Framing the War on Terror: The Internalization of Policy in the U.S. Press

Abstract

The challenge of political violence has grown with new means of global coordination and access to weapons of mass destruction. The Bush administration’s response to this threat, following the now iconic policy reference point of 11 September 2001, has had far-ranging implications for national security strategy, relations with the world community, and civil liberties. Labeled the “war on terror,”¹ the policy was framed within a phrase now part of the popular lexicon, becoming a natural and instinctive shorthand. More than phrases though, frames are “organizing principles that are socially shared and persistent over time, that work symbolically to meaningfully structure the social world.”² As would any policy advocate, administrations seek compelling frames to define the issues and help win the discursive struggle, as opponents, in turn, seek to resist those definitions and find more favorable ones.³ As a particularly powerful organizing principle, the “War on Terror” created a supportive political climate for what has been called the biggest U.S. foreign policy blunder in modern times: the invasion of Iraq. Thus, in the scope and consequences of its policy-shaping impact, the War on Terror may be the most important frame in recent memory.⁴