Covering Darfur:
The Guardian vs. Le Monde
1
Background
• Historical and economic resonance
• Britain’s colonial ties with Sudan
-From colonial master to US ally
• British interest in Sudanese oil industry
-BP & others invested in oil industry
• France’s colonial history in North Africa
-Viewed African nations as partners
• French interest in Sudanese oil
-TOTAL holds the largest oil concessions
2
Analysis
• Guardian (83 stories)
•
•
•
•
Elite British newspaper since 1821
Comprehensive international news coverage
Liberal or left-of-center stance
Critical of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
• Le Monde (92 stories)
•
•
•
•
French newspaper of record since 1944
Analysis and commentary
Moderate or left-leaning
Criticized for supporting French government policies
3
The Guardian
• Major actors
• Sudanese government: Unlawful & brutal regime
• Janjaweed: Criminals backed by Sudanese gov’t
• Rebels: Victims of atrocities committed by Sudan
gov’t & Janjaweed
• UN: Active but ineffectual
• UK government: Active mediator
• US: Aggressive power w/ threats of sanctions &
military intervention
• AU: Most appropriate mediator
4
The Guardian
• Use of Contested Words
• Genocide, ethnic cleansing, humanitarian crisis,
militia puppet-master
• Causes of Crisis
• Unequal access to natural resources
• Ethnic tension btw. Arab elites & black Africans
5
The Guardian
• Framing
• Blaming Sudanese gov’t & Janjaweed
• Description of atrocities: scorched-earth campaign,
murder, torture, rape, etc.
• Inclusion of voices from displaced victims, rebel
soldiers, foreign aid workers
• Ending the conflict:
• Providing logistical support for African Union
• Indictment to international criminal court
6
Le Monde
• Major actors
• Sudanese gov’t: Villain & perpetrator of atrocities
• Janjaweed: Allies of Sudanese gov’t, initiated a
reign of terror with murder, rape, etc.
• Rebels: Victims & perpetrators of atrocities
• UN: Incompetent
• French gov’t: No active role, focus on humanitarian
assistance through EU
• US gov’t: Protector of the Darfurians, inactive in
spite of “genocide” claim, semantics game, delayed
reaction to Darfur crisis
• AU: An African solution to an African problem
7
Le Monde
• Use of Contested Words
•
•
•
•
Restoring peace in Darfur
Humanitarian crisis, crimes against humanity
Sudan exploits and arms Arab tribes, reign of terror
Extermination campaign, politics of burning the
ground
• Causes of Crisis
• Armed insurrection against Sudan gov’t & gov’t
response of arming militant Arabs
• Janjaweed in search of profits in Darfur
8
Le Monde
• Framing
• Labels Darfur crisis as civil war: Janjaweed vs. Darfuris / Arabs
vs. Africans
• Blames Sudan gov’t, Janjaweed & rebels for atrocities
• Describes atrocities: Burning the ground, Janjaweed as villains
alleged for murder, rape & destruction
• Avoids labeling the crisis “genocide” or “ethnic cleansing”
• Depends heavily on news agencies (55%): Lack of voice from
displaced victims & rebel soldiers
• Uses analysis vs. giving the facts: Focuses more on diplomacy
rather than what is happening in Darfur
9
Comparison
The Guardian
•Initially, resonates with
US view of ethnic cleansing
& calls for UK intervention
•Later, supports nonmilitary option & presents
AU involvement as solution
•Describes US/UK as
unwilling to intervene while
UN is inefficient
•Provides historical
references
•Treats rebels as victims
Le Monde
•Challenges US view of
ethnic cleansing & genocide
•Frames Darfur crisis as civil
war/ethnic strife, thus
presents AU involvement as
a solution
•Describes UN positively
•Omits voices of rebels,
Darfurians
•Relies heavily on wire
services
10
Making Sense of the Findings
• European coverage of African conflict
• Both dailies focus on Darfur as humanitarian crisis
• The Guardian is more active in covering what is happening on
the ground than Le Monde
• Solution to Darfur crisis?
• Both dailies converge in supporting peaceful solution by
presenting AU as the best mediator instead of UN
sanctions/intervention
11