Media Framing of the Ethio-Egyptian Dispute over the First Round Water Filling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD): ETV and Al Jazeera in Focus

Abstract

Many nations are in disputes that lead to conflicts due to opposing interests and inefficient handlings of differences. The way the media frames conflict news has influence and hence can exacerbate the situation. This study examined how the Ethiopian Television (ETV) and Al Jazeera in their respective news coverage framed the Ethio-Egyptian dispute over the GERD’s first-round water-filling. The mixed methods case study design was used. Using purposive sampling, data required for the research was collected, i.e., a total of 60 news stories were selected from both media. The contents of the selected news were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively using framing theory as a theoretical framework. The study identified that the selected media outlets mostly framed the GERD’s water-filling in terms of conflict, human interest, economic consequences, mutual benefit, and responsibility attribution frames. Comparatively, the most dominant frame for Al Jazeera was the conflict frame whereas that of ETV was the human-interest frame. The findings also revealed that in content framing, Al Jazeera’s word choice was neutral to Ethiopia and biased to Egypt. On the other hand, ETV was only biased to Ethiopia. Government officials were used as key sources of information in both media while they were reporting on the GERD. For the coverage of such conflicting projects, scholars recommend peace journalism.