THE CONFLICTING ISRAELI-TERRORIST IMAGE

Abstract

This study employs the conflicting images concept and literature on the norms of professional journalism to explore how two elite US papers managed the narrative of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict when an Israeli citizen committed a terrorist attack against Palestinians living in the occupied territories. It concludes that violations of ideal expectations can interact with the norms of professional journalism to disrupt a narrative, facilitate a narrative's “repair,” and, contradictorily, retard that same repair work: The New York Times and Washington Post grappled with the meaning of the event to assess its compatibility with their narrative. The study calls for research to determine under what conditions, if any, conflicting images lead to narrative revision.