Crossfire in Quotation Marks: Framing and the Legitimation of Extrajudicial Killing in Bangladesh's English-Language Press
(2026) MKVM13 20261Media and Communication Studies
Department of Communication and Media
- Abstract
- This thesis investigates the framing of extrajudicial "crossfire" killings in English-language Bangladeshi news media by applying Robert Entman's (1993) framing theory alongside Edel and Josua's (2018) account of authoritarian legitimation. These frameworks have primarily been developed and tested on state rhetoric rather than journalistic texts. Utilizing a qualitative case-study analysis of twenty-five English-language news articles, which report on forty-six deaths published between 2009 and 2020 in The Daily Star, New Age, and bdnews24.com, the study addresses three research questions: the manifestation of Entman's four framing functions in this coverage (RQ1); the extent to which these frames perform legitimating or contesting... (More)
- This thesis investigates the framing of extrajudicial "crossfire" killings in English-language Bangladeshi news media by applying Robert Entman's (1993) framing theory alongside Edel and Josua's (2018) account of authoritarian legitimation. These frameworks have primarily been developed and tested on state rhetoric rather than journalistic texts. Utilizing a qualitative case-study analysis of twenty-five English-language news articles, which report on forty-six deaths published between 2009 and 2020 in The Daily Star, New Age, and bdnews24.com, the study addresses three research questions: the manifestation of Entman's four framing functions in this coverage (RQ1); the extent to which these frames perform legitimating or contesting political work (RQ2); and the methodological implications of applying this combined framework to media texts in a domestic context where the legality of the killings remains officially disputed (RQ3).
The findings suggest that coverage of crossfire incidents in Bangladesh predominantly, though not exclusively, reproduces the state's narrative. Sixty percent of the articles analyzed are situated at the fully legitimating end of a five-point legitimation–contestation spectrum developed for this study. Treatment recommendation is absent throughout the sample, and the diagnostic frames justifying these killings are almost exclusively grounded in security and legality. When contestation occurs, it arises through at least three distinct mechanisms: muted family testimony, internal inconsistencies within the official account's timeline, and direct institutional allegations. These mechanisms are not fully captured by a single legitimation score. Methodologically, the study demonstrates that the effective application of Entman's and Edel and Josua's frameworks to journalistic texts requires several adaptations: conceptualizing legitimation as a spectrum rather than a binary, distinguishing the source of contestation from its mere presence, and recognizing that treatment recommendations do not directly translate to the hard-news genre. These methodological adaptations constitute the central contribution of this thesis, extending a framework originally designed for state rhetoric to the analysis of media coverage of contested state violence. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9248410
- author
- Sultana, Suraiya LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- MKVM13 20261
- year
- 2026
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- framing theory, authoritarian legitimation, extrajudicial killing, Bangladesh, press freedom, state violence
- language
- English
- id
- 9248410
- alternative location
- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KyxZ4-b7cV67pLk5MAHNu4ByumAcxiYoNW24yiggXgU/edit?pli=1&tab=t.0
- date added to LUP
- 2026-09-07 12:47:44
- date last changed
- 2026-09-07 12:47:44
@misc{9248410,
abstract = {{This thesis investigates the framing of extrajudicial "crossfire" killings in English-language Bangladeshi news media by applying Robert Entman's (1993) framing theory alongside Edel and Josua's (2018) account of authoritarian legitimation. These frameworks have primarily been developed and tested on state rhetoric rather than journalistic texts. Utilizing a qualitative case-study analysis of twenty-five English-language news articles, which report on forty-six deaths published between 2009 and 2020 in The Daily Star, New Age, and bdnews24.com, the study addresses three research questions: the manifestation of Entman's four framing functions in this coverage (RQ1); the extent to which these frames perform legitimating or contesting political work (RQ2); and the methodological implications of applying this combined framework to media texts in a domestic context where the legality of the killings remains officially disputed (RQ3).
The findings suggest that coverage of crossfire incidents in Bangladesh predominantly, though not exclusively, reproduces the state's narrative. Sixty percent of the articles analyzed are situated at the fully legitimating end of a five-point legitimation–contestation spectrum developed for this study. Treatment recommendation is absent throughout the sample, and the diagnostic frames justifying these killings are almost exclusively grounded in security and legality. When contestation occurs, it arises through at least three distinct mechanisms: muted family testimony, internal inconsistencies within the official account's timeline, and direct institutional allegations. These mechanisms are not fully captured by a single legitimation score. Methodologically, the study demonstrates that the effective application of Entman's and Edel and Josua's frameworks to journalistic texts requires several adaptations: conceptualizing legitimation as a spectrum rather than a binary, distinguishing the source of contestation from its mere presence, and recognizing that treatment recommendations do not directly translate to the hard-news genre. These methodological adaptations constitute the central contribution of this thesis, extending a framework originally designed for state rhetoric to the analysis of media coverage of contested state violence.}},
author = {{Sultana, Suraiya}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Crossfire in Quotation Marks: Framing and the Legitimation of Extrajudicial Killing in Bangladesh's English-Language Press}},
year = {{2026}},
}