Mass media is an essential
source of providing information regarding peace initiatives taken by neighboring
countries. The most frequently used technique is called “framing” which is used
to provide information of the happenings of the world. It shapes public opinions
as it enables to think the way media wants them to think. Scheufele & Tewksbury
(2007) believes that framing is the tool of message construction which changes
perceptions. Framing is conducted with war and peace journalism. Lee and Maslog
(2005) define war and peace journalism. They define “war journalism is oriented
in violence, propaganda, elites, and victories whereas peace journalism creates
a setting in which possible solutions are important”.
Pakistan and India are two neighboring countries on the globe. The relationship
among the two is strained with political and historical issues as the two South
Asian nations share geographical, cultural and economic bond. After the
partition of the subcontinent, both the countries were interested to strengthen
their relationship but the territorial dispute among the two overshadowed the
struggle. The hostile relationship is accompanied by variety of issues including
Kashmir issue, 1965 war, secession of East Pakistan, Simla agreement 1972,
economic and trade agreements in 1980’s, nuclear testing, siachin issue, and
kargil war. More than sixty years of Indo-Pak is evident that the relationship
has remained unable to strengthen peace and harmony. This failure has taken over
the strength of the region as well.
Composite dialogue between India and Pakistan is known as peace process that
began in 2004 as a meeting between the two Prime Ministers. Four major conflicts
in 1947, 1965, 1971 and 1999 forced both the governments to think humanizing
their hostile relationship. Twelfth SAARC summit, 2003 was the beginning of this
peace process. It was believed that a constructive dialogue would promote the
common objective of promoting peace, security and the economic development. The
issues constituting composite dialogue are: Peace and Security including CBMs
(Confidence Building measures), Jammu and Kashmir, Siachen, Water Issue, Sir
Creek, Terrorism and Drug Trafficking, Economy and Commercial Collaboration, and
Promotion of Friendly Exchanges in various fields. (Haq, 2007)
According to Haq (2010) four rounds of talk were carried out till Mumbai Attacks
2008. After that a complete pause is adopted. India had the perspective that it
would get nothing on the negotiating table. But soon Indian outlook as a terror
victim began weakening its credibility as an international power, and then both
again entered the round of composite talks for resolution of disputes. But still
other conflicts over resources (like water) engaged both in bitterly treated
relationship. Indo-Pak composite dialogue is an incremental process for
political, economic and military measures. It has remained a beneficial
procedure but it is still labeled as unhelpful.
The study explores the framing of Pak-India composite dialogue in Pakistani
press. The study is carried out with reference to agenda-setting theory which is
explained by McCombs & Shaw (1972) as “news media is successful at telling us
what to think about”. The theory explains people get familiarity with media
exposure and place importance on the issues being discussed. As different people
feel differently regarding the issue, at hand, but most of them feel about the
same issue and give it utmost importance. Pakistani print media is performing
its journalistic duty thhrough framing as to emphasize the composite dialogue
and its progress between Pakistan and India. This framing is defined by Chong &
Druckman (2007) with reference to framing theory. They state that framing is an
effective tool in presenting issues in front of the people. People do not have
independent ideas they are being motivated by the framing utilized by media
firms. Framing effects are intense and wide spread and are important instrument
for information dissemination. The study conducts content analysis of the
coverage of Composite Dialogue between Pakistan and India from October, 2009 to
September, 2010. Two leading English newspapers namely THE NEWS and Daily DAWN
are selected for analyzing the news content. According to Colorado State
University (2011) “Content analysis is a research tool used to determine the
presence of certain words or concepts within texts or sets of texts”. Population
comprises of all the news stories that covered Pak-India Composite Dialogue
during the selected time period. Castillo (2009) defines population as “a large
collection of individuals or objects that is the main focus of a scientific
query”.
Pak-India relationship is held up by mistrust and doubts. The need for peace
process enabled both the countries to take positive step towards the resolution
of long-term territorial conflicts. The study analyzes the framing of composite
dialogue between Pakistan and India as to find which genre of journalism (either
war or peace journalism) is utilized in Pakistani print media. News content is
analyzed and the sample comprises of 2495 news stories. The coverage given to
Pak India composite dialogue is dominated by war journalism than peace
journalism. This is our first hypothesis being approved. The reason behind this
genre of journalism is that after the pause in the process due to Mumbai
attacks, it was a new beginning for both the countries to realize their mistakes
and to change their perspectives for each other. India’s attitude of achieving
nothing on negotiating table forced both the countries towards clashing
narratives. Terrorism was the dominant issue and India was concious about terror
and terror-driven activities radiating from Pakistan. It was also supposed that
Indian consulates in Afghanistan were engaged in a proxy war against Pakistan by
supporting terrorists. Composite dialogue is of a slow pace the failure of both
the countries in addressing the core issue is evident. This disbelieve and loss
of faith is dominant in Pakistani print media as war journalism is utilized
which has focused on labeling the enemy and describing the hostilities among the
two. Under the discussed issue, the first sub-hypothesis, approved, is that Hard
news stories frame more peace journalism than soft news stories. The reason is
that Pakistani print media has focused on factual reporting as to define the
current situation of the peace process and its mode of addressing the issues.
The primary aim of having more hard news stories is to report the news on
composite dialogue in a straight-forward manner that may cover all the related
facts. It is having the direct style of reporting with focus on gist of stories
with certain other necessary points. In short, hard new stories are regarded as
“mirror of reality” in peace process. Similarly, the stories contributed by
private sources are promoting more war journalism than the stories contributed
by government sources. This is the second sub-hypothesis of the study. Private
sources of news include correspondents, reporters, online sources, news agencies
and other news providers. The reason for having more news stories from private
source is that government sources are reluctant to address all issues publically
as compared to the private source which is inclined to report minute-to-minute
happenings. Private sources are news-gathering organizations that supply bulk of
news stories as they are given more access to the areas of happenings. In
reporting composite dialogue between Pakistan and India these private sources
are more attentive, authorized and authentic to believe in so the print media
have given more space to them. The third sub-hypothesis of the main hypothesis
deals with the frequency as war stories are more than the frequency of war
stories in the coverage. Realizing the hostile situation after the terror
attacks in 2008, Pakistani print media thinks war Journalism as an important
trend of reporting composite dialogue as it follows simple and the
straight-forward pattern of dichotomy. Pakistani print media has presented two
mutually-exclusive sides of the hostile attitude that is focusing the conflict
and ignoring the other sides that may affect the resolution. It is defined by
Eirienne (2011) as “In war journalism, the media portrays conflicts as battles
between two sides, good and evil, and fails to portray the nuances of any given
situation.” Second approved hypothesis states that the mean story length of war
journalism is more than the mean story length of peace journalism. The number of
words contributing the news story is found more in the stories that are reported
with war journalism. As the approach used by Pakistani print media is war and
the frequency of war stories is higher, similarly, the mean story length for war
reporting is also higher. More length of war stories depicts more emphasis on
factual reporting.
Pakistan and India established diplomatic relations since independence, but
numerous disputes and violent attitudes overshadowed their relationship.
Composite dialogue was the attempt to settle down the disputes and take
initiative toeards pecae-building. The study concludes that Pakistani print
media uses war journalism in framing Pak-India composite dialogue in 2008-2009.
Due to the increased hostile attitudes among the two, as a result of terrorism,
Pakistani media focused on reporting the most dominant issues that are affecting
the peace process, neglecting the peace initiatives in resolving the conflicts
and promoting peace talks. The frequency and mean length of war stories is found
more as compared to peace stories. Private sources and correspondents have
attempted to get close enough to the actions taken in peace process, by Pakistan
and India, to provide written accounts. The news coverage of composite dialogue
is grounded in the notion of “conflict and war” as a valued news value.