Abstract

Framing studies consistently conclude that the international news media represent African conflicts negatively and stereotypically. Owing to their focus on media content, however, most framing studies fail to examine the dynamic relationship between journalists’ cognitive role (what they say they do) and their practice role (what they actually do). Using parallel content analysis, this study compares what African diaspora journalists write about African conflicts with what they say about them. The analysis reveals that they show a preference for a factual style and a governing frame, and less preference for a judgmental style, which aligns with what they say, and a slight preference for background context which marginally aligns with what they say. However, low newsroom budgets and advertising revenue could undermine their attempts to de-Westernize the portrayal of African conflicts.