| Summary: | The purpose of this paper is to investigate, through content analyses of articles in The New York Times and the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten, how these papers have reported on the legal aspects of drone strikes in international conflicts. Drones have been deployed in US military operations at least since the October 2001 air strikes in Afghanistan. Using critical discourse analysis and framing theory, selected texts were examined in which the two newspapers reported on the topic of drone strikes. Drawing on a report of an April 2010 hearing in the US House of Representatives, this paper discusses the legality of deploying drones in international conflicts. The author concludes that in their reportage on US drone strikes the newspapers failed as watchdogs for the relevant legal issues.
|
|---|