Comparative Analysis of the Coverage by British and American Newspapers on Pakistan's Civil and Military Leadership during the Musharraf Regime

Abstract

Pakistan's military and civil leadership has continuously been influential in formulating and executing an array of national policies. The importance of mainstream print media cannot be ignored in the sphere of making public opinion about powerful institutions of civil and military leaders in the state. Therefore, the study has attempted to gauge civil and military leadership representation by four British and American mainstream newspapers (The Guardian, The Telegraph, The New York Times, and The Washington Post) during the nine-year dictatorship regime of General Perveiz Musharraf (1999–2008). Quantitative content analysis has been employed as a methodology for analyzing news stories, articles/features, andin 10 major categories, and 399 items were selected in 15 sub-categories through purpose sampling techniques in British and American newspapers related to the civil and military leadership of Pakistan. Findings have revealed that overall, anti-military leadership representation has been found more in the Musharraf era but the ratio of pro-military coverage has been calculated more as compared to pro-civilian coverage. The four leading newspapers have framed militaryestablishment positively in the case of the Lal-masjid (Red Mosque) operation while more negatively represented in the category of referendum/general elections. Based on commutative coverage of civil and military leadership, the overall impression of Pakistan has been found more unfavorable during the dictatorship regime of General Perveiz Musharraf in Western print media