The named and the nameless: A comparative analysis of US and UK news coverage of civilian deaths caused by US drone strikes, 2009–2016

Abstract

Research on foreign news coverage suggests that journalists tend to exhibit an ethnocentric bias when reporting on issues that might reflect poorly upon their nation. This stems from the institutional, commercial and cultural pressures that tend to shape the news production process. These pressures are at odds with other professional norms and values within journalism that are seen as crucial to democracy, including the need to inform the public, hold leaders accountable and expose abuses of power. This study examines these tensions in the context of US drone warfare. The authors employ social identity theory to systematically examine the manner and extent to which civilian casualties caused by US drone strikes were reported on in news coverage in the US ( The New York Times) versus the UK ( The Guardian) from 2009–2016. The article explores whether civilian casualty mentions in these news sources led to a more critical examination of the merits and efficacy of the drone policy.