Abstract
This study examined news coverage of the Syrian refugee crisis from 2011 to 2018. Specifically, it investigated how various mainstream news publications framed the Syrian refugee story, the overall tone of coverage used, and shifts in coverage of the Syrian refugee crisis over time. Refugees were depicted positively. Tone of coverage became more positive over time, and the most common frames employed were the human interest and the conflict frame.
In December of 2024, opposition forces said Syria had been liberated from President Bashar al-Assad as the forces took Damascus. al-Assad fled and was later said to be in Russia. Since 2011, the al-Assad regime had relied on Russian and Iranian military support, but both countries have been bogged down in battles in other areas (Russia in Ukraine and Iran with Hezbollah and Israeli attacks). The Syrian economy was failing, and even soldiers and police officers abandoned their posts and handed over weapons to opposition forces (“What Happened in Syria? How Did al-Assad fall?,” 2024).
The civil war started in spring of 2011 when Syrians were motivated by protestors in the Arab Spring movement in Egypt and Tunisia. They took to the streets and started protesting the al-Assad regime. Government troops responded by opening fire on the civilians, killing hundreds and imprisoning more. The military destroyed entire neighborhoods and towns, which eventually led to the formation of the Free Syrian Army, a rebel group aiming to overthrow the government (“Syria’s Civil War Explained From the Beginning,” 2018).
After more than 13 years of war, the Syrian refugee crisis is the world’s “largest refugee and displacement crisis (World Vision, “Syrian Refugee Crisis,” 2025, para. 1). More than half of the country’s population was killed or forced to leave their homes. As of 2025, there were more than 14 million Syrians displaced, more than any country in the world. Around 6.3 million refugees live abroad, almost half of those reside in Turkey (World Vision, “Syrian Refugee Crisis,” 2025).
On January 27, 2017, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that banned travel to the United States for 90 days from seven countries (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen). The ban halted the United States. refugee resettlement program for 120 days. The maximum number of refugees admitted was cut in half—from 110,000 to 50,000. Trump’s policy went against the pattern of the United States being a global leader in resettling refugees (Tirosh et al., 2022). Since 2011, roughly 35,500 Syrian refugees have settled in the United States, and most of those under the Joe Biden administration (Korhonen, 2024).
This study analyzes the reporting in United States news outlets to determine how the media framed Syrian refugees entering the United States during Trump’s first term in office. Media frames, meaning how the media package a story, help audiences shape their attitudes about a topic (Kosicki, 2003; Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002). Frames effect the cognitive processes the public uses to understand the information and make sense of the news (Scheufele, 1999). Understanding how stories about the Syrian refugees were framed will help determine the salient information citizens have available, the information journalists chose to present when they discussed the crisis, and also where the citizens attribute blame (Todd et al., 2007).
Past research has examined frames of Syrian refugees in the U.K. media (Xu, 2021) and Canadian print media (Wallace, 2018). Research has also examined visual depictions of Syrian refugees (Martikainen & Sakki, 2021; Mustafa-Awad & Kirner-Ludwig, 2021; Wilmott, 2017).
This study extends the research by examining print coverage rather than visual coverage of the Syrian war (e.g., Bozdag & Smets, 2017; Cmeciu, 2017; Perreault & Paul, 2018). Research has examined how Syrian refugees were covered in other countries (e.g., Spain and Lebanon), but not the United States. It is important to understand how the media frame events like this because citizens’ attitudes and opinions toward refugees are formed by the information they read.
Literature Review
Media frames influence how audiences evaluate issues (Frear et al., 2019). Understanding media frames is important when examining the refugee situation (Tirosh et al., 2022). The information citizens receive from the media is packaged. The story “package” is often called framing. Frames “select and call attention to particular aspects of the reality described, which logically means that frames simultaneously direct attention away from other aspects” (Entman, 1993, p. 54). Pieces of information are either included or excluded. The information included/excluded influences how individuals perceive a problem or an issue. Individuals make their decisions about an issue by what is discussed in the media even though they lack all of the details. “By framing issues in certain ways, the media influence the way people perceive a problem or issue and its consequences, possibly altering their final evaluation of the issue” (Jasperson et al., 1998, p. 206).
Each news story is unique because of the frame and the details omitted/included. Citizens use this information to build a knowledge network that will be employed when individuals want to discuss the topic (Entman, 2004). Cognitive scientists speculate words and images used in news stories activate thoughts in readers (Taber et al., 2001). For example, in this study, the knowledge network being built by the media would include information about the al-Assad regime and the history of Syria. The stories may include or omit different information about the history of Syria, the regime, the protest leading up to the civil war, or focus on the refugees. Whatever the story frame employed, the details included or omitted will provide knowledge for the news consumers to add to their knowledge network about Syria.
Frames
There are several different types of frames employed by the news media. Episodic and thematic frames are two common frames studied in mass communication. Episodic frames use a specific individual’s experience or event to illustrate the issue; while thematic frames focus on broader trends or background information on a topic (Iyengar, 1991). The use of an episodic or thematic frame impacts the attribution of responsibility. Episodic stories lead to individuals attributing responsibility to other individuals because the story focuses on a specific individual, company, or organization; and thematic frames lead to societal responsibility (Iyengar, 1991). A thematic frame about the Syrian refugee crisis might focus on the history of the al-Assad regime or discuss the number of citizens fleeing the country during the war. Whereas, an episodic story about Syria might feature a family fleeing to a neighboring country, discuss what is it like living day-to-day in a city under attack, or feature the opposition soldiers fighting back against the al-Assad regime. The episodic frame will provide a concrete instance and specific example. Iyengar (1991) notes most news stories embody both episodic/thematic elements, but they tilt in one direction.
There is limited research investigating the most common types of frames used in U.S. media coverage of Syrian refugees. Elsamni (2016) examined CNN’s international website’s coverage of Arab refugees from Syria and Iraq for the month of January 2016. Two-thirds of the articles in the sample were framed thematically. The stories were framed for the broader topic of reporting on refugees as numbers. This supports the pattern found when examining the Lebanese media discussing the Syrian refugee crisis (Turbay, 2015). As well as the pattern found when examining coverage in the Canadian and U.K. press (Xu, 2021). This study examines multiple U.S. news outlets to determine their pattern of coverage. The pattern of using a thematic frame to focus on broad issues rather than employing an episodic frame to focus on concrete instances should still be present in the U.S. print media as in other countries. Therefore, the following hypothesis predicts:
Reporters will use more thematic frames when reporting about the Syrian refugee crisis than episodic frames.
Another common frame employed in times of unrest is the conflict frame. Conflict frames are examined in times of turbulence. A conflict frame shows “conflict between individuals, groups, institutions, or countries” (de Vreese & Semetko, 2000, p. 95). Neuman et al. (1992) state the media emphasize conflict to attract attention and readership. The conflict can be seen by presenting different points of view. The most polarizing example of a conflict frame is an us/them frame that often occurs on the topic of race. An us/them frame can be seen to voice suspicion of other countries’ motives toward international issues. The U.S. press may have painted the civil war Syria in a positive light, and the refugees fleeing, because it was led by the citizens during a period of strife in the region. The “little guy” was fighting back. This would be the us/them frame (Neuman et al., 1992).
Past research examining humanitarian crises found media commonly use conflict frames (Bradimore & Bauder, 2011). However, some studies have discovered human-interest and responsibility frames to be more prevalent (e.g., Sunata & Yildiz, 2018).
The human-interest frame “bring[s] a human face or an emotional angle to the presentation of an event, issue, or problem” (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000, p. 95). Journalists often use human-interest frames to capture and retain audience attention. For example, the New York Times published a piece that featured an iconic photo of 5-year-old Omran sitting covered in dust only moments after he was pulled from the rubble of war in Aleppo. This story brought new attention to the crisis in Syria and the thousands of children dying during years of war (Barnard, 2016). Participants exposed to human-interest frames are more likely to have an emotional response to the crisis (Cho & Gower, 2006). There were very few human-interest frames used when comparing the Canadian and United Kingdom coverage of the Syrian refugee crisis (Xu, 2021).
Journalists could also frame a story by focusing on the cause of the problem. These frames are called responsibility frames and present “an issue or problem in such a way as to attribute responsibility for its cause or solution to either the government or to an individual or group” because the news media tend to minimize organizational and governmental blame (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000, p. 96).
A content analysis of CNN’s coverage of the Arab refugee crisis revealed responsibility frames were the most apparent type of frame used by journalists. The attribution of responsibility frame became common in news coverage due to the number of news stories framing ISIS as the reason for the mass influx of refugees (Elsamni, 2016).
This study extends past research by Elsamni (2016) by examining multiple U.S. news sources rather than just CNN. It also extends the research by expanding the frame categories studied. This study examines the frame category called “security” that was defined by past research stating immigrants and refugees are often portrayed as “dangerous,” “threatening,” or “potential terrorists” (Cisneros, 2008; Klocker & Dunn, 2003). This frame category was defined as portraying refugees as dangerous, threatening, potential terrorists, or a threat to U.S. security. This category may be common in U.S. media stories because of Trump’s travel ban from countries where ISIS was active.
Considering the Syrian war is a humanitarian crisis, it is unclear if journalists will employ human-interest, responsibility, security, or conflict frames more frequently. Responsibility and conflict frames dominate past research examining conflicts. Trump’s travel ban may have influenced the U.S. media to use a security frame discussing the potential risk of having Syrian refugees enter the U.S. Research examining Syrian refugees in the U.K. and Canadian media found a lack of human-interest frames, so the same pattern should apply for the U.S. media. Hypothesis 2 states the following:
Conflict frames and attribution of responsibility frames will be employed more often than the security frames or human-interest frames when discussing the Syrian refugee crisis.
Depiction
Venir (2016) examined four prominent newspapers in the United Kingdom. Syrian refugees were depicted positively with a focus on the moral responsibility of the U.K. in helping this vulnerable group of people. Whereas the Lebanese media focused on the sheer number of refugees without humanizing any one refugee (Turbay, 2015). When comparing how five European countries (the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain and Sweden) covered the Syrian refugees, there were differences in coverage between the countries. The most positive depiction of the refugees was in Sweden (Berry et al., 2015).
Though some studies have found media often portray refugees as victims during crises (Sunata & Yildiz, 2018), there is substantial research suggesting refugees are depicted as outsiders or intruders (Esses et al., 2013). Refugees have also been seen as both economic and security threats (Lawlor & Tolley, 2017). Often times, migrants into any country are viewed by the public as illegals. Blinder and Allen (2015) examined coverage of immigration in the British national press to determine whether press portrayals of migrants provided a basis for negative public attitudes. Their findings indicate the press most often portrayed migrants as “illegal immigrants” and “failed asylum seekers” suggesting they were depicted in a negative light.
Turkey has experienced one of the biggest influxes of Syrian refugees since the beginning of the crisis and currently has the largest number of refugees compared with any other (western) country. A content analysis of coverage from Turkey’s three largest active news agencies about refugee-related news concluded Syrian refugees are most frequently portrayed as victims struggling to survive and a large portion of news about humanitarian aid proves Syrian refugees are evaluated in humanistic terms (Sunata & Yildiz, 2018). The Canadian press did not depict refugees in a negative or positive light. Refugees were presented in a neutral way (Jaworsky, 2021). Considering President Trump’s ban on Syrian refugees, it is probable Syrian refugees are depicted negatively in the U.S. media. Hypothesis 3 states the following:
Syrian refugees will be depicted negatively in the U.S. media.
Previous studies have suggested news coverage of a crisis becomes more negative over time. The cheerleading stops and the press become more critical (Haigh, 2014). However, past research examined periods of war and did not analyze refugee crises. There is little to no research that analyzes how a refugee crisis is longitudinally covered by the media. Greussing and Boomgaarden (2017) investigated how the tone of coverage and frames used surrounding the influx of asylum seekers may have changed from 2015 to 2016 in Austrian media. Their findings suggest established narratives of security threat and economization were most common. Humanitarian frames and background information on the refugees’ situation were less prominent. The results of the study confirmed stereotyped interpretations of refugee and asylum issues became more common as the humanitarian crisis continued to worsen. This same pattern was apparent when examining the tone of coverage in the Austrian media after refugees were initially welcomed. Since the U.S. media traditionally present both sides of an issue to demonstrate objectivity, the coverage may remain neutral rather than leaning positive or negative. The topic may be negative, but that does not mean the tone of coverage has to be negative. The tone of coverage became significantly more negative after the initial “welcome culture” in the Austrian media (Zeitel-Bank, 2017). Research has shown the frame changed over time and the tone of coverage changed over time. These changes should have also changed how refugees were depicted. This study looks at a longer period of time, so the tone, depiction and frames may vary multiple times over several years. What happens to the media coverage when there is an ongoing refugee crisis? Research Question 1 asks the following:
Are there differences in coverage (shown in tone, depiction and frame) over the 8-year period?
Method
The study employed a content analysis. There have been several content analysis studies of Syrian refugees (e.g., Jaworsky, 2021, 2020; Tirosh et al., 2022; Wallace, 2018; Xu, 2021). This study examines different frames as well as different periods of time. Three national newspapers considered “opinion-leading newspapers considered to provide orientation for other news media” were used in this study (Tirosh et al., 2022, p. 52). The newspapers selected have been used in other content analysis studies examining the Syrian refugee crisis (e.g., Jaworsky, 2021; Tirosh et al., 2022). Articles (N = 389) were selected from the following news outlets including The New York Times (n =180), The Washington Post (n = 119) and the Los Angeles Times (n = 90).
The dates selected for the sample span from March 15, 2011, to March 31, 2018. The year 2011 was selected because it is the start of the Syrian conflict. March of 2018 was selected as the closing date because another anniversary had just passed.
Articles were pulled from Nexis Uni using search terms “Syrian refugee” in the lead paragraph or headline. The unit of analysis was each individual article by a journalist (N = 389). Op-eds and editorials were not included. Wire stories were identified, and duplicates were not included.
Coder Training
Three students enrolled at a Southwestern university were trained to complete the coding. The researcher developed by a written coding instrument. Coding norms were established during supervised coder-training sessions. Coders established a high degree of standardization during the training phase. Eight percent of the sample was used for intercoder training (n = 46).
Several variables were measured on scales (tone of coverage, episodic/thematic frame, depiction of Syrian refugees). Rosenthal’s (1984, 1987) formula for interval level data and multiple coders yielded intercoder reliabilities between .86 and .95. 1 Tone of coverage had a reliability of .86 to .95; episodic/thematic frame had a reliability of .86 to .95; and depiction of Syrian refugees had a reliability of .82 to .91.
Several other variables were measured using nominally. Krippendorff’s alpha was used to compute intercoder reliability. Intercoder reliability ranged from .83 to .99 for frames coded nominally including conflict, responsibility, human-interest and security frame. See Table 1 for a list of specific Krippendorff’s alpha results.
Coding Categories, Krippendorff’s Alpha, Percent Present
Note. Frames were coded as present or absent. The percent coded present indicates the frame was employed in the article.
Variables Measured
Independent Variable
The independent variable was the year each article was published 2011 to 2018.
Dependent Variables
Overall Tone of Coverage
Tone of coverage was assessed using a verified attitude scale (Burgoon et al., 1978). This scale has been used in previous studies to examine tone of coverage. Pfau et al. (2005) and Haigh (2014) previously employed this scale to measure tone of newspaper coverage during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It consists of six, 7-interval semantic differential scales: good/bad, positive/negative, wise/foolish, valuable/worthless, favorable/unfavorable and acceptable/unacceptable (α = .99; M = 3.59, SD = .81).
Depiction of Refugees
Depiction of international refugees in the Syrian crisis was assessed through Individualized Trust Scale (Wheeless & Grotz, 1977). There is precedence for using this scale to measure the depiction of groups in content analysis research. For example, Pfau and colleagues (2005) and Haigh (2014) used this to examine the depiction of U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan. The scale is based on four, 7-interval semantic differential scales; trusting/untrusting, candid/deceptive and sincere/insincere and honest/dishonest (α = .99; M = 3.26, SD = .69).
Frames
Episodic/Thematic Frame
The extent to which each story unit employed episodic framing was measured with a single 7-interval scale. This scale was previously used by Pfau et al. (2005) and Haigh (2014) when they examined newspaper stories. Iyengar (1991) acknowledged most news stories embody both episodic and thematic elements, with one being more dominant. Iyengar (1991) states frames usually tilt in one direction or the other. “The degree of the ‘tilt’ using a relative measure assessing the extent to which each news story embodied episodic or thematic framing” (Pfau et al., 2005, p. 477). If a story employed more episodic elements, the score would be higher on the 7-point scale. If the story was more thematic, coders would indicate a score closer to 1 on the 7-point scale (M = 2.56, SD = 1.26).
Nominal Level Frames
Additional frames coded were coded present/absent. These frames included conflict, responsibility, human-interest and security. A
Results
This study conducted a longitudinal analysis of newspaper coverage of the Syrian refugee crisis. A content analysis was conducted examining the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times coverage of the event. The New York Times published the most articles about the crisis (46.3%) followed by the Washington Post (30.3%) and the Los Angeles Times (23.1%). There was a small number of wire stories (8.2%), and most of the articles were published outside of Syria (72.2%). Only a small number of articles were published with a dateline of Syria (3.9%). Almost a quarter of the sample had a dateline of somewhere in the United States (23.9%). The crisis received the most coverage during 2015 (100 stories), 2013 (88 stories), 2012 (65 stories) and 2016 (10 stories). Now that the sample population has been described, the hypotheses will be examined.
Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc tests were conducted for the dependent variables where there were statistically significant findings. The pattern of means indicates stories were most thematic in 2014 (M = 2.16, SD = 1.12) and was approaching the midpoint of the scale when the war started in 2011 (M = 3.07, SD = 1.28).
Tukey HSD post hoc tests indicated statistically significant differences for year and tone of coverage. The year 2011 (M = 2.87, SD = .52), was significantly different in tone compared with the years 2014 (M = 3.73, SD = .65; p < .00); 2015 (M = 3.92, SD = .79; p < .00); 2016 (M = 3.85, SD = .93; p < .00) and 2017 (M = 3.79, SD = 1.02; p < .00). When comparing 2012 (M = 3.29, SD = .65) to subsequent years, there were statistically significant differences in tone compared with the years 2015 (M = 3.92, SD = .79; p < .00), 2016 (M = 3.85, SD = .93; p < .00) and 2017 (M = 3.79, SD = 1.02; p < .02).
There were also statistically significant differences when examining the tone of coverage in 2013 (M = 3.27, SD = .64) compared with 2014 (M = 3.73, SD = .65; p < .04), 2015 (M = 3.92, SD = .79; p < .00), 2016 (M = 3.85, SD = .93; p < .02) and 2017 (M = 3.79, SD = 1.02; p < .01). The overall tone of coverage became more positive as time went on. Tone was measured using a 1 to 7 scale, and 4 would have represented a neutral point. Table 2 depicts the mean values and standard deviations for each year.
Differences in Variables Over Time
Note. Mean values and standard deviations (shown in parentheses) for variables. Depiction of refugees was measured using the Individualized Trust Scale (Wheeless & Grotz, 1977). Overall frame was measured using a thematic/episodic single seven-interval scale previously used by Pfau et al. (2005) and Haigh (2014). Tone of coverage was measured using an attitude scale (Burgoon et al., 1978) consisting of six, seven-interval semantic differential scales: good/bad, positive/negative, wise/foolish, valuable/worthless, favorable/unfavorable and acceptable/unacceptable.
Significant when comparing to 2011 at the p < .05 level. bSignificant when comparing to 2012 at the p < .05 level. cSignificant when comparing to 2013 at the p < .05 level. dSignificant when comparing to 2014 at the p < .05 level. eSignificant when comparing to 2015 at the p < .05 level. fsignificant when comparing to 2016 at the p < .05 level. gSignificant when comparing to 2017 at the p < .05 level.
Chi-square analyses were conducted to examine the differences in the nominal level frame categories and the independent variable year. The chi-square analyses found statistically significant differences for conflict frame χ2(7, N = 389) = 42.44, p < .00. This frame was most common in 2013 (n = 67) and least common in 2018 (n = 3). Significant differences were also found for the responsibility frame χ2(7, N = 388) = 65.24, p < .00. The responsibility frame was most common in 2012 (n = 37) and 2013 (n = 29), and least common in 2016 and 2018 (n = 3). The security frame, χ2(7, N = 389) = 20.47, p < .00, was most common in 2015 (n = 35) and least common in 2018 (n = 2).
Please refer to Table 2 for the means and standard deviations for the dependent variables over time. Table 3 indicates the nominal level frame categories and how often they occurred for each year.
Frequency of Frame By Year
Note. The number of times the frame appeared for each year in the articles coded is presented.
Discussion
Understanding how the media covered the Syrian crisis allows one to see how U.S. citizens might form an opinion on the Syrian War as well as the Syrian refugees seeking asylum in the United States. So, this study examined news coverage of the Syrian refugee crisis from 2011 to 2018. Specifically, it investigated how three mainstream news publications (The New York Times, The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times) framed the Syrian refugee crisis and how the coverage changed over time.
Of the 389 stories analyzed, the majority of the articles’ datelines were in countries other than the United States or Syria. Refugees were seen as victims of the violence occurring in Syria as opposed to being viewed as illegal immigrants coming in to drain valuable resources as they may have been depicted in the United States (Fryberg et al., 2011). Several datelines were also from Geneva which houses one of the largest refugee centers in the world as well as a major U.N. headquarters. This could have also been a contributing factor to the tone of coverage because articles were more likely to focus on the humanitarian crises aspect of the war and how to provide aid for asylum seekers (Cmeciu, 2017).
Research examining other types of humanitarian crises found media commonly use conflict frames (Bradimore & Bauder, 2011) or human-interest and responsibility frames to be more prevalent (Sunata & Yildiz, 2018). The current findings indicate the U.S. media framed the Syrian refugee crisis differently than Canadian or U.K. media where human-interest frames were rarely used (Xu, 2021). Conflict frames are apparent across different types of humanitarian crises, but responsibility frames are less likely to be used in coverage surrounding refugees. Responsibility frames may not have been used because the coverage began during the Arab Spring which highlighted citizens protesting for their democratic rights alongside other oppressed nations such as Egypt and Tunisia. Articles focused on the conflict’s impact on the citizens of Syria rather than focusing on the Assad regime.
The study also analyzed potential changes in coverage over time. Past research indicates the press are often patriotic and uncritical at the beginning of a war (Aday et al., 2005; Haigh, 2014). Granted, that research focused on U.S. troops being sent to fight a war rather than focusing on the refugees of the war. The same pattern was found for the Syrian refugee crisis tone of coverage became significantly more negative after the initial “welcome culture” in the Austrian media (Zeitel-Bank, 2017). Wallace (2018) states, “framing of Syrian refugees is not fixed or static” (p. 228). Results indicate there were significant differences over time for the use of episodic/thematic frame and tone of coverage. There were no significant findings for depiction of Syrian refugees. When looking at the specific frames which changed over time, the conflict frame was most common in 2013 and least common in 2018. This can be attributed to the amount of coverage focusing on the actual Syrian Civil War at its beginning (2011) and later coverage (2016-2018) focusing more on the refugees themselves. The security frame was most apparent in 2015 and least apparent in 2011. Thematic frames dominated the coverage across time. The tone of coverage was never positive on the 7-point scale. Means ranged from 2.87 to 3.92, but that is approaching the neutral point on the scale.
It is also worth noting that in 2017 when President Trump employed a targeted missile strike on Syria after the al-Assad employed chemical weapons on his citizens, there were still a very small number of news articles (n = 38). The overall frame became less thematic, the tone of coverage became more positive, and the depiction of Syrian refugees became the most positive.
This study had limitations. First, the term “Syrian refugees” was not a very good search term to use for the Nexis Uni. To find articles discussing Syrian refugees, the term “Syria” was used. Several of the articles that mentioned Syrian refugees only mentioned them one time. These articles were not used in the analysis. Often the stories pulled were op-eds, letters or commentary pieces, but these articles were omitted from the analysis. Overall, the sample size for each year was small. The pattern is interesting. When the conflict started, only 15 articles were published in 2011. The most articles were published in 2015.
The most polarizing example of a conflict frame is an us/them frame that often occurs on the topic of race (Neuman et al., 1992). This study did not parse out the discussion of race or religion when looking at conflict frames, but rather examined the larger conflict frame of us versus them. Race and religion should be examined when looking at coverage of refugees. Wallace (2018) did not find the religion frame common when discussing the Syrian refugees in Canadian print media. However, the pattern found for frames discussing Syrian refugees in the U.S. media is different than research examining framing of Syrian refugees in other countries.
It was also limited by the newspapers included in the investigation. The large dailies included have a staff to report on international news rather than relying on wire reports like many local dailies or weekly newspapers. It is evident the wire services were not covering this story because only 31 articles out of 389 were wire stories; and that would mean the wire services were running almost three stories each year about the Syrian conflict. However, even the large dailies do not employ foreign correspondents at the same rate they did in the past. This is apparent because almost a quarter of the stories had a dateline from the United States, and less than 15 articles over the time period had a dateline from Syria. These papers are well archived, and that makes it easier to use them in this type of a study. Longitudinal content analysis is a challenge to conduct as databases continue to change what content is available to universities.
Future studies should analyze the Syrian refugee crisis until it is complete for a more significant look at the progression of the crisis. The focus of the Syrian crisis could also be examined. Recently the coverage has been about fighting ISIS in Syria rather than the Assad regime. It is unclear when that shift was made, but as the attention shifted and the ninth anniversary approaches, it is worth investigating. Somewhere the focus of the story shifted, and it is not clear when. Future studies could also specifically compare the coverage of Syrian refugees in the United States with the coverage of Syrian refugees in various other countries. This study examined print stories, but additional research should continue to look at the visuals used. Visuals could impact public support for U.S. involvement more so than the print coverage. Broadcast coverage could also be examined. It would also be worth examining opinion pages and letters to the editor—both omitted from this study—to see what the public was saying. This type of article could be aligned with public opinion data to see if public support for U.S. involvement in the war and its policies on Syrian refugees align.
Refugee stories are becoming a staple of American news coverage such as the refugee crisis at America’s southern border. So, understanding the frames used to cover refugees and the tone of coverage is important to understand how the U.S. public is forming their attitudes toward refugees.
Conclusion
It is important to understand how the media frame events because this leads to audience heuristics, informing their attitudes about the topic (Kosicki, 2003; Nisbet & Lewenstein, 2002). Frames effect the cognitive devices the public uses to process the information and make sense of the news (Scheufele, 1999). Understanding how stories about the Syrian conflict are or were framed helps determine the salient information citizens have available to inform their attitudes and opinions about the conflict. The results indicate if U.S. citizens were reading the stories in the three outlets analyzed, they would have been exposed to thematic frames providing more background and less concrete instances. They would have understood how foreign governments, the U.S. government and the U.N. were reacting to the crisis. All of this information would have been added to their knowledge network about the Syrian crisis. The information included/omitted from the frames influence public support for the U.S. involvement in Syria.
