Narratives of Conflict: A Comparative Study of Kashmir Coverage in US and Pakistan Media

Abstract

The Kashmir conflict, a long-standing geopolitical issue, has been prominently featured in global media, often framed through lenses of human rights, regional security, and international relations. This study addresses How do The New York Times and Dawn newspaper frame the Kashmir conflict? What narratives and biases emerge in their coverage, and how do these affect public perceptions and conflict resolution efforts?  Employing a qualitative content analysis, this research examines articles published online between January 1, 2021, and December 31, 2021, selected through purposive sampling to ensure a representative sample. This timeframe was chosen to capture the evolving dynamics of the conflict following the revocation of Article 370 by the Indian government in August 2019 and subsequent developments, which have significantly impacted the region and garnered extensive media attention. The analysis reveals that The New York Times frequently highlights human rights violations, political repression, and the conflict's impact on civilians, with occasional biases favoring the Indian government. In contrast, Dawn's coverage aligns with Pakistan's foreign policy, reflecting a consistent editorial stance on the Kashmir issue. These findings highlight the intersection of media and politics in conflict reporting and raise important questions about the ethical responsibilities of the media in framing such conflicts. By uncovering the sociopolitical dimensions of media reporting on the Kashmir conflict, this research advances the discourse on the media's role in shaping narratives and influencing conflict dynamics in South Asia