, because “without any emotion, there’s no motivation to comment on something” (ibid.). Opinion pieces also help to include the reader in the discussion and therefore the editorial writers have to be clear 14 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

about what they want to express. The sharper the theses are, the more likely the reader is to get engaged in the discussion and to at least think about what his or her personal opinion on the matter might be (cf. Linden 2010: 5). Taking all these points into account, one can see that it can be very tricky for editorial staff writers to find the right balance in their editorials. This chapter now turns to the four papers in question to see how they overcame this difficult task.  

2.1.1. The Wall Street Journal The Wall Street Journal contributes seven editorials to this analysis. The first one was published January 28 and the last one February 12, 2011. Each of them except one (The Clash February 3) 8 either carries “Egypt” or “Mubarak” in the headline so that the reader knows immediately what the editorial is dealing with. The texts are very factual, giving a lot of background information on what is going on and how these uprisings have developed over time. Since the editorial writers had a lot of space for their pieces (the editorials are an average of 750 words long, making them the longest editorials of all in this analysis), they added a lot of information to the texts one would rather expect to find in a regular news story. Of course this creates a positive effect because the readers feel informed and are not just confronted with an opinion coming out of nowhere. A well-prepared argumentation also increases the reliability and the seriousness of a newspaper. Most of the editorials even start with the news hook, confronting the reader with the newest developments on which the editorials are based. All editorials except one (The Clash February 3) also mention the Obama administration and the dilemma the US government is facing in Egypt. Most of them do not seem to approve of the Obama administration, proving true to the theory that The Wall Street Journal’s editorials convey a more conservative opinion, supporting the Republi-

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

can Party. In the first editorial, published on January 28, it is said that “perhaps we would not be faced with this choice in Egypt if we had done more than nothing during Mr. Mubarak’s 30-year tenure to support efforts toward a real civil society and functioning political system there” (Egypt’s Choice).

                                                             8

 All editorials are cited by giving the first two to four words of the editorial's headline. According to accurate MLA style (7th ed.), the shortened headline would have to be put in quotation marks. However, due to reasons of better visibility, the quotation marks in the parentheses are left out. 

15 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

This seems to be a side blow to former President Bush’s Freedom Agenda, planning on ‘exporting’ democracy to the Middle East. The article suggests that, if politicians had stuck to this initiative, the dilemma would not be there right now. Another editorial questions the rightfulness of “foreign policy realism” (Egypt and the Realists February 2) – realism being a form of political course Barack Obama is known to follow. In “Hamas, the Brotherhood and Egypt”, the writer also defends President Bush against his critics, saying that “it was with good reason that President Bush sought to promote liberaldemocratic openings throughout the Arab world” (February 4) and that February 12 is also “a day to note that George W. Bush was the President who broke with the foreign policy establishment and declared that Arabs deserve political freedom” (Egypt After Mubarak February 12). Mentioning some events and speeches of the past (“We recall that in 2005 President Bush…” (Egypt’s Choice January 28), “No less than President George W. Bush put it this way in 2003” (Egypt and the Realist February 2) makes people think back to the times of the Bush administration. Since only positive speeches by Bush are mentioned, people are supposed to be reminded of the former President in a positive fashion. Overall, it seems that The Wall Street Journal refrains from criticizing the Obama administration directly but rather does it by praising the efforts and achievements by the Bush administration completed earlier. Thereby, the criticism is not as direct and blunt but comes along in a more subtle, smooth and friendly way.  

2.1.2. New York Times During the time period investigated in this analysis, the New York Times published six editorials on the Egyptian revolution. The first one appeared on January 27 and the last one was published February 12. The average length of the editorials is 550 words. The editorials are, overall, very factual. Descriptions of what is going on in the

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

streets are only found in one editorial, talking about “men armed with clubs, rocks, knives and firebombs” (Egypt’s Agonies February 4). Other than that, the words written only paint a very vague picture of the revolution, leaving a lot of room for the reader to imagine what the demonstrations and fights might look like. The editorials also provide a lot of background information, be it about Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution and Egypt’s poverty problems (Mr. Mubarak January 27), the effects on the rest of the Middle East (Washington and Mr. Mubarak January 29), Egypt’s vice president Omar Suleiman, to whom a whole editorial is devoted (Mr. Suleiman February 9), and last but not least on 16 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

the US-Egyptian relation, including the annual amount of military aid given to Egypt by the United States. This is mentioned in four out of six editorials and reflects a very professional way of reporting, even if it occurs in an editorial. The New York Times enables every reader to understand the background stories of what is happening and why. The reader is able to grab the most important pieces of information even though he or she might not even read the Times every day. In all six editorials, both the United States and the effects of the Egyptian revolution are mentioned and the latter is, by part, also explained in the texts. This is probably done so that the American readership can understand why the revolution in Egypt is of importance for the United States as well and why they should therefore also care about it. The New York Times also makes it very clear that the United States have a huge influence on what is happening in Egypt. In the editorial on February 2, talking about Mubarak’s announcement not to run for re-election again, it is said that “Mr. Mubarak spoke after President Obama’s special envoy urged him not to run again” (Beyond Mubarak). In the very first editorial, there is a slight side blow against former President George W. Bush and his policies. It is said that “President Obama was right to move beyond his predecessor’s ‘democracy’ agenda built around military intervention and empty rhetoric” (Mr. Mubarak January 27). Other examples can be found, showing that the New York Times is supportive of the Obama administration, e.g. “President Obama is right to take pains to avoid […]” (Beyond Mubarak February 2), “President Obama said the right thing […]” (Mr Suleiman’s February 9). The Times also defends the administration against critics by using the stylistic device of argument anticipation in the editorial of February 2. It states that “[c]ritics here and in Egypt have complained […]. Balancing national security concerns against moral responsibilities is never pretty” (Beyond Mubarak). The paper is acting like the administration’s advocate in a way. The New York Times seems to want to tell their readers to be patient with the government and to be patient with decisions because the Obama administration is going through a hard time. Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Still, in the editorial of February 9, it is stated that the United States and the European Union “badly miscalculated when they endorsed Egypt’s vice president, Omar Suleiman, to lead the transition to democracy” (Mr. Suleiman’s). Thus, although the general feeling is that the New York Times supports the Obama administration and its way of handling the crisis, it is still well able to express criticism when holding a different opinion. The author(s) use(s) a large amount of personal pronouns in the editorials to create a kind of community spirit and to show that the New York Times is part of the Ameri17 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

can people, that it is not above but among all the other US-citizens. This direct inclusion can be found in every single editorial (“we won’t try to game […]” (Washington and Mr. Mubarak January 29), “we are skeptical […]” (Beyond Mubarak February 2), “we fear Mr. Mubarak is planning […]” (Egypt’s Agonies February 4)). In some, it is even the first word of the text; “We sympathize with the […]” (Mr. Mubarak January 27), “We are a long way from knowing […]” (Mr. Suleiman’s February 9). Another aspect stands out in the category of word choice. Many times, the writers choose to use the term “Liberation Square” instead of “Tahrir Square” (Beyond Mubarak February 2), (Mr. Suleiman’s February 9) or even use both terms in one sentence (Egypt’s Agonies February 4). One could interpret this as a sign set by the paper, signaling that the New York Times believes in the liberation of the Egyptians. The word triggers positive thoughts about the revolution and suggests freedom is actually located in this square in Cairo. Apart from that very emotional and direct way of presenting things, the New York Times manages to stay rational and does not only cheer full of joy when Mubarak finally steps down, but also raises some skepticism. It is stated that they “felt anxiety about the news that a council of military leaders will now run the country” (Egypt’s Moment February 12). That, again, shows that the New York Times editorial board wants to express that they are well able to see the bigger picture and do not just see the good or the bad side in things happening.

2.1.3. San Francisco Chronicle During the 18-day revolution in Egypt, the San Francisco Chronicle published six editorials dealing with the subject. The first one appeared on Thursday, January 27, two days after the Day of Revolt, the last one on Saturday, February 12. The average number of words is about 340. The general sentiments that come across in all editorials are a huge admiration for the protesters in Egypt and an aversion towards Mubarak and his way of handling the Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

demonstrations. The protests are described by using phrases such as “a week of inspired street protests” (A step closer February 2), “the events in Egypt are nothing short of miraculous” (Egypt’s 18-day revolution February 12) and they are even called “the epitome of a people’s revolution” (Mubarak – he’s not listening February 11). On the other hand, there is Hosni Mubarak and his “harsh, autocratic government” (Egyptian unrest January 27) taking “barbaric attempt[s]” (A war against February 5) against the protesters. On February 11, the Chronicle calls Mubarak “delusional” (Mubarak – he’s not listening) and states further that “he’s not Egypt. Egypt belongs to the people in the streets […]” 18 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

(ibid.). Moreover, the speech he held that day was described as “rambling and insulting” (ibid.). All these adjectives and phrases help to convey a negative picture of Hosni Mubarak. He seems to be an unlikable and unteachably stubborn old man, unable to let go of power, even though “[t]he best thing for Mubarak to do is to step down, right now” (Mubarak – he’s not listening February 11). Another important aspect to note is the role of the United States in the Egyptian revolution. As mentioned before, policymakers in the US were facing a dilemma during the 18-day protests because they were unsure as to how to react towards Mubarak, who had been a longtime ally of the United States, especially because it remains unclear what or who will follow Mubarak after his resignation. However, the San Francisco Chronicle represents a clear standpoint in this matter, stating that “instead of helping Mubarak, Washington has to find a way to help the Egyptian people” (Egyptian unrest January 27) in the very first editorial on that matter. Throughout the editorials, the Chronicle sticks to this opinion, stating on February 12 that “as for the United States, we must encourage this transition [to democracy]” (Egypt’s 18-day revolution). Additionally, the only US government official quoted is Barack Obama (February 2 and February 12), affirming his support for the Egyptian people as follows: “’We hear your voices,’ President Obama said in a Tuesday message to the demonstrators. The transition ‘must begin now’” (A step closer February 2). No other US official is quoted, creating the impression that the US is very sure about having to support the demonstrators and not Hosni Mubarak. The San Francisco Chronicle makes it perfectly clear that it does not understand how one cannot fully support the protesters by stating that “out of cynical caution, most Western officials refused to fully embrace the protesters” (Egypt’s 18-day revolution February 12). Brian McNair, Professor of Journalism and Communication, states that editorials

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

can sometimes be “presented as the ‘voice of the reader’, and directed at policy-makers. Alternatively, they may be constructed as the calm, authoritative voice of the editor, viewing the political scene from a detached distance.” (qtd in Wahl-Jorgensen 2008: 73) In the case of the San Francisco Chronicle it becomes clear very quickly that the editorial is supposed to serve as the ‘voice of the reader’. In the February 5 editorial, dealing with the attacks on Western and Arabic journalists during the revolution, it says that “[i]t’s tough to feel neutral about a regime while watching your own countrymen be attacked by it” (A war against). Moreover, the paper appeals to the readers’ patriotism, 19 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

stating that “[t]he Egyptians were inspired by our own traditions of freedom and democracy. The least we can do is to help them make their dreams real.” (Egypt’s 18-day revolution February 12). In this example, the author uses words associated with the United States, like ‘freedom’, ‘democracy’, ‘dream’ (referring to the principle of the American Dream) so that the reader is reminded of his or her heritage and the responsibility that comes with it – to be somehow obliged to support democracy wherever possible. In all these examples, there is no detached distance recognizable whatsoever. Interestingly enough, the personal touch to the editorial seems to increase over the days. In the first editorial it is referred to the United States by saying “The United States can’t afford […]” and “Washington has to find a way […]” (Egyptian unrest January 27). In the last one the tone has changed to, “As for the United States, we must […]” and “[t]he least we can do” (Egypt’s 18-day revolution February 12).  

 

2.1.4. The Washington Times Six editorials dealing with the Egyptian revolution were published by The Washington Times between February 1 and February 11, 2011. They are all relatively lengthy, having an average word count of approximately 580. The editorials all deal with the Obama administration in a way and discuss the dangers and possibilities of the US government’s reaction to the revolution. Throughout all editorials, the Obama administration is described by use of many negative adjectives and phrases. President Obama and his government are called “feckless” (Obama channeling February 1), they seek “to ramp up” tension (Egypt’s blood February 3), they are provoking a new war in the Middle East (The next Mideast war February 7) and, by their behavior, they are helping the “America-hating Muslim Brotherhood” (Egypt’s blood February 3) to come to power in Egypt, which would mean “a radical Islamic takeover” (What’s next February 11).

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Curiously, if one takes a closer look at all editorials, it turns out that they all use the same arguments in each and every piece. They all mention the Muslim Brotherhood and call them “America-hating” (The next Mideast war February 7) and relate them to the words “jihad” (What’s next February 11) and “al Quaeda No. 2” (Obama channeling February 1). All these words trigger very negative associations, especially in American minds, since the United States particularly fear religious extremism due to the 9/11 attacks. Two articles even use the same quote by a brotherhood leader who is stated to have said that the Egyptians should “be prepared for a war against Israel” (Egypt’s blood 20 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

February 3). The topics of Israel and Iran come up in almost all of the editorials as well. It is stated that “[t]he worst-case scenario in Egypt is an Iran redux” (The Egyptians hate us February 2) and in the first editorial on February 1, it is explained in great detail what happened in Iran in 1979 and why this was bad for the United States (Obama channeling February 1). While the Muslim Brotherhood is presented in a very negative fashion, Hosni Mubarak is called “a 30-year partner of the United States, a man who has helped keep peace in the region and been a durable ally in the war on terrorism” (Egypt’s blood February 3) who always “lived up to expectations” (Obama proves February 8). The fact that Mubarak supposedly reigned his country like a dictator and the reasons why people are protesting in Egypt are completely omitted in the argumentation. It is interesting to note which sources are cited in the editorials to underline the paper’s point. First of all there is the former Vice President Dick Cheney, a Republican. He is quoted, claiming that Mubarak has been “a reliable U.S. ally” over the years and that the US government should not let him down (Obama proves February 8). Cheney is still a known personality in the political sphere and therefore serves as an “authoritative source” for the paper (Bell 1991: 191). In addition to that, Chris Matthews, an MSNBC journalist is quoted in the same editorial. He also stresses that Mubarak must be supported because “[y]ou treat your friends a certain way” (Obama proves February 8). In relation to that it is relevant to note that Chris Matthews is said to be politically conservative even though he works for MSNBC, a news outlet which is believed to be very liberal (S.A. 2005). The other people quoted in the editorials are government officials from the Obama administration, whose statements are, most of the time, accompanied by an editorial disagreeing or degrading comment, e.g. “This is nonsense” (The next Mideast war February 7). This is also part of another measure used by the editorial writers, namely the one of argument anticipation. The writer weakens the opposite side’s arguments by listing them and then outdoing them with his or her own argument. This is done numerCopyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

ous times in the editorials present, for instance in the February 2 editorial, when it is stated that “[t]he burst of enthusiasm that attended Mr. Obama’s outreach effort boosted favorability slightly to 27 percent, but in 2010 disappointment set in…” (The Egyptians hate us). Another example can be found in the editorial where it says that “Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton insisted the United States is ‘not advocating any specific outcome.’ Some outcomes, however, are much worse than others” (The next Mideast war February 7). The same quote by Clinton is used again in another editorial where it says “[…] ‘not advocating any specific outcome,’ which left the door open for all out21 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

comes, including a radical Islamic takeover” (What’s next February 11). By also mentioning the opposition party’s arguments, the editorial writers prove they are well aware of the fact that there are other opinions. This makes them more reliable and believable when presenting their own arguments. Also the headlines used in the editorials were not chosen by chance but carry a meaning themselves. Oftentimes, “headlines will have certain ‘trigger’ or ‘key’ words to signify ‘who’ or ‘what’ the story is about” (Rafferty 2008: 226) and this is exactly what the headlines of The Washington Times’ editorials are doing. “The Egyptians hate us” (February 2), “Egypt’s blood on Obama’s hands?” (February 3), “The next Mideast war” (February 7) – all these headlines carry words with a negative connotation and therefore let the readers of the paper know right away that trouble has to be associated with the Egyptian revolution. Also the headline “Obama proves Osama was right” (February 8) triggers very negative associations. It is suggested that Osama (bin Laden), who was considered a very dangerous foe to the United States has done something right in the past. This is practically a contradiction in itself since an enemy can never be ‘right’ with anything; at least in the eye of the opponent.

2.1.5. Conclusion First of all, it is striking that all four papers, regardless of their circulation, almost all published the same number of editorials during the given time period. This signals that all four newspapers rated the topic as being relevant enough to report about and to voice their opinions on it. Additionally, it shows that the newspapers were all aware of the fact that the uprisings might trigger discussion and different opinions among the US population and therefore wanted to be part of and also influence this discussion. The closer look at the 25 different editorials published in the four papers shows that all papers seem to follow a certain direction they want the reader to think in. The San Francisco Chronicle makes it clear they are in favor of the revolution and democracy develCopyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

opment and against Mubarak and they very much urge Obama and the rest of the United States to only support the demonstrators. The New York Times also approves of the Obama administration’s way of handling the situation. However, the Times’ editors present that opinion in a more subtle way, by also stating that they are aware of the fact that the situation is a very tricky one for the US government and that they have to handle the revolution and everything attached to it with care. Both papers discuss the importance of a stable democracy in Egypt after Mubarak’s resign. Still, neither the New York Times

22 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

nor the San Francisco Chronicle present a malicious campaign against the Muslim Brotherhood like The Washington Times is in its editorials. The Washington Times’ editorials all aim at triggering fear of the Muslim Brotherhood and how bad it would be for the United States if they gained power after Mubarak. Other possibilities are not even mentioned in one of the editorials, even though other political groups are beginning to form in order to be present at the Parliamentary elections in November 2011 (cf. Sharp 2011b: 3). The pieces all present a very one-sided view on things in Egypt, not looking for reasons for the revolution but just seeing how much worse everything is going to be for the United States if Mubarak leaves office. By contrast, the New York Times even states that “it is easy to understand why Egyptians are fed up” (Mr. Mubarak January 27). By explaining the scenarios in a very detailed and factual way, The Washington Times manages to really make its readers believe that the revolution is very dangerous for the United States. The fact that the editorial writers do not use any personal pronouns in their pieces, makes them appear like the scholar wagging his finger at the policy makers and explaining to the public why they should not trust the government in this matter. The Washington Times lines with a Republican point of view in all the editorials. The claim made by Groseclose and Milyo in their 2005 report on media bias was that “few would disagree that The Wall Street Journal editorials are conservative […]” (2005: 1199). This holds true for the editorials investigated in this analysis. However, the paper presents this way of thinking in a much more subtle way than The Washington Times. While The Washington Times keeps stressing how dangerous the Muslim Brotherhood would be for the United States if Mubarak resigned, The Wall Street Journal seems to have understood that a regime change in Egypt was unstoppable. Therefore, the editorial writers took this democratic change as a fact and attributed the credit for that change to the Bush administration. The Journal refrained from triggering fear of the

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Brotherhood. In fact, the paper only mentions them in more detail in one editorial (Hamas, the Brotherhood February 4).

23 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

2.2.

News story

“Journalists do not write articles. They write stories. A story has structure, direction, point, viewpoint” (Bell 1991: 147). News stories are the very foundation of newspaper reporting. Due to the fact that print journalists can take their time when writing their pieces, in contrast to Web journalists who always have to think of the ‘be first’ principle, the strength of newspaper stories is to deliver more accurate, more detailed and more facetted background information than any other medium. Of course there are also different subgenres when looking at news stories, like the feature story, which is really giving an insight view from the core of the event, or the spot news, which just gives the most important facts to the who, when, where, what, how questions. This distinction is also made when looking at the different front page articles relevant for this analysis. It is discussed what the author’s perspective on the topic was when producing the text, since, according to Peter Linden, this is one of the most important aspects to consider when analyzing news stories (cf. Linden 2008: 78). The framework used in the following chapter is provided by Allan Bell in his book The Language of News Media (1991). Along with other factors, Bell gives an overview of the structure of news stories, news values, news sources and actors and roles of facts and figures in a news story. These factors will be taken into account when looking at the articles in question. However, Bell is of course not the only scholar whose works is cited. The choice of words, the style of writing and other aspects relating to the language of the text are also taken into consideration. Nevertheless, according to Peter Linden’s definition of a journalistic text, it underlies a current event and is not driven by an artistic urge, which is why one cannot read it like a literary piece of work (2008: 73). As in the sections before, it is also important to note that not all aspects can be taken into account at all times, but that the articles are analyzed based on their most Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

striking and unique features, since the main aim of this analysis is to find a ‘red thread’ in the way of reporting.  

2.2.1. The Wall Street Journal Between January 26 and February 12, 2011, thirteen articles were published on the front pages of The Wall Street Journal that deal with the revolution in Egypt. The articles have an average length of 1,500 words and are therefore the longest articles in this analysis. 24 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

They each give a lot of background information on the happenings. Most of them put emphasis on one specific aspect after giving an overview of the demonstrations. Given that The Wall Street Journal is the biggest paper in the United States by circulation, it is clear they have a large number of staff members both within the US and abroad. When looking at the articles about the revolution in Egypt, it becomes clear that there was a group of reporters on the ground there, reporting from the very core of the happenings. The journalists doing the major part of reporting on the topic were Matt Bradley, Charles Levinson and Margaret Coker from Cairo. Most of the time, there were also reporters from Washington contributing to their reports, such as Jonathan Weisman and Adam Entous. By often giving the information of the journalists’ locations in the byline, the reader already feels in good hands since first-hand reporting seems more reliable and the reporters therefore more competent. Additionally, the Journal also reports on regions where no reporter was stationed – Suez in this particular case – basing its information on material coming from news agencies like the Associated Press (cf. Levinson, Bradley January 29). With regard to its sources, The Wall Street Journal seems to be very concerned about keeping a certain balance. In every article carrying accusations, the other side also gets the chance to defend itself. Therefore, one finds quotes by “Safwat Al-Sherif, the secretary general of the NDP” (Bradley, Spindle January 28) and other supporters of Hosni Mubarak (cf. Levinson, Said et al. February 3) and even if “[t]op Egyptian officials weren’t available to comment” (Bradley January 26), it is made clear that the reporters at least tried to get a statement. Furthermore, it stands out that The Wall Street Journal reporters seem to heavily rely on political analysts in their reporting. “Analysts said” (Levinson, Bradley January 29) is a phrase one finds many times in The Wall Street Journal’s front-page articles. By not giving the organization the analysts work for (if they are connected with any organization), the Journal avoids being put in a political corner. However, analysts are often considered a very reliable source, for they evaluate Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

certain political situations for a living and are therefore considered experts for some people. This, again, ensures the Journal readers that they are reading a very serious, reliable, and trustworthy paper. One article that stands out is a news analysis that was also published on the front page (Seib January 29). It came out relatively early, when the protests had just been going on for three days. This shows that The Wall Street Journal’s editorial staff managed to understand the relevance and the scope of the revolution in Egypt at an early stage. In 25 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

this analysis, the author gives a detailed background on the US-Egyptian relation and therewith explains why the United States has to care after all about what is going on in the Middle East. Gerald F. Seib lays out four possibilities of what could happen if Mubarak was replaced by any other form of leadership. He talks about Mohammed ElBaradei, Omar Suleiman, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian army as four alternative leaders and explains why it is difficult for the United States to support or fight any of those alternatives because, in any case, “it outstrips their ability to control it once it gets rolling”. The analysis is a good way to make it clear to the reader which outcomes the revolution might have and what this means for the United States. It is really a possibility to explain backgrounds rather than just collecting facts as it is often done in other news stories. However, even though it is an analysis, the author is careful not to take any side and to give any advice to the US government. Another article that is somehow out of line between all the other news stories is a piece on Wael Ghonim, the Google executive who was put in government detention shortly after the protests began and was not released until February 9 (Coker, Malas et al. February 7). The article is basically a profile on Ghonim, explaining his role in the uprisings. This is a news angle no other newspaper considered in this analysis paid as much attention to as The Wall Street Journal did. Stylistically, it stands out that The Wall Street Journal writers tend to use rather long sentences than short ones, sometimes up to 45 words per sentence (cf. Coker, Levinson et al. February 2). According to Peter Linden this indicates a very unagitated way of reporting (2008: 97), distanced and mainly factual. Additionally, the structure of The Wall Street Journal’s articles is what Allan Bell would call the typical structure of a narrative. In the first sentences, the so-called ‘abstract’, the “central action and main point” (1991: 148) is presented and the reader gets to know what is newsworthy about this article. This is also referred to as the ‘lead’ in the journalism business. This feature is how one can distinguish the Journal’s usual news stories from the background pieces without Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

a completely new newshook. This is demonstrated by the following example: On February 2, almost at ‘half-time’ of the revolution so-to-speak, The Wall Street Journal published an article entitled “How Cairo, U.S. were blindsided by revolution”. In that article Charles Levinson, Margaret Coker and Jay Solomon provide a chronology of the events and always add the United States’ point of view to them. The article starts off by saying “Two months before Egypt exploded in popular rage, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met Ahmed Aboul Gheit, Egypt’s foreign minister, in her seventh-floor offices in Washington” (Levinson et al. Februray 2). Technically, this article does not start with an ab26 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

stract and ‘news’ in the narrow sense but with the orientation (cf. Bell 1991: 148), setting the scene and answering the who, when, where questions. By also putting articles of that manner on the front page, The Wall Street Journal manages to keep its reporting fresh and original even for continuous readers of the paper.  

  

2.2.2. New York Times The most extensive front-page reporting on the revolution in Egypt was done by the New York Times. 35 articles were published on the A1 page between January 26 and February 12. The topic appeared on the front page at least once every day, sometimes twice or three times and on February 12 even four times. Even though the paper published so many articles on the matter, the pieces are relatively long, consisting of an average of 1,300 words. This huge amount of material on the Egyptian revolution shows the high relevance the New York Times attributed to the topic. The very first article already carries “U.S. Foreign Policy” in the headline (Landler January 26), immediately emphasizing the relevance for the American readers of the paper. The article also starts by giving the location ‘WASHINGTON’ so it is clear that the piece is written with a US focus. However, the other front-page article published on January 26 is only concerned with the happenings in Egypt and does not even mention the US government: it carries the location marker ‘CAIRO’ (Fahim, El-Nagger). Another fact that stands out is the variety of authors contributing to the coverage. The New York Times has a strong workforce to pull from all over the United States and abroad and this becomes clear when looking at the reporting on Egypt. However, one name one stumbles upon many times when reading the A1 articles is ‘David D. Kirkpatrick’. Interestingly, Kirkpatrick was located in Tunis and contributed to an article by Mark Landler when reporting started on January 26. However, since events started to unfold in Egypt, the reporter moved to Cairo from where he continued working in order to be closer to the events (Kirkpatrick January 29). The fact that already four other journalists were staCopyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

tioned in Cairo at that point (Kareem Fahim, Mona El-Naggar, Liam Stack and Dawlat Magdy), shows the importance the New York Times attributed to the revolution. This proves the point made by Souad Mekhennet, who stated in medium magazin that the United States reacted fast in relocating many of their Middle East reporters to Egypt when the revolution was still in its fledgling stages (cf. Milz 2011: 20). However, the Times’ network is large enough to still have reporters stationed in Beirut (cf. Shadid, Bakri et al. January 28) or Jerusalem (cf Bronner January 31), giving background cover-

27 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

age on how the revolution in the most populous country of the Middle East is affecting the rest of the region. One can easily recognize that the Times tends to focus on one specific aspect in each article instead of mentioning all aspects in one large article, like The Wall Street Journal does. Therefore, one finds an article concentrating on the work and the role of Al Jazeera during the revolution (Worth, Kirkpatrick January 28), another one on the future of Israel in view of the uprisings (Bronner January 31), a piece profiling the protesters, including their ‘leader’ Mohamed ElBaradei (Kirkpatrick, El-Naggar January 31), and a very thorough picture of Hosni Mubarak and his political career (Slackman February 12). Therefore, any reader can decide for him or herself which aspect is of interest to him or her when picking up the paper. However, it has to be noted that all articles are understandable also for non-continuous readers of the paper. According to a study carried out by Sigal, almost 50 percent of the stories that appear on the front pages of the New York Times originate from information coming from US officials (qt in Bell 1991: 191). This is also reflected in the front-page articles looked at in this analysis, at least in the ones carrying the location marker WASHINGTON. Most of the quotes come from White House officials, including President Obama, Hillary Clinton and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, or experts working at Middle East oriented organizations (cf Landler January 29). The articles marked CAIRO do not feature as many quotes. Most of them are provided by protesters. This reveals that the New York Times distinguishes between articles providing an ‘inside’ and an ‘outside’ view on the situation. The outside view, namely the US perspective, is used to provide assessments of the revolution by US officials and the inside view serves to present the protesters’ situation in a more emotional and direct way. Nevertheless, this does not imply that the ‘inside’ articles do not provide any factual background. Just like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times also published one news analysis

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

on the revolution on the front page. However, the one in the Times was issued much later than the one in the Journal, namely on February 12, the day after Mubarak’s resignation. In the article, Anthony Shadid provides a resume of the 18-day revolution. He writes about how everything started on January 25, how uncertain the order following Mubarak was at that moment and which effects the revolution might have on the Arab world as a whole. Interestingly, he does not quote any US officials but only Arab protagonists. Most of them are protesters and other supporters of opposition groups, but Shadid also quotes people from Saudi Arabia, Tunisia or Syria. They express their joy (“The sun will 28 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

rise on a more beautiful Egypt”), their responsibility, which they are aware of (“This is a historic moment in the Arab world”) and their fear of what might come now (“I’m dead scared”). The article is very factual but lives through the peoples’ quotes, presenting both the positive and the negative sides of the revolution. The United States, however, are not mentioned once. It is a gripping change of viewpoint, only letting the Arabs speak. However, a certain amount of admiration is recognizable in the text, especially since it ends with a song, saying “Egypt, you rose up, and your son succeeded and he waved your flag high”.  

2.2.3. San Francisco Chronicle Technically the San Francisco Chronicle should to be taken out of this part of the analysis, since there were no articles published on the paper’s front page between January 26 and February 12, 2011 that dealt with the Egyptian revolution. However, in order to not have to ignore the paper completely, this analysis considers four articles out of the six available. These four articles were published either in the ‘Metro’ or the ‘Main News’ section of the Chronicle. They are all relatively short, the longest consisting of only 745 words. One of them only deals with the revolution indirectly since it mainly discusses that Al Jazeera can be watched via a San Francisco Internet link (Garofoli February 4). What is striking at first sight of the articles is that they all already carry the local touch in their headlines, either including “S.F.” (Colliver, February 12), (Kane February 6), (Garofoli February 4) or “Nothern Californians” (Nelson, Tucker February 2). This is what Allan Bell would categorize as the evaluation: “Evaluation is the means by which the significance of a story is established” (Bell 1991: 151). The headlines already show the reader that this story is of importance to him or her because by belonging to the readership of the San Francisco Chronicle, he or she is very likely to come from the San Francisco Bay Area and can therefore relate to the people told of in the stories.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

There is no political figure quoted in any of the articles, be it an US official or an Egyptian spokesperson. All articles concentrate very strongly on personal comments and feelings of ‘normal’ US citizens who have some kind of connection to Egypt and the events there. This is not very common practice, according to Bell (1991). Considering that news actors can be “divided into the Knowns and Unknowns [and] Knowns appear four times as often as Unknowns” (ibid: 194), the San Francisco Chronicle puts a lot of emphasis on the Unknowns. This is probably due to the fact that the paper wants to re-

29 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

tain the closeness to its readers and uses the Unknowns to convey ‘real’ feelings from ‘real’ people who are somewhat on the same stage as the reader. Concerning the structure of the news stories, three of the four articles start off with the so-called ‘nut graph’, answering the ‘W-questions’ in the very first sentence. The article on the Californians who got out of Egypt just before the protests started is basically a compilation of three short and superficial profiles. It is a very personal piece that gives very few facts (Nelson, Tucker February 2). In this story, the nut graph appears much later, in the third and fourth paragraph, explaining that the people portrayed in this piece are only a handful of those “travelers who fled the country in the last few days”. The style of writing is very comparable to the one in the yellow press and appears to be what could be called ‘sensational journalism’. Sentences like “[a] sleepless week filled with fear” let it seem that Dawn Lukas, one of the three protagonists, was really in danger before leaving Egypt. Two further articles tackle the exact same topic, namely two rallies in San Francisco to support the protesters in Egypt. One was reported about on February 6 (Kane) and the other one on February 12 (Colliver). The latter describes how “a small but spirited crowd” celebrated Mubarak’s downfall. All the people quoted in the article are filled with joy about the protesters’ victory and none raise any skepticism about what might follow Mubarak. There are a lot of direct quotes used in this article, adding an emotional touch to it. “It’s unbelievable”, “I cannot tell you how beautiful it is”, “We are in awe of the young men and women of Egypt” (Colliver February 12) – all these quotes serve a purpose. Direct quotes are “supposed to be brief, pithy, colorful, to add something which a version in reported speech would not” (Bell 1991: 209). They add personality to the story and help collect and convey all the emotions coming from the people. However, they are not very factual since they all just express personal opinion. The other article on the rally states how the San Francisco protesters were already supporting the Egyptian protesters halfway through the revolution (February 6) and how they were worried PresCopyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

ident Obama “would let cynical politics and a desire for immediate stability outweigh the passion of the millions calling for democracy in Egypt” (Kane February 6). This is the only time that the Obama administration is even mentioned in all of these articles. It is striking that the only time the US government is brought up, it is mentioned in connection with people urging it to support the democracy movement in Egypt. This is what stays in the readers’ minds when thinking about the Obama administration in the context of the Egyptian revolution: it should support democracy in Egypt, and therefore support

30 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

the protesters. Other issues and the dilemma the US government is facing are not brought up at all in the San Francisco Chronicle news stories.    

2.2.4. The Washington Times The smallest paper looked at in this analysis published eleven front-page articles on the revolution in Egypt between January 31 and February 11, 2011. They include an average number of 1060 words each and most of them were written by Heather Murdock. Her articles are oftentimes contributed to by Ashish Kumar Sen in Washington, so it says at the end of the articles. First of all, it stands out that The Washington Times puts a lot of information in the headlines of the articles. They consist of two parts, two elliptic sentences that complete and round up each other. Using this ‘telegram’ style is supposed to attract the reader to the story, since he or she directly sees its keywords, like “Brotherhood” (Sen January 31), “Obama” (Rowland February 1), or, of course, “Egypt” (e.g. Scarborough February 1). According to Allan Bell, it is common that rhetoric devices are used in headlines (1991: 189) and this also holds true for The Washington Times’ headlines, especially concerning alliterations (e.g. “Carefully calls ...” (Rowland February 1), “Protesters push …” (Murdock February 4), “…ill and injured in Cairo” (Murdock February 8)). The majority of people quoted in The Washington Times’ articles are demonstrators on Tahrir Square. In an article published on February 9 for instance, seven people are quoted and six of them are anti-Mubarak demonstrators (Murdock). Additionally, many of the articles end with a direct quote, mostly from protesters, e.g. “’I have to go now,’ Mr Shafeey said […] ‘To set up my own checkpoint” (Murdock February 3), “’He doesn’t care about my security,’ she said. ‘He only cares about his security’” (Mudrock February 4), “’I’m not going to hell for orders’” (Murdock February 7) or “’He gave us

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

hope that he was going to leave,’ he said. ‘He wants to start a civil war’” (Murdock February 11). Ending an article with a quote creates a certain suspense in the article. They convey the feeling of very determined protesters, create a dramatic ending and can maybe even serve as a cliffhanger because the reader is left with that very personal statement and probably wants to know how the ‘story’ goes on. To put it in Allan Bell’s words, “news stories are not rounded off. They finish in mid-air” (1991: 154). The quotes by the protesters give the reporting an emotional touch and make the story more comprehensible for the readers than reported speech would. However, since Heather Murdock is the 31 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

journalist mainly working on the topic, it remains unclear whether this way of reporting was intended by the paper’s editors or whether this is just Murdock’s personal style of writing. .

There are a few articles published within the time period that stand out because they approach the topic differently. On February 8, Heather Murdock wrote a relatively short (841 words) background piece on makeshift clinics in Cairo (Murdock February 8). It is a very descriptive piece of writing, creating a lot of images by explaining in detail what the environment looks like (“shuttered door”, “red walls”). It really puts the focus on another side of the protests – the one that is not hopeful and glorious but the “bloody toll” of the demonstrations. Murdock manages to deliver the picture of a very brutal Cairo, resulting in thousands of people being treated in makeshift clinics. Overall, a very negative vibe about the revolution is conveyed by this article. The second article that does not necessarily report about news and new developments in Egypt is called “Leaderless protests spawns crowded field for president” (Sen February 7) and is written by Ashish Kumar Sen, supposedly located in Washington, considering the fact that his other contributions on the topic were made from the US capital as well. In his article, Sen shortly characterizes the Egyptian key players hoping to succeed Mubarak. Well-known figures as ElBaradei and Omar Suleiman are mentioned as well as Amr Moussa (“one-time foreign minister in the Mubarak-government”) or Mohammed Badie, the head of the Muslim Brotherhood. However, it stands out that Omar Suleiman is described in a very positive fashion, while Amr Moussa, who is favored by many Egyptians, is mentioned to have been “highly critical of U.S. support for Israel” in the past. Last but not least there is an article entitled “Key military, intelligence assets imperiled in Egypt” (Scarborough February 1). This piece is what one could call a ‘scenario article’. The writer describes what would happen if “Egypt falls into the hands of radical

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Islamists”, the Muslim Brotherhood in this case. It is very one-sided because it portraits the Brotherhood as a “shadowy” fraternity, calling “for the destruction of Israel” and basically hating America to the bone. The article outlines how “US military and intelligence agencies would lose vital air, land and sea assets” if the Muslim Brotherhood came to power. Rowan Scarborough paints the picture of a dystopia in this text, triggering fear of the Brotherhood. Regarding its structure, this article is to some extent comparable to the news analysis found in The Wall Street Journal (see section 2.2.1.). However, the main difference is that the Journal’s news analysis gives various alternatives of 32 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

what might follow the Mubarak regime, while this article in the Times concentrates on the one scenario that is most feared by the United States.    

 

2.2.5. Conclusion When looking at the four different papers, the coverage in the San Francisco Chronicle stands out as the most incomplete. First of all, in order to include the newspaper in the analysis, one has to take all pages of the paper into account, since no article on the matter was published on the front page. In total, only six articles were published by the Chronicle within the 18 day period. However, these articles still do not give an overview of what was happening in Egypt, but take up side stories like the fact that “San Francisco’s Link TV carries Al Jazeera reports on Egypt” (Garofoli, February 4) or add a local touch to it by reporting on “Tales of lucky few Northern Californians who escaped” (Nelson, Tucker February 2). If one had only read the San Francisco Chronicle during the 18 days of the revolution, one would have had to read the editorials in order to be able to understand the complicated situation there and what implications that might have for the United States. One might argue that the Chronicle is to be considered more of a local newspaper with limited possibilities for reporting. Still, even if its circulation and number of staff members is relatively small compared to the other papers, there are still ways to increase the intensity of reporting. The Washington Times, for instance, is even smaller and managed to produce more extensive reporting, even if they had to hire a freelancer to do it. Additionally, there is always the possibility of using wire services. If it is impossible or simply too expensive for a newspaper to get reporters on the ground in Egypt, news agencies like Associated Press or Reuters offer numerous background reports for newspapers to use and reprint. Even a large paper like The Wall Street Journal used an article published by Associated Press about the revolution in Egypt (cf. Associated Press Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

January 31). However, since this article was not printed on the front page of the paper, it was not considered in this analysis. It is possibly this paper’s way of reporting to look at a story from a local angle. According to Bree Shepherd this is also “the trend of other American newspapers, devoting increasing attention to local and regional news”, especially pursued by “other Bay Area newspapers” (2011: 101). In recent years, The Washington Post has dedicated itself to turn into a largely local paper again, keeping a focus on the DC area, since they 33 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

feel it is the best way to compete with the Internet-driven news market nowadays, according to Doug Jel and David Pery from the Post’s editorial staff (Personal interview February 24, 2010). Michael Schudson was one of the first to point out the fact that newspapers – “especially those most prestigious, most powerful, and with most resources to devote to news gathering – have sought autonomy from official views and promoted […] more investigative reporting or ‘news analysis’, more investigative or ‘enterprise’ journalism, and more tolerance for new varieties of feature writing” (1978: 163). Even though his remarks were made more than 30 years ago, one has to take into consideration that, as Peter Linden (2010) confirms, newspapers are nowadays mostly read because of their insight analytical reporting. The huge number of correspondents engaged in the reporting on the revolution at both The Wall Street Journal and the New York Times shows that these two papers definitely have a lot of resources “to devote to news gathering” (ibid.) and they also used them to deliver the kind of background reporting Schudson is referring to in his book. These two papers also started with front-page reporting on the very first day of the revolution and ended on February 12, the last day included in this analysis. This reveals that these two papers stuck to front-page reporting from the beginning until the very end. The New York Times even kept the topic on the front page every single day of the revolution. There were also some differences in tone and style. Whereas The Wall Street Journal kept a professional distance and quoted mainly political analysts, The Washington Times focused on conveying the feelings of the protesters. They provided background information as well but the Times stories came across as being rather emotional. The New York Times provided both perspectives but separated them into two different articles most of the time. The articles in the New York Times are shorter than the ones in The Wall Street

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Journal; however, the Times had many more news stories on their front page than all the other papers. It seems that The Wall Street Journal expects its readers to be able to stay focused throughout longer articles covering multiple aspects while the New York Times tries to keep them shorter and covers the different angles in individual articles. It is striking, though, that The Wall Street Journal seems to strictly keep its business articles from the front page and concentrate on political issues.

34 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

However, there are also similarities between the newspapers. In nearly all news stories except for the ones in the San Francisco Chronicle, President Obama was quoted at least once. The reason for that is simply that “[i]n the United States, the president is both ultimate news actor and news source” (Bell 1991: 194). Overall, even though there are some differences in reporting between the papers, they all made an effort to not let their political bias – if present – shine through their reporting. Most of them showed both sides of the story, The Wall Street Journal even quoted pro-Mubarak Egyptians and members of the NDP. One can conclude, however, that the protester’s side was laid out in more detail. This is probably due to the fact that it was much easier for reporters in Cairo to get voices from protesters than from the anti-Mubarak protesters since these people also wanted to be reported on to get their message sent around the globe by reporters.

2.3.

Letter to the Editor

Letters to the editor are highly important for newspapers since they can help to promote the paper and improve its circulation. The reason for this is the fact that the letter writers want every one of their friends to see they were published in the paper and urge them to read it (cf. Richardson 2008: 58). This tactic also seems to work with the readers. Readership surveys have proven the letter section to be among the most popular sections of the paper, with readership quotes as high as about fifty percent (Wahl-Jorgensen 2002: 69). The Guardian, a newspaper in the U.K. with a circulation of 241,287 per issue (ABC 2011), receives about 300 letters every day, according to letter editor Ian Mayes (2003) – on a regular day, that is. These numbers drastically increase when controversial political events are on the paper’s agenda. When people learned about the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the number of letters doubled during the first week (ibid.). One can clearly see that it is important to the readers to state their opinions – not only do people want to share their view of the world on the Internet via social media and commentary functions Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

under websites; they also want to communicate with other readers and editors of the ‘classical’ news medium, the newspaper. In contrast to the other two genres analyzed in this study, the papers’ staff cannot influence what is written in the letter, which words are used and, most importantly, who writes the text in the first place. However, the paper can influence one very decisive factor: which letters are actually published and which ones are not. Karin Wahl-Jorgensen (2002) suggests four criteria according to which editors of the letter section select the 35 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

letters published in the paper. One is the rule of relevance, suggesting that only those letters are likely to be published that take up an issue that is “already placed firmly on the agenda by the paper” (Wahl-Jorgensen 2002: 73). Theoretically, readers should be able to introduce their own topics to the agenda, but usually they “will invariably fail” (ibid.). The second and third factors are the rules of entertainment and brevity. Entertaining letters have crisp formulations, sharp theses and add spice to the letters page, which then actually helps the paper, because “[n]ewspapers can turn on readers by offering more sparkly, entertaining […] letters sections” (Wahl-Jorgensen 2002: 74). Concerning the brevity, according to Wahl-Jorgensen, the majority of papers even imposes a 300word limit, so that more people can state their opinion in one issue (ibid: 75). The last rule is, in Wahl-Jorgensen’s opinion, “the most slippery one” (ibid: 76) and is called the rule of authority. It suggests that editors tend to prefer contribution from persons of authority, showing “basic competencies” (Wahl-Jorgensen 2002: 77) in their letters. These criteria are important to consider when analyzing the letters to the editor in the following section. However, in this particular case the rule of relevance will be left out, since all letters looked at in this analysis are per se dealing with the topic of the Egyptian revolution in some way. Apart from the selection of the letters, it is also interesting to look at the placing of the letters, if there is more than one letter concerning the same topic on one page. John Richardson states that the letters are chosen and are then put close to other letters presenting a different opinion “in ways that also reveal the editorial or political position of the paper” (2008: 67). Additionally, Karin Wahl-Jorgensen notes that it has also become very important to the letter pages editors to create a certain diversity in their selection of letters (2002: 77). It will be interesting to see how balanced or how broad the range of opinions is in the letters published by the different papers and to what extent they meet the criteria suggested by Wahl-Jorgensen. In summary, one can say that “[l]etters published in newspapers suggest a great deal about the paper and its readers” (Richardson

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

2008: 67).

2.3.1. The Wall Street Journal The biggest newspaper in the United States features seven letters to the editor on the topic in question. They appeared on February 2, February 8 and February 11 and most of them refer to specific articles previously published in the Journal. For instance, the letters published on February 8 all relate to the op-ed article “Egypt’s Economic Apartheid” 36 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

by Hernando de Soto, published February 3 (Price February 8). This reveals that even in the letters to the editor, The Wall Street Journal keeps up with its reputation of frequently adding an economic angle to their news coverage and that the paper’s readers seem to appreciate this special angle since they reply to these economic articles. The remaining four letters deal more with the political side of the revolution. Two of them critically discuss the US government’s rhetoric on the whole issue, calling it “jibberish coming out of the mouths of President Obama and Hillary Clinton” (McIntyre February 2) and claiming that the White House has been sending “mixed messages” to the Middle East (Graham February 11). The letter by Abraham Irwin names reasons for the revolution (Irwin February 11) and the last letter reminds those who “have applauded the promise of liberty” in Egypt to critically think about what might happen after the revolution, drawing parallels to the French Revolution (Comanor February 11). Overall, the readers of The Wall Street Journal seem to be rather critical about the US government responding to the revolution. None of the letters expresses pure joy: at the most they convey understanding for the reasons why people started revolting in Egypt (cf. Irwin February 11). It is also striking that no letter was published about the revolution on Saturday, February 12, even though the Journal is issued on Saturdays. Interestingly, none of the letter writers chose to write in the first person perspective, a perspective called “intrusive” by Peter Linden (2008: 51). Using the third person perspective makes the letter writers more distant and makes the letters easier to integrate into the other editorial content of a newspaper. The letter writers keep the same distance as journalists ought to when writing a news article. It makes them appear more serious and believable because they write as if they are just distributing facts and not their own opinion. This aligns with the writing style of the other articles found in The Wall Street Journal. The paper is regarded as a serious and widely acknowledged newspaper for educated readers and its readers live up to these expectations as well, at least judging by

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

their letters to the editor.  

2.3.2. New York Times The “Gray Lady” chose 34 letters to the editor to be published between January 26 and February 12, 2011 on the revolution in Egypt. It must be kept in mind that, according to Reader, quoted in Wahl-Jorgensen (2002), the New York Times letter editors publish approximately six percent of the letters sent to them, or sometimes even less (ibid. :70). Considering this number, 34 letters appears to be a lot for that relatively narrow time 37 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

period. The first letter was printed on January 29 and the last one on February 12. On this date, eight letters were published, making it the day with the most letters on this topic. However, these letters are also the shortest ones throughout the whole time period, with the longest being only about 127 words long (Hayward February 12). Here, the rule of brevity comes in, allowing “for the greatest number of individuals to voice their opinion” (Wahl-Jorgensen 2002: 75). Most of the letters refer to articles previously published in the New York Times. However, they do not stick to what was written in these articles and just support or disclaim the theses but use it as a starting point to develop their own argumentations. It is very striking that the New York Times also prints letters coming from outside the United States. By doing so, even though it undermines the claim that editors often have a “preference for locally generated content” (Wahl-Jorgensen 2002: 74), the paper stresses its importance, influence and the fact that it has a readership beyond national borders. The fact that more than half of these letters not coming from within the US are written by ‘experts’ underlines the influence of the paper even more. Among a letter from India (Pune February 11), one from London (Hewitt February 1), a contribution from Italy (Huffaker February 12) and Paris (Akl February 5), there is one letter from Israel, giving a clear statement in favor of the United States government. The writer says that “American support for Egypt, if anything, has attenuated Mr. Mubarak’s strong-arm tactics” and states further that other Middle Eastern countries “which are not supported by the United States, are more repressive than Egypt” (Vradim February 2). This letter is of particular importance because it states clearly that the Israeli (of course this one letter is not at all representative but the writer acts like one in that particular case) are fond of the EgyptIsrael peace treaty and will stand behind the United States no matter what happens to Egypt after Mubarak. There are also many ‘experts’’ letters published in the 18-day time period, meaning that below the writer’s name, his or her profession is given. There is one by the senCopyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

ior editor of Middle East Monitor (Hewitt February 1), one by Ahmad Majidyar, who is “senior research associate at the American Enterprise Institute” (Majidyar February 4), another one written by a former employee of the Lebanese Embassy in Washington (Akl February 5) and one by a law professor who has also published a book (Cohn February 8). This indicates that the rule of authority introduced by Karin Wahl-Jorgensen is, indeed, of relevance for letters pages editors, because these experts tend to be more believable for the reader. Giving their job after their name already attributes a certain expertise

38 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

to them. As Allan Bell puts it, “for the media, a title embodies a person’s claim to news value” (1991: 190). What also stands out is that every day there is at least one letter commenting on US behavior towards the revolution, be it in a critical (e.g. Mangan January 29) or in an approving way (e.g. Vradim February 31) . By doing that, the New York Times manages to remind the people reading the letters page why the topic is of relevance to US citizens as well and not just for the Egyptians. The diversity of comments on US behavior is relatively wide, even though the majority of letters clearly states that “Mr. Obama must move urgently to cut Mubarak loose […]” (Meyer February 4), since “the only just stance toward the Egyptians is to push Hosni Mubarak out of power” (Akl February 5) and the US “should speak clearly for freedom and democracy” (Chen February 8). However, in two cases the New York Times also published a few letters on the same page defending two completely contradicting opinions. On February 5, two letters were printed saying that the Obama administration has been too “hasty in calling for President Hosni Mubarak’s resignation” (Reifler) and that “[t]housands of demonstrators do not necessarily represent 80 million Egyptians” (Kean). On the other hand, there is the letter by Roger Akl, urging the United States to do something against Mubarak and support the protesters. Something similar can be seen on February 11. The letter sent by Jennifer Patton expresses pure admiration for the protesters, calling them an “inspiration” and stating that their “energy, determination, creativity and resourcefulness are breathtaking”. However, Gordon Carmichael’s letter conveys a very different opinion, saying that the protesters should “get off the streets and allow day-to-day life in Egypt to return to normal”. By putting these very different letters on one page, the New York Times creates diversity on the letters page and somehow sticks to the so-called rule of entertainment by keeping the discussion spicy and interesting for the reader. The editorials on February 12 exactly reflect the opinion the New York Times al-

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

so conveys in its numerous editorials. The majority of people are simply happy for the Egyptians and praise them for their victory over Mubarak, saying things like “congratulations” (Thakar), “Bravo” (Sape), “I applaud them” (Steinberger) and “today we are all dancing” (Wilson). There is also one letter congratulating Tunisia for the inspirational Jasmine Revolution (Peters) and one congratulates the US government for “a masterly job by Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton” (Tobin). One letter, however, is critical of what might follow the revolution, and reads “we can only hope that the reforms that have been promised will, in fact, make a difference in the lives of average Egyptians” (Hayward). 39 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Therefore, this last collection of letters published on February 12 can somehow be seen as a representation of the paper’s opinion – of course one has enough reason to cheer and be happy with and for the Egyptians, but nevertheless one has to think about the consequences and what might follow this revolution.

 

2.3.3. San Francisco Chronicle In the Chronicle, seven letters to the editor were published broaching the issue of the revolution in Egypt. They were all printed on February 129, one day after Mubarak had resigned from power. There are two possible explanations for this: Either the Chronicle did not receive any letters on the topic before February 12 or the paper wanted to wait until the end of the revolution to ‘reveal’ its readers’ voices. The letters are all very short, all between 18 (Page) and 81 words (Thomas). It seems that the paper wanted as many people as possible to be able to state their opinion on the matter and therefore only picked out the very short letters to publish. What stands out first is the fact that all letters come from the San Francisco Bay Area. More than half of the letters were written by people living directly in San Francisco and the other ones are very close to the city as well. This indicates, again, that the San Francisco Chronicle pursues a more local approach and focus on things, because if the paper even received letters out of area on the topic, (which is unknown in this case) they did not select them for publication. Five out of the seven letters are very uncritical, merely conveying the writers’ sentiments of being “completely overjoyed to know that Hosni Mubarak is gone” (Salama). Taking into account both the shortness and the uniformity of opinions presented, one can apply another aspect of the rule of brevity, claiming that “newspapers put the premium on a diversity of names tagged onto opinions, rather than the opinions themselves” (Wahl-Jorgensen 2002: 76). There is only one letter, headlined “Let the joy go

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

on”, in which the writer wishes the Egyptians can keep up the jubilation (Halvorsen). The only letter making some critical remarks is the one by Elliot Smith from El Cerrito. She states that she is also happy for the Egyptians but criticizes the US government for having supported Mubarak for a long period of time. The letter by Elliot Smith also proves true the rule of entertainment, as it uses irony as a measure of conveying the writer’s opinion:                                                              9

Since all letters to the editor in the San Francisco Chronicle were published on February 12, the date is omitted in the in-text citations and only the last name of the writers is provided in this section. 

40 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

“Aren’t our political leaders happy that the people of Egypt have finally pointed out to them that Hosni Mubarak was actually, uh, how do I say this, um, a dictator! And to think we have been giving him $1.3 billion a year in military aid! Gosh, if we had only known the truth” (Smith). This is an amusing way of criticizing the US government and therefore sparks and spices up the discussion and makes reading for the consumer more interesting (cf. WahlJorgensen 2002: 74). The letters page editors of the Chronicle also chose some other letters using associative language, which a lot of Americans can probably relate to very well. Paul Spiegel’s letter is titled “Living in freedom” and refers to “9/11 when Americans learned to live in fear”, which will now “be replaced by the call of 2/11, when Egyptians learned to live in freedom.” First of all, the word ‘freedom’ is a word, that, especially patriotic US inhabitants like attributing to their country. Additionally, “9/11” is an expression that appeals to many Americans as well, because it more or less affected the entire population. Another letter reads as follows: “We got rid of Richard Nixon. The Egyptians got rid of Hosni Mubarak. All good things are possible” (Page). Most people probably associate negative things with former Republican President Nixon, thinking of the Watergate scandal and the liar he was discovered to be through this crisis. The letter by Jean Halvorsen also addresses the American public, by comparing the cheering in Egypt to the (baseball) World Series, one of the most important sport events in the United States, after the Super Bowl. The letters to the editor correspond well with the general sentiment conveyed already in the paper’s editorials. According to Richardson’s remarks on the placement of letters to the editor, the very little diversity of opinion suggests that the San Francisco Chronicle expresses its opinion through the letters. The Chronicle shows huge admiration for the Egyptian protesters and very little criticism about US behavior in the matter.

2.3.4. The Washington Times

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

During the 18-day time period, The Washington Times published eight letters to the editor dealing with the Egyptian revolution, all to be found in the issues between February 3 and February 9. Interestingly, they are all written by men and none of them refer to a specific article published by the Times, but they all argue on the basis of what is going on in Egypt. Seven out of six letters deal with the Obama administration’s way of handling the situation in Egypt. All of those except one reflect an antipathy against Obama. While 41 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

two letters criticize the President for having tolerated the Mubarak regime for far too long (Dodell February 3) and lacking “focus on growing troubles both at home and abroad” (Card February 4), another one written by David Lawrence is critical of the concept of ‘change’, “that has always been President Obama’s mantra after all” (February 4). The same holds true for two letters published on February 9, saying that the United States should not interfere in Egypt and should hold back with imposing its will on others (Jack February 9), (Bloustein February 9). The last letter that raises critical thoughts about Obama says the President and his administration are at “height of hypocrisy” (Towle February 9), because they are promoting democracy in other countries but not at home. Strikingly, on February 9, there are three letters published and they all convey the same negative opinion about Barack Obama. This does not fulfill John Richardson’s theory of ‘diverse’ placement. In addition to that, the average opinions of the letters align with the negative viewpoint on the Obama administration already presented in The Washington Times’ editorials. It appears that The Washington Times does not seem to attach importance to diversity and different opinions when it comes to the selection of the letters to the editor published by the paper. However, the paper distributed the letters in a way that, although the same opinion is conveyed in numerous letters, they all use different argumentations and stress different aspects. While one letter accuses the Obama administration of being hypocritical (Towle February 9), another one reminds the readers of the “disastrous experience of the 2006 election in Gaza” (Bloustein February 9), yet another letter blames Obama for not having noticed the “danger presented by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak” (Dodell February 3) and William Card writes that Obama overall misses the signs of “growing troubles both at home and abroad” (February 4). It is clearly visible that all of these letters blame the Obama administration for something, yet they all stress different aspects. By printing all those letters, The Washington Times presents various reasons to dislike the US government to its readers.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

The only letter urging the Obama administration to interfere and to support democratic change in Egypt instead of backing Mubarak is written by an “expert”, in the sense that his profession as an adjunct professor at the American University is stated below his name (Abdelkader February 8). His letter is also the longest one among the six, consisting of 334 words. In this case, the rule of authority set up by Karin WahlJorgensen (see chapter 2.3.) is applicable, because by printing Mr. Abdelkader’s profession next to his name, the paper emphasizes his role as a scholar. According to Karin Wahl-Jorgensen’s rule of brevity, most letters printed are supposed to voice an opinion 42 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

“in a succinct and punchy fashion” (2002: 75). Assuming that this letter by Mr. Abdelkader took up a lot of space on the letters page, it stands out both in length and in the opinion conveyed. It might be that this letter appeared particularly bulky compared to all the other shorter letters, and when The Washington Times’ readers are more used to seeing short and snappy letters, they might just overlook this lengthy letter and maybe tend not to read it.

2.3.5. Conclusion It appears striking that The Wall Street Journal, a notably bigger paper than the other three, published as many letters to the editor as the San Francisco Chronicle did, for instance. The only paper that strongly stands out is the New York Times, which published about five times as many letters as all the other papers. Judging by the selection made by the papers, it seems the Journal letter writers are much more critical when it comes to the US government’s behavior and foreign policy in the United States than the Chronicle readers are. However, since it is unknown how many letters were sent to the Chronicle that dealt with US behavior but were just not published, it is impossible at this stage to actually transfer this observation to the readers. The selection of letters published in the New York Times is the most balanced of all four papers. Both joyous and critical letters, including or completely ignoring the United States government’s stance are present on the letters pages of the Times. The paper tries to cover all the different opinions one could have on the topic and the variety of opinions is also reflected in the number of letters printed by the Times. All the other papers lean toward a certain direction in their letter selection, sometimes according to their political slant and sometimes to their outward reputation as a serious newspaper. The Washington Times printed many letters discrediting the Obama administration, and the same holds true for The Wall Street Journal. However, the tone was very different when comparing these two papers. The Journal letters came across as being very distanced and factual,

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

whereas The Washington Times’ letters page featured a lot of irony and hard side blows against the administration. The San Francisco Chronicle decided to publish almost exclusively the voices expressing joy for the Egyptians after Mubarak’s downfall. The Wall Street Journal did not publish one letter voicing the same sentiment. This leads to the assumption that the two papers want to convey a different picture of their readership, which is factual, welleducated and very critical in case of The Wall Street Journal and very emotional and maybe a little eccentric in case of the San Francisco Chronicle. 43 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

 

3.

Conclusion

The study at hand aimed at investigating how the 2011 revolution in Egypt was depicted in US Print Media, especially taking into account that the newspapers analyzed are said to follow a certain political bias. Most results concerning the different genres were already discussed in the conclusion sections after each genre analysis. However, some concluding remarks are still to be made in this chapter. The thesis that reporting differs from paper to paper has proven true throughout every genre. Every paper places the emphasis on different aspects of the topic, stresses different viewpoints and looks at happenings from different angles. That is certainly a good thing, for it proves that the print media landscape in the Unites States is very diverse and offers something for the liking of any reader. That is the way it is supposed to be, since every reader likes to read those papers the most which are in accordance with his or her own opinion. However, journalists must not neglect their responsibility of doing just reporting and no matter how popular the so-called opinion journalism has become, people also need to have sources, i.e. newspapers, that inform them more or less neutrally about events of the world and what these events might mean on one hand and also on the other hand. The analysis has shown that the papers do not hold back or try to hide their political slants when it comes to editorials and letters to the editor. It was particularly interesting to see how these two genres accompanied each other considering the opinion conveyed. The selection of letters to the editor mostly completed the picture constructed by the editorials. This did not have to hold true for one particular day, though, but for the whole period of reporting. When looking at news stories, it is harder to discover the particular bias every paper follows. The genre was the hardest to investigate among all three. Still, some small aspects were observable even in this genre.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

The main differences observable in the news stories genre can be seen when looking at the background, or side aspect articles published by the papers rather than the actual news stories. At least The Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and The Washington Times presented many facts around the revolution correctly and were trying to really make their readers understand why this conflict is even of relevance for the United States. By looking at the focus put on certain topics, one can, nevertheless, recognize a hint of opinionated reporting. The Washington Times, for example, published a scenario article on how horrible Egypt was going to be if the Muslim Brotherhood came 44 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

to power. This reflects a very conservative way of thinking because it triggers fear of anti-American movements in the Middle East. While the New York Times aims at being an internationally read newspaper – and also tries to emphasize this by publishing letters to the editor send from other countries , the San Francisco Chronicle certainly tries to put its focus more on local reporting. As mentioned before, this might be a smart tactic by the Chronicle since a lot of US newspapers seem to be following that new way in times of high competition. However, it is questionable whether almost all real’ reporting on the topic – meaning not just using the events in Egypt as a news hook to report on local rallies – can only be found in the editorials of a newspaper. By doing so, the reader does not get a chance to obtain information without getting the paper’s unfiltered opinion (a liberal opinion in the case of the San Francisco Chronicle) on the side. However, it has to be noted that this study was not primarily written to make judgments on good or bad reporting in US newspapers. Nevertheless, to any (subjective) reader of all these papers, it sticks in their minds which ones were able to provide information and which ones lacked some quality in reporting. It seems that The Washington Times does not even try to ‘hide’ its politically conservative slant and expresses it through both its letters to the editor. This is to say that the journalists use very direct expressions and words when defaming the Democratic Party and Barack Obama’s administration. Even though similar tendencies could be found in The Wall Street Journal’s editorials, the paper tended to bring its opinion across in a more subtle way, as already explained in chapter 2.2.5. Overall, the bias each paper is said to have somehow holds true. The Wall Street Journal tends to publish longer texts in their editorial writings and in their news stories. They take a lot of space but also use this space to explain many background aspects and lay out a topic completely with much side information one would not find in the other newspapers. This shows that the Journal, just like the New York Times, which also pub-

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

lished a very large amount of information on the revolution, wants to be perceived as a very factual, very accurate and very detailed newspaper, not only in the finance and business sector but also when it comes to political topics. Its reporting is held very balanced in the news stories and the reporters always try to present both sides of the story. The same holds true for the New York Times. The political slant is recognizable in the editorials (more conservative in The Wall Street Journal and more liberal in the Times) and seems to have completely vanished in the news stories.

45 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

This study aimed at investigating in what way a paper’s political slant affects its coverage on one particular topic. However, there are many other aspects one could look at in this context and many other approaches one could use to investigate this topic. First of all, since the revolution in Egypt was also referred to as the ‘Facebook-revolution’, it would also be interesting to have a look at the role of social media in this context. Additionally, the 18-day-Revolution might now be over, but still the future of Egypt remains uncertain, at least until the elections have been held in November. It would be worth another look to see whether the newspapers have changed their way of reporting after the fall of Mubarak and how they will react once a new government is installed in Egypt. Another important point when analyzing news stories is the illustration of the articles, be it a photo or a cartoon or a graph of some sort. Fifty percent of newspaper readers are attracted to an article or even to the whole newspaper by both the headline and the illustration (Linden 2008: 75). Furthermore, it has to be noted that concerning the letters to the editor, an important aspect was left out in the analysis. One can assume that only those people who read the paper on a regular basis are motivated enough and have a strong enough connection to the paper to write such a letter. As Bell (1991) puts it, “[t]he audience are arguably the most important and certainly the most researched component of mass communication”. However, the study of readership or audience analysis would have followed a different research question and was therefore omitted in this study. In this context, it is also important to point out that it is very hard to determine in one single analysis whether a newspaper always keeps its political slant, no matter which topic it is reporting on. Additionally, it is also difficult to tell whether a newspaper does always, indeed, represent its opinion or if it is just trying to ‘please’ its readership. Danuta Reah states that both broadsheets and tabloids “identify their own readership as some kind of homogeneous group with identical aims, beliefs and opinions” (2002: 50). Therefore, one could also argue that newspapers know their target group and are trying to pubCopyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

lish opinions that please their readership. Otherwise they might be disappointed and look for another news outlet which suits their beliefs and values better. ‘One only reads what he wants to read’, as one might say. After all, the news business is a business and very often, media outlets are trying to sell their product – news in this context – in order to survive. No news outlet can afford to lose its target audience due to too large differences in opinion. This is an important point one has to consider when looking at the results of this analysis.

46 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

4.

Works Cited The Works Cited are divided into primary and secondary sources, the primary sources being the newspaper articles used for the analysis. Each paper is listed separately, in the order also used in the body of the study. The secondary sources are all other sources used for this study.

Primary sources

The Wall Street Journal   “Egypt's Choice - and Ours: U.S. diplomats opposed any alternative to Hosni Mubarak.” Editorial. The Wall Street Journal 28 Jan. 2011: A18. Print.

“Egypt's Revolution: Mubarak now has few good options for retaining power.” Editorial. The Wall Street Journal 29 Jan. 2011: A16. Print. “Egypt and the Realists: So much for stability in lieu of freedom in the Middle East.” Editorial. The Wall Street Journal 2 Feb. 2011: A16. Print. “The Clash on Liberation Square: The restraint by Egypt's military is crucial to an orderly transition.” Editorial. The Wall Street Journal 3 Feb. 2011: A14. Print. “Hamas, the Brotherhood and Egypt: What the U.S. mistake of 2006 can teach Arab democrats.” Editorial. The Wall Street Journal 4 Feb. 2011: A14. Print. “The Mubarak Shuffle: A dangerous turn in Egypt's political crisis.” Editorial. The Wall Street Journal 11 Feb. 2011: A12. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

“Egypt After Mubarak: The best chance since 9/11 for Arabs to join the modern world.” Editorial. The Wall Street Journal 12 Feb. 2011: A16. Print. Associated Press. “Turmoil Rattles Middle East.” The Wall Street Journal 31 Jan. 2011: C2. Print. Bradley, Matt. “Rioters Jolt Egyptian Regime.” The Wall Street Journal 26 Jan. 2011: A1. Print.

47 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Bradley, Matt, and Bill Spindle. “Arab Unrest Spreading.” The Wall Street Journal 28 Jan. 2011: A1. Print. Coker, Margaret, et al. “Egypt Girds for Showdown.” The Wall Street Journal 4 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Coker, Margaret, et al. “Mubarak Deepens Crisis.” The Wall Street Journal 11 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Coker, Margaret, et al. “Mubarak Offers to Negotiate.” The Wall Street Journal 1 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Coker, Margaret, Charles Levinson, and Jonathan Weisman. “Mubarak Promises to Step Down.” The Wall Street Journal 2 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Coker, Margaret, Nour Malas, and Marc Champion. “Google Executive Emerges as Key Figure in Revolt.” The Wall Street Journal 7 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Comanor, William S. “Riding the Uncertainty Tiger of the Revolution in Egypt.” Letter. The Wall Street Journal 11 Feb. 2011: A12. Print. Graham, Ron. “Riding the Uncertain Tiger of the Revolution in Egypt.” Letter. The Wall Street Journal 11 Feb. 2011: A12. Print. Irwin, Abraham. “Riding the Uncertainty Tiger of the Revolution in Egypt.” Letter. The Wall Street Journal 11 Feb. 2011: A12. Print. Levinson, Charles, and Matt Bradley. “Egypt's Regime on the Brink.” The Wall Street Journal 29 Jan. 2011: A1. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Levinson, Charles, et al. “Fall of Mubarak Shakes Middle East.” The Wall Street Journal 12 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Levinson, Charles, Margaret Coker, and Summer Said. “Opposition Unites in Egypt.” The Wall Street Journal 31 Jan. 2011: A1. Print. Levinson, Charles, Margaret Coker, and Jay Solomon. “How Cairo, U.S. were Blindsided By Revolution.” The Wall Street Journal 2 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Levinson, Charles, et al. “Mubarak's Supporters Strike Back.” The Wall Street Journal 3 Feb. 2011: A1. Print.

48 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

Lundberg, Jack. “Change in Egypt and Property and Political Rights.” Letter. The Wall Street Journal 8 Feb. 2011: A14. Print. McIntyre, Joe. “What Would Reagan Do About Egypt?” Letter. The Wall Street Journal 2 Feb. 2011: A16. Print. Price, Jessamine. “Change in Egypt and Property and Political Rights.” Letter. The Wall Street Journal 8 Feb. 2011: A14. Print. Seib, Gerald F. “Moment of Truth for U.S.” The Wall Street Journal 31 Jan. 2011: A1. Print. Stocker, Marshall L. “Change in Egypt and Property and Political Rights.” Letter. The Wall Street Journal 8 Feb. 2011: A14. Print.

New York Times  

“Mr. Mubarak Is Put on Notice.” Editorial. New York Times 27 Jan. 2011, final ed. A30. Print. “Washington and Mr. Mubarak.” Editorial. New York Times 29 Jan. 2011, final ed. A22. Print. “Beyond Mubarak.” Editorial. New York Times 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. A22. Print. “Egypt's Agonies.” Editorial. New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A22. Print. “Mr. Suleiman's Empty Promises.” Editorial. New York Times 9 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

“Egypt's Moment.” Editorial. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print. Akl, Roger. “Watching the Struggle for Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A16. Print. Alkalay, Peter. “Sorting Out the Uprising in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 1 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print.

49 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Balakrishnan, V.K. “Sorting out the Uprising in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 1 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Barsoum, Michel. “Echoes From the Revolt in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. A22. Print. Bommarito, Salvatore J. “Awaiting the Outcome in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 3 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Bronner, Ethan. “Israel Shaken As Turbulence Rocks an Ally.” New York Times 31 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Bumiller, Elisabeth. “Calling for Restraint, Pentagon Faces Test of Influence with Ally.” New York Times 30 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Bumiller, Elisabeth. “West Backs Gradual Egyptian Transition: Ally's Stability Hinges on a Secretive Military.” New York Times 6 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Carmichael, Gordon. “A Night of High Drama in Cairo.” Letter. New York Times 11 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Chen, Victor. “If Mubarak Leaves, What's Next?” Letter. New York Times 8 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Cohn, Marjorie. “If Mubarak Leaves, What's Next?” Letter. New York Times 8 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Cooper, Helene, and Mark Landler. “Ally Balks as White House Is Said to Press for His Rapid Exit.” New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Cooper, Helene, Mark Landler, and Mark Mazzetti. “Sudden Split Recasts Foreign Policy.” New York Times 3 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Cooper, Helene, and David E. Sanger. “For Egypt, U.S. Seems to Settle On Slow Path.” New York Times 8 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Dajer, Tony. “Sorting out the Uprising in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 1 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Fahim, Kareem, and Mona El-Naggar. “Across Egypt, Protests Direct Fury at Leader.” New York Times 26 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. 50 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

Fahim, Kareem, Anthony Shadid, and Mark Landler. “West Backs Gradual Egyptian Transition: Cool Response to Plan From the Opposition.” New York Times 6 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Fahim, Kareem, Michael Slackman, and David Rohde. “Resentment Finds a Target In an Insider.” New York Times 7 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Hayward, Charles B. “The Day Mubarak Was Driven Out.” Letter. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print. Hewitt, Ibrahim. “Sorting out the Uprising in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 1 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Huffaker, Carrie. “The Day Mubarak Was Driven Out.” Letter. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print. Kean, Geoffrey. “Watching the Struggle for Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A16. Print. Khodr, Mohamed. “Sorting out the Uprising in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 1 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Kirkpatrick, David D. “Mubarak Orders Crackdown, With Revolt Sweeping Egypt.” New York Times 29 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Egyptians Defiant as Military Does Little to Quash Protests.” New York Times 30 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Mubarak's Grip Is Shaken as Millions Are Called to Protest.” New York Times 1 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

---. “As Egypt Protest Swells, U.S. Sends Specific Demands.” New York Times 9 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Wired, Educated and Shrewd, Young Egyptians Guide Revolt.” New York Times 10 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Mubarak Out.” New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Kirkpatrick, David D., and Mona El-Naggar. “Protest's Old Guard Falls In Behind the Young.” New York Times 31 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. 51 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Kirkpatrick, David D., and Kareem Fahim. “Mubarak's backers storm protesters as U.S. condemns Egypt's violent turn.” New York Times 3 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Kirkpatrick, David D., and David E. Sanger. “Egypt Officials Seek to Nudge Mubarak Out.” New York Times 5 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “After first talks, Egypt Opposition vows new protest.” New York Times 7 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Kirkpatrick, David D., and Michael Slackman. “In New Role, Egypts Youths Drive Revolt.” New York Times 27 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Landler, Mark. “A Region's Unrest Scrambles U.S. Foreign Policy.” New York Times 26 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Obama Cautions Embattled Egyptian Ally Against Violent Repression.” New York Times 29 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Landler, Mark, et al. “A Diplomatic Scrambe as an Ally Is Pushed to the Exit.” New York Times 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Landler, Mark, and Andrew W. Lehren. “State Secrets; Cables Show U.S. Tacks on Egypt: Public Support, Private Pressure.” New York Times 28 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Landler, Mark, and Mark Mazzetti. “U.S. Faces a Stark Choice as an Ally Clings to His Office.” New York Times 11 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Lauen, Roger. “Awaiting the Outcome in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 3 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Lipman, W.F. “Watching the Struggle for Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A16. Print. Lipton, Amy N. “If Mubarak Leaves, What's Next?” Letter. New York Times 8 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Majidyar, Ahmad. “The Drama in Egypt: What Is the Next Act?” Letter. New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A22. Print. Mangan, James. “In the Mideast, Days of Tumult.” Letter. New York Times 29 Jan. 2011, final ed. A22. Print. 52 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

Meyer, Carlyn. “The Drama in Egypt: What Is the Next Act?” Letter. New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A22. Print. Patton, Jennifer. “A Night of High Drama in Cairo.” Letter. New York Times 11 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Peters, Vincent. “The Day Mubarak Was Driven Out.” Letter. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print. Preston, Douglas. “A Night of High Drama in Cairo.” Letter. New York Times 11 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Pune, Vijaya M. “A Night of High Drama in Cairo.” Letter. New York Times 11 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Reifler, Samuel. “Watching the Struggle for Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A16. Print. Rudowski, Joyce. “If Mubarak Leaves, What's Next?” Letter. New York Times 8 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Sanbonmatsu, John. “If Mubarak Leaves, What's Next?” Letter. New York Times 8 Feb. 2011, final ed. A26. Print. Sape, N. “The Day Mubarak Was Driven Out.” Letter. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print. Scott, Michael. “Echoes From the Revolt in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. A22. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Shadid, Anthony. “Seizing Control of Their Lives and Wondering What's Next.” New York Times 30 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Mubarak won't run again, but stays; Obama urges a faster shift of power.” New York Times 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Street Battle Over the Arab Future.” New York Times 3 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Egypt officials widen crackdown; U.S. in talks for Mubarak to quit.” New York Times 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print.

53 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

---. “Egypt's leaders seek to project air of normalcy.” New York Times 8 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “After Tahrir, Uncharted Ground.” New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Shadid, Anthony, Nada Bakri, and Kareem Fahim. “Waves of unrest spread to Yemen, shaking a region.” New York Times 28 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Shadid, Anthony, and David D. Kirkpatrick. “In Egypt, Opposition Unifies Around Government Critic.” New York Times 31 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. ---. “Mubarak Won't Quit, Stoking Revolt's Fury and Resolve.” New York Times 11 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Slackman, Michael. “A Brittle Leader, Appearing Strong.” New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A1. Print. Steinberger, Rita A. “The Day Mubarak Was Driven Out.” Letter. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print. Thakar, Sid. “The Day Mubarak Was Driven Out.” Letter. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print. Tobin, Rita. “The Day Mubarak Was Driven Out.” Letter. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print. Vradim, Jim S. K. “Echoes From the Revolt in Egypt.” Letter. New York Times 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. A22. Print. Wilson, Nancy F. “The Day Mubarak Was Driven Out.” Letter. New York Times 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A20. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Worth, Robert F., and David D. Kirkpatrick. “Seizing a Moment, Al Jazeera Galvanizes Arab Frustration.” New York Times 28 Jan. 2011, final ed. A1. Print.

54 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

San Francisco Chronicle  

“Egyptian unrest threatens region;: On Turmoil in Africa.” Editorial. San Francisco Chronicle 27 Jan. 2011, final ed. A15. Print. “A step closer to democracy;: Mubarak won't run for re-election; protesters not satisfied.” Editorial. San Francisco Chronicle 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. A11. Print. “A war against knowledge;: On the Attacks on the Media in Egypt.” Editorial. San Francisco Chronicle 5 Feb. 2011, final ed. A7. Print. “Googling Freedom: On Egypt.” Editorial. San Francisco Chronicle 8 Feb. 2011, final ed. A15. Print. “Mubarak - he's not listening: ON TURMOIL IN EGYPT.” Editorial. San Francisco Chronicle 11 Feb. 2011, final ed. A13. Print. “Egypt's 18-day revolution;: On Hosni Mubarak's Resignation.” Editorial. San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A9. Print. Colliver, Victoria. “Supporters hail peaceful Cairo demonstrations: S.F. RALLY.” San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A5. Print. Evangelista, Benny. “Aghast at Egypt: COMMUNICATION.” San Francisco Chronicle 29 Jan. 2011, final ed. D1. Print. Evangelista, Benny. “Egyptians' voices turned into tweets: SOCIAL MEDIA.” San Francisco Chronicle 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. D1. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Garofoli, Joe. “S.F.'s Link TV carries Al Jazeera reports on Egypt.” San Francisco Chronicle 4 Feb. 2011, final ed. A5. Print. Halvorsen, Jean. “Let the joy go on.” Letter. San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A9. Print. Kane, Will. “Rally held in S.F. to support Egypt: DEMONSTRATION.” San Francisco Chronicle 6 Feb. 2011, final ed. C1. Print. Levin, Norm. “Freedom in Egypt.” Letter. San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A9. Print.

55 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Nelson, Katie, and Jill Tucker. “Tales of lucky few Northern Californians who escaped.” San Francisco Chronicle 2 Feb. 2011, final ed. A8. Print. Page, M.H. “The good news.” Letter. Letter. San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A9. Print. Salama, Mohammad. “A nation's newfound desire for democracy.” San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A9. Print. Smith, Elliot. “Egypt: Who knew?” Letter. San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A9. Print. Spiegel, Paul. “Living in freedom.” Letter. San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A9. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Thomas, Robert. “Egypt's peace prize.” Letter. San Francisco Chronicle 12 Feb. 2011, final ed. A9. Print.

56 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

The Washington Times  

“Obama channeling Jimmy Carter;: Egypt is Barack's Iranian Moment.” Editorial. The Washington Times 1 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. “The Egyptian's hate us;: Mubarak's fall would spell trouble for America.” Editorial. The Washington Times 2 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. “Egypt's blood on Obama's hands? White House is fanning flames of Islamic revolution.” Editorial. The Washington Times 3 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. “The next Mideast war: Obama policies are pushing volatile region to the brink.” Editorial. The Washington Times 7 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. “Obama proves Osama was right: When the chips are down, Barack abandons U.S. allies.” Editorial. The Washington Times 8 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. “What's next in Egypt?; Mubarak resists mob pressure, for now.” Editorial. The Washington Times 11 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. Abdelkader, Zerougui. “Egypt's ripple effect on the Middle East.” Letter. The Washington Times 8 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. Blousten, Paul. “Beware Gaza reprise in Egypt.” Letter. The Washington Times 9 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. Card, William. “Egypt's warning signs missed.” Letter. The Washington Times 4 Feb. 2011: B2. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Chase, Jonathan. “ElBaradei for interim Egyptian president.” Letter. The Washington Times 7 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. Dodell, Nathan. “Egypt is a wake-up call.” Letter. The Washington Times 3 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. Jack, Bob. “Danger in meddling with Mubarak.” Letter. The Washington Times 9 Feb. 2011: B2. Print. Lawrence, David. “The failure of change in Egypt.” Letter. The Washington Times 4 Feb. 2011: B2. Print.

57 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Murdock, Heather. “Embattled Mubarak won't seek new term in September: Vows to oversee 'peaceful' transition.” The Washington Times 2 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. ---. “Mubarak backers join fray in Egypt: Widespread clashes kill 3, injure 1,500.” The Washington Times 3 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. ---. “Protesters push to showdown: Departure Fridays' looms for Mubarak.” The Washington Times 4 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. ---. “Vice president offers concessions in Egyptian talks: Mubarak ouster not on the table.” The Washington Times 7 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. ---. “Makeshift clinic treat ill and injured in Cairo.” The Washington Times 8 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. ---. “Egyptians show no signs of weariness: Anger still fills Tahrir Square.” The Washington Times 9 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. ---. “Mubarak refuses to resign: Gives authority to vice president; crowds furious with decision.” The Washington Times 11 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Rowland, Kara. “Obama treads lightly on Egypt: Carefully calls for change and end in violence.” The Washington Times 1 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Scaraborough, Rowan. “Key military, intelligence assets imperiled in Egypt.” The Washington Times 1 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Sen, Ashish K. “Egyptian Muslims call out for ElBaradei: Brotherhood seeks talks with Mubarak.” The Washington Times 31 Jan. 2011: A1. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

---. “Leaderless protest spawns crowded field for president.” The Washington Times 7 Feb. 2011: A1. Print. Towle, David. “Hypocrisy on democracy.” Letter. The Washington Times 9 Feb. 2011: B2. Print.

58 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

4.1.

Secondary sources

ABC. National Newspapers Circulation Certificate: August 2011, 2011. Web. Retrieved from . 20 Sep. 2011. 

Ahrens, Frank. “Moon Speech Raises Old Ghosts as the Times Turns 20.” The Washington Post 23 May. 2002: E01. Web. Retrieved from . 20 Sep. 2011. 

Al Jazeera English. Egypt not trending in China: Beijing blocks searches for "Egypt" from microblogging site following protests there., 2011. Web. Retrieved from . 17 Sep. 2011.

Armbruster, Jörg. Der arabische Frühling: Als die islamistische Jugend begann, die Welt zu verändern. Frankfurt am Main: Westend, 2011. Print. Audit Bureau of Circulations. US NEWSPAPER, 2011. Web. Retrieved from . 17 Sep. 2011 

Bell, Allan. The language of news media. Oxford, UK ;, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1991. Print. Berger, Arthur A. Media analysis techniques. 3rd. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage, 2005. Print. Cook, Timothy E. Governing with the news: The news media as a political institution. Chicago, Ill: The University of Chicago Press, 1997. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Egypt State Information Service. The Lotus Revolution, 2011. Web. Retrieved from 17 Sep. 2011.

Franklin, Bob, ed. Pulling newspapers apart: Analysing print journalism. London;, New York: Routledge, 2008. Print. ---. “Newspapers: trends and developments.” Pulling newspapers apart: Analysing print journalism. Ed. Bob Franklin. London ;, New York: Routledge, 2008. 1–37. Print.

59 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

Groseclose, Tim, and Jeffrey Milyo. “A measure of media bias.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 120.4 (2005): 1191–237. Web. Retrieved from 10 Sep. 2011. 

Harrison, Jackie. “News.” Pulling newspapers apart: Analysing print journalism. Ed. Bob Franklin. London ;, New York: Routledge, 2008. 39–47. Print. Herrera, Linda. Egypt's Revolution 2.0: The Facebook Factor. Jadaliyya, 2011. Web. Retrieved from 21 Sep. 2011.

Jel, Doug and David Pery. Personal Interview. Washington, DC, 24 February 2010 Kienzle, Ulrich. “Abschied von 1001 Nacht.” medium magazin 3 (2011): 25. Print. Linden, Peter. Wie Texte wirken: Anleitung zur Analyse journalistischer Sprache. 3rd ed. Berlin: ZV Zeitungs-Verl. Service, 2008. Print. ---. “Journalisten-Werkstatt: Wie Texte wirken.” medium magazin 9. supplement (2010): 2–15. Print. Lindner, Roland, and Carsten Knop. “Der "Chronicle" vor dem Untergang.” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 26 Feb. 2009: 18. Print. Mayes, Ian. Readers between the Lines. Guardian, 2003. Web. Retrieved from

19 Sep. 2011.

Milz, Annette. “Der andere Blick.” medium magazin 3 (2011): 20. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Plambeck, Joseph. “Newspaper Circulation Falls Nearly 9%.” New York Times 27 Apr. 2010: B2. Print. Rafferty, Eamonn. “Headlines.” Pulling newspapers apart: Analysing print journalism. Ed. Bob Franklin. London ;, New York: Routledge, 2008. 224–32. Print. Reah, Danuta. The language of newspapers. 2nd. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.

60 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

   

Richardson, John. “Readers' letters.” Pulling newspapers apart: Analysing print journalism. Ed. Bob Franklin. London ;, New York: Routledge, 2008. Print. S, A. Matthews's statements defy conservatives' claims that he is a "liberal Democrat". Media Matters, 2005. Web. Retrieved from 27 Sep. 2011.

Schudson, Michael. Discovering the news: A social history of American newspapers. New York: Basic Books, 1978. Print. Shapira, Ian. “Unification Church will put Washington Times up for sale.” The Washington Post 1 May. 2010. Web. Retrieved from 19 Sep. 2011.

Sharp, Jeremy M. Egypt: Background and U.S. Relations. Federation of American Scientists, 2009. Web. Retrieved from 5 Sep. 2011. ---. Egypt: The January 25 Revolution and Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy. Congressional Research Service, 2011a. Web. Retrieved from 5 Sep. 2011.

---. Egypt in Transition. Congressional Research Service, 2011b. Web. Retrieved from 5 Sep. 2011. Shepherd, Bree, ed. The 'In the Know' Guide to Notable North American Newspapers: The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and More: Webster's Digital Services, 2011. Print.

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

Wahl-Jorgensen, Karin. “Understanding the Conditions for Public Discourse: four rules for selecting letters to the editor.” Journalism Studies. 3.1 (2002): 69–81. Print. ---. “Op-ed pages.” Pulling newspapers apart: Analysing print journalism. Ed. Bob Franklin. London;, New York: Routledge, 2008. 70–78. Print. Weinberg, Neil. NYT vs. WSJ: Liberal Bias Vs. Conservative Bias? Forbes, 2010. Web. Retrieved from 10 Sep. 2011.

61 

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook

If you are interessted in publishing your study please contact us: [email protected]

Anchor Academic Publishing

Copyright © 2013. Diplomica Verlag. All rights reserved.

disseminate knowledge

This is what they tell US: The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt : The US Printing Press on the 2011 Revolution in Egypt, Diplomica Verlag, 2013. ProQuest Ebook