ABSTRACT
In terms of content and framing, the coverage, generally speaking, conformed to an empathy framing, at times containing explicit criticism of the Clinton administration’s repeated failure to act in Bosnia and implicitly pushed for some kind of response to the market-place bombing.40 For example, on the day of the bombing the three main news networks41 carried horrific footage of the aftermath of the shelling containing images of mutilated bodies. For the next two days these same channels all opened their evening news programmes with follow-up stories detailing the aftermath of the market-place bombing. At the same time, ABC gave headline airtime to Bosnian Prime Minister Haris Silajdzic, who accused the UN of appeasement, and Fred Cuny (USAID), who accused Bosnian Serb nationalists of launching the attack. CNN coverage42 was, if anything, even more dramatic, and was both empathising and implicitly pressuring for action to be taken. The following text is an extract from a CNN report by Roger Walters on the day of the shelling:
Between 50 and 60 civilians were killed. The situation is so confused, no one is sure how many are wounded, but the estimates run above 150. These people were mangled by flying steel from what was thought to be a 120 millimeter mortar shell. They had no warning – walking among the market stalls, a tremendous explosion occurred. A moment later, the ground was littered with decapitated bodies as well as severed arms and legs. Eight bodies were so badly mangled they could not even tell if they were men or women. Sarajevo’s hospitals are overwhelmed. The wounded lay moaning in the corridors waiting for medical attention. The dead lay among the dying. So
outrageous was the carnage, the Bosnian government is now characterizing this as a fight between good and evil.43
