Es heißt ja immer wieder, der exzellente Journalismus der Leitmedien werde nur hin und wieder durch Propagandaartikel getrübt und sei im Großen und Ganzen objektiv. Das dem nicht so ist, insbesondere, wenn es um inhaltlich entscheidende Themen geht, zeigt diese Studie des Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland.
Kurz die wesentlichen Punkte:
The study found that:
Newspaper coverage focused on the “he said/she said” aspects of the policy debate,
without adequately explaining the fundamental issues that should have been informing
assessments—such as Iran’s nuclear capabilities and intentions, the influence of U.S.,
European, Iranian, and Israeli security strategies, and the impact of the nuclear
When newspaper coverage did address Iranian nuclear intentions and capabilities, it did
so in a manner that lacked precision, was inconsistent over time, and failed to provide
adequate Buy Bactrim sourcing and context for claims. This led to an inaccurate picture of the choices
facing policy makers.
Government officials, particularly U.S. government officials, were the most frequently
quoted or relied-on sources in coverage of Iran’s nuclear program. This tendency focused
attention on a narrow set of policy options and deemphasized other potential approaches
to the dispute.
Newspaper coverage generally adopted the tendency of U.S., European, and Israeli
officials to place on Iran the burden to resolve the dispute over its nuclear program,
failing to acknowledge the roles of these other countries in the dispute.
A plurality of newspaper articles took the approach of examining the domestic political
and international diplomatic angles of the larger story, contributing to the heavy reliance
on official sources and a focus on official policy proscriptions. Commentary and opinion
articles relating to Iran’s nuclear program made up a larger than typical share of the
coverage, demonstrating the intense interest focused on the topic and opening the public
debate to a range of viewpoints.
Newspaper coverage paid insufficient attention to the broader context—particularly, the
security concerns of the United States, Iran, Israel, and European states, and the effect of
domestic politics within these same countries—that influences what specific actors say or
do about Iran’s nuclear program at different times. This obscured the substantial
confusion about national motivations and made it difficult to conceive of and debate
consensual solutions to the dispute.
Coverage of Iran’s nuclear program reflected and reinforced the negative sentiments
about Iran that are broadly shared by U.S., European, and Israeli publics. This contributed
to misunderstandings about the interests involved and narrowed the range of acceptable