Narratives of conflict: the language of peace in the chaos of war. On British media’s use of international law and strategic narratives during the first month of the Israel-Gaza ‘war'

Abstract

This master’s thesis aimed to uncover perceived bias in British media coverage of the Israel- Gaza conflict and to highlight potential double standards through a critical discourse analysis of how selected newspapers deploy international law. An in-depth analysis of The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, and The Sun's coverage of the first month of the 'war,' including October 7th, situated international law within different narrative frames. Despite varying article types— news, opinion, or editorials—this research found that left-wing progressive media deploy international law more frequently than right-wing counterparts. While The Guardian systematically addresses the situation through international law, The Daily Telegraph and The Sun favor narratives constructed through selective contextualization, humanization, and legitimation of violence. By favoring military-strategic narratives imbued with orientalism, these newspapers create 'alternative legalities' that justify Israel’s actions while undermining Palestinian suffering. This raises questions about media power in shaping perceptions and its intersection with political power. The potential of strategic media narratives to undermine international law and legitimize otherwise illegal actions highlights the need for critical engagement with media, especially in the context of Israel-Palestine or other conflicts.