The particular dialect or language that a person chooses to use on any occasion is called a code 7049 Copyright © 2025 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal on Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 13, Number 2, December 2025 pp. 7049 - 7075 Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model Nazifatul Mardiah1, Abdul Basid2 1,2UIN Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang Corresponding E-Mail: mardiahnazifatul@gmail.com Received: 2025-11-13 Accepted: 2025-12-07 DOI: 10.24256/ideas. v13i2.8440 Abstract Media reporting on the Israel–Palestine ceasefire negotiations often reflect ideological and geopolitical orientations that shape how the conflict is understood by the public. This study investigates how four major Arab-language news outlets—Al Jazeera, Okaz, Sky News Arabia, and BBC News Arabic—construct their framing of the ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel. Specifically, the research addresses two questions: (1) how each outlet employs Robert N. Entman’s four framing elements, and (2) what similarities and differences emerge from the comparative framing across these media. Using a descriptive qualitative design, the study analyzes four online articles published during the negotiation stalemate in early 2025. Data were collected through documentation and examined using Entman’s framing devices: problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and treatment recommendation. The findings reveal contrasting patterns: Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic frame Israel as obstructing the ceasefire and emphasize humanitarian impacts; Okaz portrays Hamas as the primary barrier and legitimizes Israel’s security-oriented stance; and Sky News Arabia adopts a more balanced yet moderately pro-Palestinian framing. These variations demonstrate how geopolitical context influences media narratives. The study contributes to conflict communication research by illustrating divergent Arab media framings and underscores the need for critical media literacy in interpreting politically charged news. Keywords: framing analysis, media framing, Robert Entman, ceasefire, Arab media. http://u.lipi.go.id/1457703302 mailto:mardiahnazifatul@gmail.com Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7050 Introduction Mass media framing plays a crucial role in shaping public perceptions of an issue, particularly in protracted conflicts such as the Israel–Palestine dispute. The ceasefire negotiations between Hamas and Israel represent a significant moment that influences regional stability and international diplomatic dynamics. To provide chronological clarity, it is important to note that although the ceasefire agreement was formally announced on January 19, 2025 (Shaban, 2025). The media coverage analyzed in this study focuses on the developments and negotiations that continued into March 2025, during which disputes regarding the implementation of the agreement intensified. This temporal distinction is essential for understanding how media outlets framed both the initial agreement and the subsequent deadlock. However, the media are not always neutral in presenting information. Each outlet constructs frames according to its political interests and editorial orientation, thereby influencing how the public understands the conflict (Paramitha and Karim 2022; Ramadhana et al. 2025). In reporting on the Israel–Palestine conflict, Arab media not only present facts but also engage in issue selection and emphasize particular aspects that construct a certain social reality. This construction can support one side while undermining the other. Information packaged by highlighting specific elements tends to attract greater public attention and simultaneously shape public understanding (Sulaeman and Islami 2024). Therefore, media framing is not entirely neutral but is influenced by ideological and political interests aligned with the narratives of governments or other stakeholders (Firdaus Marsun, Sadakita Br. Karo, and Wiwien Wirasati 2023; Qorib et al. 2025). In the context of the Israel–Palestine ceasefire conflict, media framing determines which party is perceived as responsible, which impacts are highlighted, and what solutions are imagined. The choice of perspective ultimately constructs social reality, shapes public opinion, limits societal interpretation, and influences international policy (Siregar and Qurniawati 2022), while also creating a directed narrative that affects readers’ emotions (Aseel Zibin 2024). This aligns with Entman’s (1993) foundational assertion that framing operates by selecting certain aspects of a perceived reality to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and treatment recommendation (Entman 1993). Media framing is analogous to a double-edged sword. Balanced framing can help the public understand the complexity of the conflict, whereas biased framing tends to reinforce polarization and influence state policies(Ninan, Mahalingam, and Clegg 2022). Geographical, historical, and ideological factors play an important role in shaping the media’s perspective. Arab media, which maintain close cultural and political proximity to Palestine, tend to portray the ceasefire as part of the Palestinian people’s resistance against Israeli occupation. In contrast, Western media often highlight Israel’s security efforts, which may result in marginalizing Palestinian civilian suffering (Pratiwi et al. 2025). Concrete evidence of these IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7051 diverging perspectives can be observed in the aforementioned ceasefire agreement on January 19, 2025, which included the release of hostages, the withdrawal of Israeli troops, and the reconstruction of Gaza. Although mediated by the United States, Egypt, and Qatar, its implementation was marred by accusations of non- compliance and conflicting interpretations, contributing to the negotiation deadlock observed in March 2025 (Aljazeera 2025). The international media response to these developments varies significantly. Western media outlets such as CNN, BBC, and The New York Times often display a pro-Israel bias by emphasizing Israel’s suffering and justifying its military actions (Akmal 2024; Ghani 2025; Wienanto 2024). In contrast, Al Jazeera places greater emphasis on the humanitarian impact on Palestinian civilians. Thus, news framing reflects each media outlet’s political background, making critical analysis essential for enabling the public to assess diverse perspectives objectively (Entman 2019). Such comparative framing research is increasingly relevant as global media ecosystems become more polarized (Tsfati and Ariely 2014). This study utilizes Robert Entman’s framing theory, which views the media as an actor that selects issues, defines problems, diagnoses causes, provides moral evaluations, and offers solutions (Entman 2007). The concept of framing proposed by Robert N. Entman emphasizes that the media frame audience perspectives through issue selection and the emphasis of certain aspects of an event (Entman 1993, 2007) As an initial stage, the researcher reviewed previous studies relevant to this theme to avoid plagiarism and strengthen the academic foundation. Previous studies demonstrate how framing analysis has been used to analyze conflicts and social issues, such as the #EndSARS movement in Nigeria (Afolabi and Gabriel 2025), the representation of women in the presidential election (Anggoro, Puspitasari, and Som 2023), and the Kanjuruhan tragedy (Hafidli et al. 2023). On the issue of Israel–Palestine, several studies identify sharp differences between Arab and Western media. Al Jazeera presents a more balanced framing, while the BBC avoids terms such as “genocide” or “war crimes” (El Damanhoury, Saleh, and Lebovic 2025) Al Jazeera views Hamas’s attacks as defensive, whereas the BBC describes them as terrorism (Zawawi et al. 2024). The Guardian emphasizes the ideological dimensions of the conflict, while USA Today focuses on institutional responses (Jaber 2025). CNN tends toward war journalism (Bhowmik, S., & Fisher 2023), and BBC is frequently perceived as pro-Israel (Kasmani 2025). Studies in Indonesia also reveal differences in framing among media such as Detik, Republika, and Kompas.com (Alfriandi and Zuhriah 2024; Hanief and Ainani 2024; Qorib et al. 2025; Ramadhana et al. 2025). These studies collectively underscore the complexity of framing practices across platforms and geopolitical contexts. Based on the previous studies mentioned above, this research shares several similarities and differences. The similarities lie in the focus on the Israel–Palestine conflict issue and the use of framing analysis to examine how the media construct the news frame (Aseel Zibin, 2024; Bhowmik, S., & Fisher, 2023; El Damanhoury et Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7052 al., 2025; Jaber, 2025; Kasmani, 2025; Nael, 2025; Zawawi et al., 2024). Several studies even specifically highlight Arab media, such as Aseel Zibin (2024) who discussed Arabic news headlines, and Kasmani (2025) who analyzed Al Jazeera’s narratives. Another similarity is evident in the use of framing analysis as the main analytical tool, as applied in the studies of Afolabi and Gabriel (2025), Jaber (2025), and Qorib et al. (2025), which examined how international and local media construct conflict frames in line with their respective interests. The difference in this study lies in its more specific object, namely, news coverage of the Israel–Palestine ceasefire in Arab news media. Previous studies have predominantly focused on the context of war (Bhowmik, S., & Fisher, 2023), political cartoons (Guta and Eissa, 2025), pro- Palestinian protests in the West (Jaber 2025), and social media content (A. Alamsyah, 2024; Moharam, 2025; Nasereddin, 2023). Meanwhile, this study focuses on four Arabic-language online media outlets with diverse geopolitical backgrounds: Al Jazeera (Qatar), Okaz (Saudi Arabia), BBC News Arabic (United Kingdom), and Sky News Arabia (Abu Dhabi). This cross- geopolitical comparison provides an original contribution by demonstrating how the political interests and diplomatic positions of each media outlet's home country influence the construction of ceasefire discourse. Using Robert Entman’s framing model, this study systematically maps framing devices in defining problems, diagnosing causes, making moral judgments, and providing treatment recommendations. To sharpen the study’s orientation, this research is guided by the following research questions: (1) How does each of the four media outlets construct news framing based on Robert Entman’s framing model? (2) What similarities and differences emerge from the comparative analysis of media framing across the four outlets? The significance of this study lies in its contribution to media and conflict communication research. By comparing framing across Arab media with distinct political alignments, this research provides insights into how news discourse becomes a site of geopolitical negotiation, influencing public perceptions and policy debates. This study also strengthens the application of Entman’s model in cross- geopolitical contexts, an area that remains underexplored in existing literature. Therefore, this research enriches framing studies in the context of Arab media and the Israel–Palestine issue by presenting novelty in its research object, issue context, and combination of framing theory with cross-geopolitical media analysis an approach rarely conducted before. Such an approach resonates with broader scholarly calls for comparative framing research in global conflict reporting (Matthes 2012), and positions this study as a valuable contribution within the expanding scholarship on mediated conflict narratives. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7053 Method This study adopted a descriptive qualitative approach using Robert N. Entman’s framing analysis method. This approach enables a comprehensive and in- depth examination of how media construct meanings, values, and ideologies through the four framing devices: problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and treatment recommendation (Entman 1993, 2007). This framework is essential for identifying how each outlet highlights, omits, or emphasizes particular aspects of the ceasefire discourse. This research was conducted online by accessing four international Arabic- language news outlets: Al Jazeera, Okaz, Sky News Arabia, and BBC News Arabic. The primary data consisted of four articles discussing the Israel–Palestine ceasefire agreement of January 19, 2025: (1) Al Jazeera, “ بشأن ويتكوف مقترح ترفض حماس رمضان هدنة ”; (2) Okaz, “ االتفاق إلى للعودة حماس سالح نزع تشترط إسرائيل ”; (3) Sky News Arabia, “ رمضان هدنة بشأن ويتكوف مقترح ”; and (4) BBC News Arabic, “ توافق بتطبيق تتمسك وحماس الفصح، وعيد رمضان خالل غزة في هدنة على إسرائيلي أمريكي النار اطالق وقف اتفاق من الثانية المرحلة ”. All publication dates were recorded and summarized in a table to ensure temporal alignment. Secondary data were obtained from books, journals, and previous studies to strengthen interpretation. A purposive sampling strategy was used because all four articles reported on the same political moment and represented distinct editorial orientations (Palinkas et al. 2015). Al Jazeera is widely associated with pro-Palestinian perspectives; Okaz reflects Saudi state-aligned conservatism; Sky News Arabia adopts an approach influenced by UAE regional policy; while BBC News Arabic reflects Western public- service journalism. This diversity provides a comparative geopolitical lens. Data collection used the reading and note-taking method. The researcher read each article thoroughly, identifying key expressions relevant to Entman’s framing elements. Data were collected between March 1–7, 2025 to maintain consistency. Because the articles were written in Arabic, the analysis was conducted directly on the Arabic texts to avoid meaning distortion, especially in lexical and evaluative choices (Baker et al. 2008). To ensure validity, the researcher used increased diligence, source triangulation, and peer discussion. In addition, intercoder reliability was strengthened through independent coding by two coders, followed by reconciliation of discrepancies in line with qualitative reliability guidelines (Lombard, Snyder- Duch, and Bracken 2002). Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7054 Data analysis followed Miles and Huberman’s three-stage model: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing (Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña 2018). During data reduction, news excerpts relevant to Entman’s framing devices were identified. Open coding was conducted prior to categorization, allowing recurring terms and evaluative cues to be grouped according to framing elements. Data display involved organizing the findings into descriptive comparisons across the four outlets, and conclusion drawing was used to interpret ideological orientations and their implications for public opinion formation (Olivia and Setiawan 2023). This study also acknowledges limitations: only one article per outlet was analyzed, and the analysis focused solely on textual not multimodal framing. These limitations open avenues for future research using longitudinal or multimodal approaches. Results And Discussion Framing of the Ceasefire Agreement News in Gaza During the Holy Months of Ramadan and Easter on Al Jazeera Online News Media In conducting framing analysis on a narrative, Robert Entman divides it into four main components: defining problems, diagnosing causes, making moral judgments, and making treatment recommendations. In this first subsection, the framing presented by the online news media Al Jazeera will be described regarding the ceasefire agreement in Gaza during the holy months of Ramadan and Easter, as reported in the news article titled رمضان هدنة بشأن ويتكوف مقترح ترفض حماس ” (Al Jazeera, 2025). The detailed explanation is presented as follows: Define Problems Define Problem is the initial stage of framing analysis that examines how the media define a problem and present the background of an event (Entman & Usher, 2023). In the news report regarding the ceasefire agreement in Gaza during the holy months of Ramadan and Easter, titled “ هدنة بشأن ويتكوف مقترح ترفض حماس Al Jazeera narrates the conflict by positioning Israel as the party that ,”رمضان triggered the outbreak of hostilities. This is evident in the statement quoted from Hamas, مقترحات على نتنياهو بنيامين اإلسرائيلي الوزراء رئيس اعتماد أن حماس أوضحت Aljazeera)منه للتنصل مفضوحة محاولة لالتفاق خالفا األولى المرحلة لتمديد أميركية 2025) IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7055 The use of the phrase “ للتنصل مفضوحة محاولة ” (an obvious effort to avoid responsibility) clearly frames Netanyahu as a political betrayer. Al Jazeera frames this issue not merely as a “difference in interpretation” of the ceasefire agreement but as a deliberate act of political betrayal. Furthermore, the problem is further defined by linking it to Israel’s decision to suspend humanitarian aid. Hamas condemns Netanyahu’s decision to halt humanitarian aid, describing it as a form of extortion and a war crime. The news text states that, وانقالب حرب وجريمة رخيص ابتزاز هو اإلنسانية المساعدات وقف نتنياهو قرار أن“ (Aljazeera 2025)”االتفاق على سافر This reinforces the frame that the core issue lies in the suffering of civilians caused by Israel’s policies, rather than Hamas’s stance. The framing constructed by Al Jazeera indicates that the main problem does not lie with Hamas but with Israel, which is portrayed as inconsistent and detrimental to the Palestinian people. Diagnose Causes Diagnose Causes is the second stage in framing analysis, which explains the causes of an event, identifies the actors involved, and describes why they take certain actions (Entman, 2010). Its objective is to show who is considered responsible for a particular event. In this news report, Al Jazeera identifies Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as the main figure responsible for the delay in the ceasefire. This is reflected in the news excerpt stating that, جيشه فشل بعد األرض على سياسية وقائع فرض يحاول نتنياهو أن إلى حماس أشارت (Aljazeera 2025) .شهًرا 15 مدى على إرسائها في الفاشي By emphasizing the phrase “ سياسية وقائع فرض ” (imposing political facts), Al Jazeera highlights that Netanyahu sought to turn the military failures of the past 15 months into political gains by delaying the implementation of the second phase of the ceasefire agreement. Israel is viewed as attempting to unilaterally create a new political reality, whether through prolonged military operations, blockades that suppress the lives of Gaza residents, or manipulation of the agreement’s content. This narrative is reinforced by the support of the United States, whose envoy tends to accommodate Israel’s strategies. Thus, Al Jazeera does not position Hamas as an obstacle to peace but rather as a party responding to an unjust situation. According to this framing, the root cause of the problem lies in Israel’s strategy, supported by the United States, which perpetuates the continuation of the conflict. Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7056 Make Moral Judgement The make moral judgment stage is the process of determining moral decisions, namely identifying which party is considered right or wrong, and the ethical values used as the basis for assessing actors' actions in an event, which often reveal the media's ideological tendencies (Entman 2007). Moral judgments may appear in the form of what (what is done) or who (who acts), and are then evaluated as either justifiable or condemnable. In this regard, Al Jazeera demonstrates its alignment with Palestine. Hamas is positioned as the party defending its homeland and the rights of its people, while Israel is portrayed as the party responsible for the conflict and accountable for the suffering of civilians. This can be seen in the following statement. سافر وانقالب حرب وجريمة رخيص ابتزاز هو اإلنسانية المساعدات وقف نتنياهو قرار“ (Aljazeera 2025)“ .االتفاق على The three key phrases “ رخيص ابتزاز ” (extortion), “ حرب وجريمة ” (war crime), and “ االتفاق على سافر وانقالب ” (a blatant violation of the agreement) construct a clear moral framing, portraying Netanyahu not merely as a political actor but also as a criminal perpetrator. Through the label “war crime,” Al Jazeera emphasizes that his actions violate humanitarian norms and values. This framing affirms moral support for Palestine and positions Israel as the guilty party. Treatment Recommendation The treatment recommendation stage is the phase in which the focus of framing analysis lies on the solutions offered to resolve the problem (Entman, 2007). In its coverage, Al Jazeera proposes the solution it considers most relevant to resolving the conflict: implementing the second phase of the ceasefire agreement. Al Jazeera emphasizes that the only way out of the deadlock is through a permanent cessation of war, the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, the reconstruction of the Gaza region, and the release of Palestinian prisoners in accordance with the agreement. This is emphasized in the following excerpt, العقابية إجراءاته ووقف االحتالل على للضغط بالتحرك الدولي والمجتمع الوسطاء طالبت“ “ (Aljazeera 2025).بغزة إنسان مليوني نحو بحق This excerpt contains two important messages. The first is a message to international mediators and the global community to pressure Israel to comply with the agreement already established jointly. In this way, Al Jazeera not only presents information but also subtly directs public opinion that peace can only be achieved if Israel halts its repressive policies and the international community takes an active role. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7057 Framing of the Ceasefire Agreement News in Gaza During the Holy Months of Ramadan and Easter on Okaz Online News Media In this second subsection, the framing presented by the online news media Okaz will be described regarding the ceasefire agreement in Gaza during the holy months of Ramadan and Easter, as reported in the news article titled “ تشترط إسرائيل االتفاق إلى للعودة حماس سالح نزع ” (Okaz 2025). The detailed explanation is presented as follows: Define Problems In Okaz’s news coverage, the main problem is framed not as Israel’s violation but as Hamas’s attitude, which is considered an obstacle to peace. This narrative is clearly evident in the following excerpt, النار إطالق وقف اتفاق من الثانية المرحلة إلى العودة اإلسرائيلي االحتالل سلطات رهنت“ “ (Okaz 2025).حماس حركة سالح بنزع غزة، في The emphasis on the phrase “ حماس حركة سالح بنزع ” frames the idea that peace will not be achieved until Hamas completely disarms itself. In other words, the problem does not lie in Israel’s failure to honor the agreement but in the very existence of Hamas’s weapons. Such framing creates the impression from the outset that the issue arises not from power asymmetry or Israel’s military actions but from Hamas’s stubbornness and refusal to compromise. Hamas is positioned as the main party delaying peace, while Israel is portrayed as the party setting the rules and controlling the course of the agreement. Diagnose Causes Diagnose Causes in Okaz’s coverage of the continuation of the ceasefire in Gaza consistently frames Hamas as the main cause of the ongoing tensions. This framing not only emphasizes Hamas’s rejection of Israel’s conditions but also emphasizes how Hamas’s actions are considered to worsen the situation and hinder the achievement of peace. One of the aspects highlighted by Okaz is the claim that Hamas misused humanitarian aid. The news excerpt states that بكل أوفينا لقد‘ وقال... غزة في لحماس اقتصاديا محركا أصبحت المساعدات أن زعم (Okaz 2025).األخير اليوم حتى التزاماتنا The phrase “ لحماس اقتصاديا محركا أصبحت المساعدات ” (aid has become an economic engine for Hamas) indicates that humanitarian aid is not viewed as a right Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7058 intended for the people of Gaza but is politicized by Hamas for economic and strategic interests. Through this framing, the public is directed to perceive that the main problem does not lie in Israel’s failure to implement the agreement but in Hamas’s noncompliance and exploitation of resources that should be allocated for civilian needs. In addition, Okaz emphasizes Hamas’s possession of weapons and control over Palestinian detainees as direct obstacles to the second phase of the ceasefire. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar and Defense Minister Yisrael Katz explicitly stated that Israel was ready to enforce these conditions, including the threat of using military force if Hamas refused. Through such framing, Okaz successfully shifted the focus of the conflict’s cause from Israel to Hamas, constructing a moral-political narrative that affirms Israel’s legitimacy while delegitimizing Hamas as an obstacle to peace. This narrative illustrates how the diagnosis causes the device to be used to shape public opinion, determine who is “guilty” and who is “righteous,” and establish a moral foundation for the coercive measures proposed by Israel. Make Moral Judgement Okaz highlights Hamas as the party hindering the implementation of the ceasefire agreement. The media emphasize that Hamas’s actions in refusing to disarm and still detaining half of the hostages are considered obstacles to the continuation of the ceasefire and the peace process. Thus, Hamas is positioned as a stubborn party, unwilling to compromise and obstructing peace. This is reflected in the following excerpt, ضرورة على شدد لكنه قدما، للمضي مستعدة أبيب تل أن اإلسرائيلي الخارجية وزير زعم“ “(Okaz 2025) .لحماس الكامل السالح ونزع رهائن سراح إطالق على االتفاق This excerpt affirms that Hamas becomes the obstacle to peace because it refuses to compromise. Meanwhile, Israel is positioned as the party striving to uphold the agreement and ensure national security. The use of military threats, blockades, power cuts, and the displacement of Palestinian residents is presented as a way to pressure Hamas to comply with the requirements. Thus, in the narrative, Israel appears to act fairly and rationally by enforcing the requirements considered necessary to continue the ceasefire. This kind of framing builds a moral opinion that tends to favor Israel and portrays Hamas as politically and morally wrong for rejecting the established conditions. Meanwhile, Israel is portrayed as if its actions are right and responsible for ensuring peace in order to maintain national security. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7059 Treatment Recommendation In this news report, the proposed solution is directed toward applying maximum pressure on Hamas. Israel put forward the conditions of total disarmament and the threat of continuing the war if the demands were not met. This is shown in the following excerpt, مع ،’ الجحيم خطة ‘ من كجزء غزة على الحصار لتشديد تخطط نتنياهو بنيامين حكومة (Okaz 2025) .للمطالب االستجابة تتم لم إذا الحرب باستئناف التهديد The phrases “ غزة على الحصار تشديد ” (tightening the blockade on Gaza) and “ خطة indicate that the proposed strategy is coercive rather than (plan of hell) ”الجحيم conciliatory. Through this framing, peace can only be achieved if Hamas submits to Israel’s demands; therefore, all moral, political, and economic pressures are directed at forcing Hamas to comply. Framing of the Ceasefire Agreement News in Gaza During the Holy Months of Ramadan and Easter on Sky News Arabia Online News Media In this third subsection, the framing presented by the online news media Sky News Arabia will be described regarding the ceasefire agreement in Gaza during the holy months of Ramadan and Easter, as reported in the news article titled “" حماس رمضان هدنة"بشأن ويتكوف مقترح على ترد ” (Arabiyah 2025). The detailed explanation is presented as follows: Define Problems In the news coverage regarding Hamas’s response to the temporary ceasefire proposal submitted by the U.S. envoy, Sky News Arabia presents the conflict as a negotiation deadlock. The problem is not merely about extending the ceasefire, but also concerns the commitment to the agreements previously reached. Hamas is positioned as the party rejecting the proposal because it is considered to contradict the initial agreement, which should have already entered the second phase, namely a permanent ceasefire, the withdrawal of Israeli troops, and the release of prisoners. This rejection is emphasized in Hamas’s statement, النار، إطالق وقف اتفاق من الثانية المرحلة بتطبيق مطالبة المقترح، هذا حماس ورفضت (Arabiyah 2025) .غزة قطاع في الحرب إنهاء فعليا يعني الذي Hamas is depicted as the party rejecting the proposal and demanding the enforcement of the second phase of the agreement, which effectively means ending Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7060 the war in the Gaza Strip. Hamas views the proposal put forward by the United States and approved by Israel as a form of denial. Meanwhile, Israel emphasizes the importance of extending the first phase in the interest of the gradual release of hostages. Thus, the framing of Sky News Arabia positions Israel as the party attempting to avoid its commitments and delay the resolution of the permanent conflict, while Hamas is framed as the party demanding consistency with the agreement. Diagnose Causes Sky News Arabia reports mutual accusations between Israel and Palestine regarding the causes of the ceasefire negotiation deadlock. From Hamas’s perspective, the main issue lies with Israel, which is considered to have failed to uphold the agreement with the support of the United States. Hamas even describes the proposal submitted by the U.S. and accepted by Israel as evidence that Israel is ignoring the commitments it had previously signed, as stated in the following excerpt, التي االتفاقات من يتنصل االحتالل أن واضح تأكيد" األميركي المقترح أن الحركة واعتبرت (Arabiyah 2025) عليه وقع Conversely, from Israel’s perspective, the one at fault is Hamas. In the following news excerpt, أدرك أن بعد الحالي النار إطالق وقف بتمديد اقتراحه قدم ويتكوف أن نتنياهو مكتب وأضاف .دائم نار إطالق وقف بشأن محادثات إلجراء الوقت من مزيد إلى حاجة هناك أن "وقال إذا واألربعين الثاني اليوم بعد القتال إلى العودة إسرائيل تستطيع االتفاق، بموجب: (Arabiyah 2025).االتفاق بانتهاك حماس متهما ،" مجدية غير المفاوضات أن شعرت It is stated that Israel accuses Hamas of violating the agreement and complicating the negotiation process. Israel also argues that the extension of the first phase is necessary to ensure the safe release of hostages. Thus, this news report shows mutual accusations between the parties; however, the media provides more space for Hamas’s statements on the reasons for rejecting the temporary ceasefire. Make Moral Judgement In the moral framing, Sky News Arabia positions Hamas as the party consistently demanding the implementation of the agreement, as shown in the following excerpt, IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7061 "برس فرانس" تلقته بيان في مرداوي محمود حماس في القيادي وقال الوحيد الطريق": …… الثانية المرحلة تنفيذ من بدءا االتفاق، تنفيذ استكمال هو األسرى وعودة المنطقة الستقرار (Arabiyah 2025) عنه نتراجع ولن عليه نصر ما هذا This excerpt shows Hamas’s firm stance. Through Mahmoud Mardawi, Hamas stated that the only path to regional stability is to implement the agreement through the second phase. Therefore, with this, Hamas is portrayed as the party that adheres to its principles and strives to ensure peace. Conversely, Israel appears inconsistent. In the following excerpt, "وقال إذا واألربعين الثاني اليوم بعد القتال إلى العودة إسرائيل تستطيع االتفاق، بموجب: .مجدية غير المفاوضات أن شعرت Although Israel accepted the U.S. proposal, it emphasised that it had the right to resume the war after the forty-second day if the negotiations were deemed to have failed. This statement instead reinforces the notion that Israel is prepared to withdraw from its initial commitment. In addition, Israel also attempted to justify the extension of the ceasefire on the technical grounds of the hostage release process. Netanyahu even added that Witkov proposed the extension of the ceasefire after realizing the need for additional time to reach a permanent agreement, أن بعد الحالي النار إطالق وقف بتمديد اقتراحه قدم ويتكوف أن نتنياهو مكتب وأضاف“ ”.دائم نار إطالق وقف بشأن محادثات إلجراء الوقت من مزيد إلى حاجة هناك أن أدرك The United States, through its proposal, is portrayed not as a neutral party but as one that tends to strengthen Israel’s position by offering a temporary solution. Treatment Recommendation In Sky News Arabia’s coverage, several competing solutions are presented. Hamas consistently emphasizes that stability can only be achieved by implementing the second phase of the existing agreement. Mahmoud Mardawi once again emphasized that, تنفيذ من بدءا االتفاق، تنفيذ استكمال هو األسرى وعودة المنطقة الستقرار الوحيد الطريق .عنه نتراجع ولن عليه نصر ما هذا … الثانية المرحلة Meanwhile, Israel presents a pragmatic solution: extending the first phase with the gradual release of hostages. Netanyahu stated that on the first day of implementing Witkov’s proposal, half of the hostages would be released, and the remaining hostages would be freed once a permanent ceasefire was agreed upon. Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7062 في المحتجزين الرهائن نصف سراح إطالق سيتم ويتكوف، اقتراح تنفيذ من األول اليوم في … أمواتا، أو أحياء سواء غزة، In addition, Israel also emphasizes the need for extended negotiation time, which became the basis for Witkov’s proposal to extend the ceasefire. Meanwhile, the United States introduced the idea of a temporary ceasefire during the periods of Ramadan and Easter. However, the media framing shows that the U.S. proposal is more short-term in nature and does not address the root causes of the conflict. Thus, the solution presented as the most logical in Sky News Arabia’s coverage is Hamas’s proposal to enforce the second phase of the agreement, while the solutions proposed by Israel and the United States have the potential to prolong the deadlock. Framing of the Ceasefire Agreement News in Gaza During the Holy Months of Ramadan and Easter on BBC News Arabic Online News Media In this fourth subsection, the framing presented by the online news media BBC News Arabic will be described regarding the ceasefire agreement in Gaza during the holy months of Ramadan and Easter, as reported in the news article titled “توافق بتطبيق تتمسك وحماس الفصح، وعيد رمضان خالل" غزة في هدنة" على إسرائيلي أمريكي النار اطالق وقف اتفاق من الثانية المرحلة ” (Arabic, 2025). The detailed explanation is as follows: Define Problems In its news coverage regarding the deadlock in the implementation of the ceasefire in Gaza, BBC News Arabic highlights that the root of the problem lies in Israel’s unclear commitment to the content of the agreement. Within this framing, the main problem is defined differently by Hamas and Israel. In the following statement, رئيس عليه وافق … إطالق وقف اتفاق من الثانية المرحلة بتطبيق األحد حماس طالبت BBC)عليه وقع التي االتفاقات من يتنصل االحتالل أن واضح تأكيد" هو اإلسرائيلي الوزراء Arabic 2025) Hamas views the core issue as Israel’s breach of the agreement that had been signed, particularly concerning the implementation of the second phase. Meanwhile, Israel perceives the problem as the impossibility of reconciling both parties (Israel and Hamas) in a short period. This is as stated by Netanyahu, IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7063 وإسرائيل حماس مواقف أن إلى خلُص أن بعد الطاولة على المقترح هذا وضع ويتكوف فإن بشأن المحادثات إلتمام الوقت من مزيد إلى حاجة هناك وأن الفور، على بينها التوفيق يستحيل (BBC Arabic 2025) .النار إلطالق دائم وقف It was stated that Witkov proposed this plan after concluding that the positions of Hamas and Israel could not be reconciled immediately, and that additional time was required to finalize the discussions on a permanent ceasefire. Diagnose Causes In this news coverage, Israel is identified as the cause of the deadlock for stalling and avoiding the commitment to proceed to the second phase. In his statement to Arab television, Hamas spokesperson Hazem Qassem emphasized that the mediators should compel Israel to implement all phases of the agreement. والمطلوب لنا، بالنسبة مرفوض االحتالل يطرحها التي بالصيغة األولى المرحلة تمديد إن عدم على مشيراً المختلفة، بمراحله باالتفاق االحتالل إلزام الضامنة والدول الوسطاء من (BBC Arabic 2025) .الثانية المرحلة بشأن الحركة مع مفاوضات أي وجود Conversely, Israel shifts the blame to Hamas, stating that the negotiations can only continue if Hamas changes its position. " ويتكوف خطة تفاصيل كل" حول " فورا " مفاوضات لبدء مستعدة إسرائيل أن البيان وأضاف موقفها حماس غيرت" إذا ". Furthermore, the United States is viewed as contributing to the deadlock through its proposal for a temporary ceasefire during Ramadan and Easter. Instead of resolving the issue, this proposal is considered to offer only a short-term solution. The U.S. tends to lean toward Israel by providing it with room to evade responsibility. Hamas is positioned as the party rejecting the proposal because it insists on the full implementation of the agreement. Thus, the framing of the conflict’s cause is directed toward Israel’s strategy and the involvement of the United States, rather than Hamas’s stance. Make Moral Judgement In this news coverage, Hamas is portrayed as the party with a stronger moral foundation because it remains consistent with the agreement's terms. Hamas demands the implementation of the second phase of the agreement, which includes Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7064 ending the war, withdrawing troops, releasing prisoners, and reconstructing Gaza. This is illustrated in the following statement نتراجع ولن عليه نصر ما هذا … بيان في مرداوي محمود حماس في القيادي وقال (BBC Arabic 2025) عنه Different from Israel, its decisions to halt humanitarian aid, extend the first phase, and keep open the option of continuing the war demonstrate forms of manipulation and war crimes. Israel is positioned as the party that prioritizes military strategy over humanitarian considerations, thereby causing greater suffering. Treatment Recommendation Differences in framing are also evident in the solutions offered. Hamas emphasizes that the only way out is to immediately move to the second phase, permanently end the war, withdraw Israeli troops, reconstruct Gaza, and carry out a comprehensive prisoner exchange. This statement is emphasized through the following sentence, الدائم النار اطالق وقف على المفاوضات تضمن والتي الثانية المرحلة تنفيذ من بدءا (BBC Arabic 2025)األسرى سراح إطالق ثم ومن اإلعمار وإعادة الشامل واالنسحاب Israel, on the other hand, offers an extension of the first phase in accordance with the U.S. mediator’s plan, with a scheme of gradual hostage release until a long-term ceasefire agreement is reached. Comparison of Media Framing in Al Jazeera, Okaz, Sky News Arabia, and BBC News Arabic In general, these four online media outlets present different framings of the ceasefire issue in Gaza. Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic show a similar tendency, namely positioning Israel as the main party hindering the achievement of peace. Both media emphasize that Hamas’s rejection of the temporary ceasefire proposal does not mean rejecting peace but rather represents consistency with the existing agreement. Within the moral framework, Hamas is positioned as the party fighting for the rights of the Palestinian people, while Israel is viewed as inconsistent, indecisive, and engaging in actions that are harmful to humanity. Meanwhile, Sky News Arabia takes a neutral position. The media does not fully side with either Hamas or Israel; however, the news narrative it presents shows that Israel is attempting to delay the second phase of the ceasefire, while Hamas appears as the party demanding consistency. In other words, Sky News Arabia’s framing tends to be more balanced compared to Al Jazeera or Okaz, yet it still expresses criticism toward Israel. Unlike the three previous media outlets, Okaz presents an opposing perspective. In its narrative, Hamas is described as the obstacle to peace for refusing IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7065 Israel’s disarmament terms. Israel is positioned as the wise party, merely seeking to maintain national security. Such a narrative makes Okaz’s framing appear pro-Israel and places the blame on Hamas as the main cause of the deadlock. When examined based on the results of the analysis of Robert Entman’s four framing elements, namely define problems, diagnose causes, make moral judgment, and treatment recommendation, it can be seen that Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic are aligned in their framing that supports Palestine, while Sky News Arabia takes a middle position with a tendency leaning more toward Hamas. Meanwhile, Okaz appears to be more inclined to support Israel. Define Problems The define problem presented by Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic both highlight Israel’s inconsistency as the root cause of the issue and position Hamas not as an obstacle to peace but as the party demanding that the agreement be upheld. In contrast, Okaz places the problem on Hamas’s attitude in rejecting Israel’s conditions, particularly regarding disarmament and the release of hostages. Sky News Arabia places greater emphasis on the negotiation failure caused by differences in understanding between Israel and Hamas over the agreement's contents, thus providing a fair narrative for both parties, though its framing tends to lean toward Hamas as the more consistent party. Diagnose Causes Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic claim that Israel, particularly Netanyahu, intentionally postponed the implementation of the second phase with the backing of the United States. Meanwhile, Okaz accuses Hamas of being the main cause due to its stubbornness. The existence of blockades and military threats is considered a reasonable measure as a consequence imposed by Israel. Sky News Arabia, in this case, takes a neutral position by presenting a two-sided narrative in which Israel blames Palestine and Palestine blames Israel, although its coverage gives more weight to Hamas’s arguments. Make Moral Judgement Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic firmly place Hamas in a positive moral position by portraying Israel as the perpetrator of aggression and war crimes. In contrast, Okaz views Hamas as irrational, stubborn, and an obstacle to peace, while Israel is depicted as the party upholding security. Sky News Arabia adopts a more moderate stance but still provides moral legitimacy to Hamas by emphasizing its consistency, while portraying Israel as manipulative and delaying its commitments. Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7066 Treatment Recommendation Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic emphasize that the best solution to the temporary ceasefire proposal is to proceed with the second phase in accordance with the previous agreement. Meanwhile, Okaz recommends that Hamas disarm and release the hostages; otherwise, Israel will resume its military operations. Sky News Arabia presents three options. Tabel (1): Summary of Data Analysis Framing Element (Entman) Al Jazeera Okaz Sky News Arabia BBC News Arabic Define Problems Israel framed as violating the agreement and obstructing the transition to the second phase; humanitarian suffering highlighted as the core issue. Hamas framed as the main obstacle to peace due to refusal to disarm and release hostages; Israel’s conditions presented as reasonable. Problem defined as negotiation deadlock caused by differing interpretations of the agreement; Hamas emphasizes consistency. Problem framed as Israel’s unclear commitment and avoidance of implementing the second phase; technical complexities acknowledged. Diagnose Causes Netanyahu and Israeli political decisions supported by the U.S. framed as the primary cause of the deadlock. Hamas portrayed as the cause of continued conflict through misuse of aid, refusal of disarmament, and rejection of Israel’s conditions. Mutual accusations presented, but narrative gives more weight to Hamas’s claims that Israel is avoiding commitments. Israel framed as avoiding obligations; U.S. proposal seen as enabling Israel. Hamas positioned as responding to Israeli inconsistency. Make Moral Judgement Hamas morally legitimized as defending Palestinian rights; Israel depicted as committing “war crimes” and humanitarian violations. Hamas morally delegitimized as stubborn and irrational; Israel framed as acting responsibly to ensure national security. Balanced moral framing, yet Hamas portrayed as more consistent and principled; Israel criticized for delaying commitments. Hamas framed as morally consistent with the agreement; Israel depicted as manipulative, prolonging conflict, and causing humanitarian harm. Treatment Recommendation Implement the second phase: permanent ceasefire, Israeli withdrawal, reconstruction, Apply pressure on Hamas: disarmament, hostage release, or continuation of Israeli Three options presented, but the most legitimate solution framed as implementing the second phase. Move to the second phase immediately; permanent ceasefire, troop withdrawal, IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7067 Framing Element (Entman) Al Jazeera Okaz Sky News Arabia BBC News Arabic and prisoner exchange. military operations. Israel and U.S. proposals viewed as temporary. reconstruction; U.S. proposal seen as insufficient. Overall Framing Orientation Pro-Palestinian / critical of Israel Pro-Israel / critical of Hamas Moderately balanced with a slight tilt toward Hamas Pro-Palestinian, but framed through technical- humanitarian discourse The findings of this study on how Arab media frame the Israel–Palestine ceasefire, when analysed using Robert Entman’s model, show clear patterns that can be connected to earlier scholarship on conflict reporting, media bias, and agenda- setting within the Middle East. Many of the results align with previous research arguing that Arab news outlets often construct narratives that emphasize Palestinian victimhood, humanitarian suffering, and power asymmetry, thereby reinforcing frames that highlight injustice, occupation, and resistance. These findings strengthen earlier studies by (Hazleton 2016) which documented the tendency of Arab media to adopt frames grounded in regional political identity and collective memory. At the same time, some aspects of the findings diverge from prior research particularly the more recent shift toward pragmatic or diplomatic framing that appeared in outlets seeking to reflect changing geopolitical alliances. This distinction suggests that while traditional solidarity narratives remain influential, some Arab media organizations are gradually incorporating more nuanced evaluations of ceasefire dynamics, especially when reporting is intended to appeal to international audiences or align with evolving state interests. Such variations indicate the complexity of the media landscape and show that the framing is not monolithic, but rather shaped by political climate, ownership structures, and strategic communication goals (Vericat 2020). The results also hold deeper interpretive value when examined through Entman’s four functions of framing: defining the problem, diagnosing causes, making moral judgments, and suggesting remedies. The research shows that Arab media tend to define the ceasefire not merely as a pause in violence, but as evidence of Israel’s failure to achieve military goals or as a humanitarian necessity forced by international pressure. This framing carries symbolic meaning: it situates the ceasefire within a narrative of resistance and endurance, reaffirming long-standing regional discourses that portray the Palestinian struggle as morally superior and rooted in legitimate self-defence (Wells et al. 2024). In terms of diagnosing causes, the findings reveal that responsibility is often attributed to Israel’s military actions, political decisions, and historical occupation, which aligns with earlier literature emphasizing attribution framing in Arab reporting. However, the study also identifies a growing emphasis on internal Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7068 Palestinian political fragmentation and regional diplomacy as secondary causal frames, marking a slight departure from older studies that did not foreground intra- Palestinian dynamics (Khamaisi 2008). The moral evaluations embedded in the coverage further underscore the alignment with normative frameworks that equate Palestinian perseverance with justice, while criticizing Israeli actions as violations of international norms. These moral judgments have interpretive relevance because they do not merely describe events they shape the audience’s understanding of legitimacy, victimhood, and accountability. Finally, in suggesting remedies, Arab media frequently emphasize the need for international intervention, structural political solutions, or unified Arab diplomacy, showing consistency with research documenting the advocacy-oriented nature of regional media framing (Ben Saad and Dergaa 2023). Beyond their alignment or divergence from prior scholarship, these findings hold broader implications for how framing practices influence public perceptions, shape conflict narratives, and potentially guide policy debates. In terms of public opinion, the adoption of emotionally resonant frames such as humanitarian suffering or resistance narratives can solidify public identification with the Palestinian cause, reinforcing long-standing sociopolitical sentiments (Habib 2016). This type of framing may mobilize public sympathy, strengthen collective outrage, or generate support for particular political actors. Research in media effects suggests that when frames repeatedly highlight one side’s suffering or moral legitimacy, they not only shape immediate interpretation but can influence long-term belief systems and political alignments. Thus, the framing observed in Arab media has the capacity to deepen societal cohesion around the issue, but could also polarize public debate by marginalizing alternative perspectives. Regarding conflict representation, the findings indicate that Arab media framing tends to simplify complex political realities into moral binaries oppression versus resistance, victim versus aggressor. While such binaries resonate strongly with audiences, they may also obscure internal Palestinian political tensions, overlook the strategic calculations of regional governments, or reduce the diplomatic intricacies of ceasefire negotiations (Ben Saad and DERGAA 2023). This has consequences for how the conflict is understood regionally and internationally: the focus on one dominant narrative may limit opportunities for more nuanced or multi- perspective coverage. Nevertheless, by highlighting humanitarian crises and structural injustices, such framing can push global attention toward civilian protection and international accountability thus shaping how the ceasefire is perceived within broader geopolitical debates. A more comprehensive interpretation of the framing patterns found in Arab media coverage of the Israel–Palestine ceasefire reveals that variations cannot be explained solely through a binary distinction between pro-Palestinian and pro- Israeli orientations. Instead, the findings point to a multilayered framework shaped by geopolitical alliances, diplomatic interests, mediator relationships, and the IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7069 strategic positioning of each media institution within broader state agendas. For instance, Al Jazeera’s framing aligns strongly with narratives emphasizing Palestinian suffering, resistance, and moral legitimacy. While this may appear to reflect a pro-Palestinian stance, the deeper driver is Qatar’s geopolitical approach: positioning itself as a mediator in Gaza while simultaneously amplifying its soft- power influence in the region. Thus, the humanitarian-resistance framing is not only ideological but also instrumental reinforcing Qatar’s image as a key broker capable of shaping regional discourse. By contrast, Al Arabiya’s coverage reflects Saudi Arabia’s diplomatic repositioning, especially its interest in balancing relations with Western allies, maintaining regional stability, and preparing for potential normalization steps. This explains why the framing in Al Arabiya tends toward diplomatic neutrality, acknowledging Palestinian grievances but presenting the ceasefire as a product of multilateral political processes. The causal attribution in this framing often incorporates internal Palestinian dynamics, Gulf diplomatic initiatives, and international mediation demonstrating a more state-aligned, risk-averse narrative that supports Saudi Arabia’s shifting foreign-policy direction (Arabic 2025). Meanwhile, Sky News Arabia mirrors the UAE’s strategic interests, which include economic partnerships, security cooperation, and an increasingly pragmatic stance toward Israel following the Abraham Accords. As such, its coverage tends to adopt a technocratic, stability-oriented framing emphasizing institutional negotiation, crisis management, and the constructive role of global mediators such as the US, Egypt, and Qatar. This framing is not overtly ideological but reflects a policy environment where normalization, economic cooperation, and regional integration shape media narratives (Sky News Arabia 2025). The role of mediators particularly the United States, Qatar, and Egypt also significantly influence framing choices. Media aligned with states involved in active diplomacy tend to foreground the legitimacy and necessity of mediation efforts. For example, Qatar-based media elevate humanitarian justifications for ceasefires while highlighting Qatar’s diplomatic role, indirectly amplifying national prestige. Egyptian media often underscore Egypt’s indispensability in negotiations, portraying the ceasefire as a success of regional stability efforts. Outlets influenced by US partnerships, in turn, frame ceasefires as strategic pauses tied to security considerations and international pressure. Thus, mediator involvement is not merely reported it becomes an element of the narrative architecture that shapes how the ceasefire is interpreted and valued (Okaz 2025). Political and economic interests further shape these framing strategies. States with long-standing ties to Western economies may Favor diplomatic or moderate framings that avoid direct confrontation with Israel. Conversely, countries engaged in ideological projection or soft-power competition use framing to reinforce national branding or regional leadership claims. The result is a spectrum rather than a dichotomy of framing positions, as shown in the diagram, where media outlets Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7070 occupy different narrative zones depending on political alignment, economic aspirations, and diplomatic roles. Understanding these nuances reveals that framing is not a passive reflection of editorial choices but an active instrument of political communication intimately tied to state interests and regional power dynamics (BBC Arabic 2025). The table and spectrum visualization help illuminate how each outlet assigns meaning to the ceasefire through Entman’s four framing elements: defining the problem, diagnosing causes, making moral evaluations, and recommending treatments. When interpreted in light of geopolitics, diplomacy, and economics, the findings reveal a complex ecosystem in which framing functions as both a cultural lens and a policy tool shaping public opinion, reinforcing or reconfiguring conflict narratives, and influencing the direction of regional policymaking. Conclusion This study demonstrates the critical importance of examining how media construct narratives about conflict, particularly in politically sensitive issues such as the Israel–Palestine ceasefire negotiations. By applying Robert Entman’s framing model, this research reveals that news framing is not merely a technique of presenting information but a discursive tool that shapes public perception, legitimizes political positions, and reflects broader geopolitical alignments. The comparative lens adopted in this study offers an important contribution to media and conflict communication research, especially within the context of Arab-language journalism, where cross-national editorial orientations play a decisive role in shaping the portrayal of the ceasefire. Methodologically, the study employed a descriptive qualitative approach combined with Entman’s four framing devices: problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and treatment recommendation. This analytic framework enabled a systematic examination of how each of the four media outlets: Al Jazeera, Okaz, Sky News Arabia, and BBC News Arabic constructed the ceasefire narrative. Through purposive sampling and textual analysis of four news articles published during the negotiation deadlock, this research uncovers distinct patterns showing how political, ideological, and geopolitical interests are embedded in media discourse. With regard to the first research question: How does each media outlet construct news framing based on Entman’s model? The findings show that Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic define the problem through Israel’s inconsistencies, diagnose the causes in Israeli political decisions supported by the United States, morally position Hamas as the actor defending Palestinian rights, and recommend implementing the second phase of the ceasefire agreement. Okaz, by contrast, frames Hamas as the core obstacle to peace, attributes the cause of the deadlock to Hamas’s refusal to disarm, constructs moral legitimacy for Israel’s security-centered measures, and recommends pressuring Hamas or continuing military operations if IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7071 necessary. Sky News Arabia presents a more balanced approach by allowing both sides to articulate their positions, yet subtly emphasizes Hamas’s consistency in demanding the fulfillment of the agreed terms while portraying Israel as delaying the transition to the second phase. In response to the second research question: What similarities and differences emerge from the comparative analysis of media framing? The study finds that Al Jazeera and BBC News Arabic share significant similarities in their pro- Palestinian framing, highlighting Israeli aggression, political manipulation, and humanitarian violations. Sky News Arabia occupies a middle ground by presenting dual perspectives, though still offering more descriptive space to Hamas’s reasoning. Okaz clearly diverges by constructing a pro-Israel frame, presenting Hamas as the cause of the continued conflict and legitimizing Israeli conditions as rational and necessary. These differences underscore how framing is deeply tied to the geopolitical alignment and editorial ideology of each media outlet. The findings of this study contribute to broader scholarly conversations on media bias, cross-regional framing, and the politicization of conflict reporting. They highlight the need to view media not only as conveyors of information but also as actors engaged in constructing meaning within geopolitically charged contexts. This research also enriches the application of Entman’s model in comparative Arab media studies, an area that remains underexamined within existing literature. Looking forward, this study hopes to encourage further research on framing practices across a larger dataset of news articles, the inclusion of visual and multimodal elements, and longitudinal analyses that track shifts in framing across different stages of the conflict. Beyond academic relevance, the findings also suggest the need for greater media literacy among the public so that audiences can critically evaluate the ideological forces shaping conflict narratives. Ultimately, a deeper understanding of media framing may contribute to more informed public discourse and more balanced conflict communication in regional and international contexts. Acknowledgement (if any) The author expresses gratitude to all parties who have provided support in completing this research. The author extends sincere thanks to UIN Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang, the institution where the author pursued education and received academic facilities that supported the smooth progress of this research. Special appreciation is given to the supervisor, Dr. Abdul Basid, S.S., M.Pd., for his guidance, direction, and valuable feedback throughout the writing and improvement of this research. The author also extends gratitude to the beloved family for their prayers, moral support, and continuous motivation, as well as to colleagues and friends who have always provided encouragement, assistance, and constructive ideas throughout the process of completing this research. May all forms of help, support, and kindness receive multiple rewards from Allah SWT. Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7072 References A. Alamsyah, A. W. Muharam and D. P. Ramadhani. 2024. “Polarized Narratives in Digital Spaces: A Social Network Examination of the Gaza Conflict.” International Conference on Data Science and Its Applications (ICoDSA) 527– 32. doi: 10.1109/ICoDSA62899.2024.10651759. Afolabi, Taiwo, and Friday Gabriel. 2025. “So ro -So ke : A Framing Analysis of Creative Resistance During Nigeria’s #EndSARS Movement.” Journalism and Media 6(2):1–21. doi: 10.3390/journalmedia6020069. Akmal, Muwadhoful. 2024. “Kontruksi Berita BBC Dalam Konflik Palestina-Israel: Analisis Framing Media Robert N. Entman.” IQTIDA : Journal of Da’wah and Communication 4(1):86–104. doi: 10.28918/.v4i1.6943. Alfriandi, Dimas, and Zuhriah. 2024. “Analisis Isi Framing Berita Konflik Israel Dan Palestina Di Media Kompas.Com.” Indonesian Journal of Humanities and Social Science 5(2):643–54. Aljazeera. 2025. “ حماس ترفض مقترح ويتكوف بشأن هدنة.” Al Jazeera. Retrieved April 7, 2025 (https://www.aljazeera.net/news/2025/3/2/ - بشأن-ويتكوف-مقترح-ترفض-حماس رمضان-دنةه ). Anggoro, Ayub Dwi, Fingky Ayu Puspitasari, and Ahmad Puad Mat Som. 2023. “Robert Entman’s Framing Analysis: Female Representation in 2024 Presidential Candidates on Republika.Com and Sindonews.Com.” Komunikator 15(2):211–24. doi: 10.18196/jkm.19247. Arabic, BBC. 2025. “ الفصح، وحماس وعيد في غزة’ خالل رمضان ‘هدنة على إسرائيلي أمريكي توافق ”.تتمسك بتطبيق المرحلة الثانية Arabiyah, Sky News. 2025. “رمضان ‘هدنة بشأن ويتكوف مقترح على ترد Sky News ”’.حماس Arabiyah. Aseel Zibin, Abdel R. M. Altakhaineh &. Marwan Jarrah. 2024. “Compound Nouns as Linguistic Framing Devices in Arabic News Headlines in the Context of the Israel-Gaza Conflict.” Russian Journal of Linguistics Article 2024. Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid Khosravinik, Tony Mcenery, and Ruth Wodak. 2008. “Combining Critical Discourse Analysis.” Discourse & Society 19(3):273– 306. BBC Arabic. 2025. “ توافق أمريكي إسرائيلي على ‘هدنة في غزة’ خالل رمضان وعيد الفصح، وحماس تتمسك ”.بتطبيق المرحلة الثانية Bhowmik, S., & Fisher, J. 2023. “Framing the Israel-Palestine Conflict 2021: Investigation of CNN’s Coverage from a Peace Journalism Perspective.” Media, Culture & Society, 45(5),. El Damanhoury, Kareem, Faisal Saleh, and Madeleine Lebovic. 2025. “Covering the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Al Jazeera English and BBC’s Online Reporting on the 2023 Gaza War.” Journalism and Media 6(1):1–16. doi: 10.3390/journalmedia6010009. Entman, R. M. 2007. “Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power.” Journal of Communication 57(1):163–73. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7073 Entman, R. M. 2019. “Fridays of Rage: Al Jazeera, the Arab Spring, and Political Islam.” Journal of Communication 69(3):E1–3. Entman, Robert M. 1993. “Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication 43(4):51–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1460- 2466.1993.tb01304.x. Firdaus Marsun, Sadakita Br. Karo, and Wiwien Wirasati. 2023. “Ideologi Media Pada Pemberitaan Nusantara Sebagai Ibu Kota Baru Indonesia.” Jurnal ISIP: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik 19(1):42–50. doi: 10.36451/jisip.v19i1.67. Ghani, Faras. 2025. “The Sharp Contrast: How Israeli and Western Media Cover the War on Gaza.” Al Jazeera. Guta, Hala, and Eiman. Eissa. 2025. “Examining Media Bias and Geopolitical Proxy Framing Effects on Media Representations of the Palestinian–Israeli Conflict in Taiwan: A Computational Framing Analysis.” Journal of Arab & Muslim Media Research 18(1):101–32. Habib, Sama. 2016. “TOO LATE FOR TWO STATES: THE BENEFITS OF PIVOTING TO A ONE-STATE SOLUTION FOR ISRAEL AND PALESTINE.” Journal of International Affairs 69(2). Hafidli, Muhammad Nabil, Rianne Nur, Dwi Lestari Sasmita, Luthfiah Nurazhari, Nazma Rahisa, and Gumilang Putri. 2023. “Analisis Framing Model Robert Entman Tentang Kasus Kanjuruhan Di Detikcom Dan Bbc News.” JIS: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial 3(1):2548–4893. Hanief, Lalita, and Muhammad Ainani. 2024. “Framing Analysis of Israel-Palestine Conflict News on Online Media Detik.Com and Republika.Co.Id.” Jurnal Kajian Jurnalisme 8(1):86–98. doi: 10.24198/jkj.v8i1.53602. Hazleton, William A. 2016. “Comparative Peace Processes.” Irish Political Studies 31(4). doi: 10.1080/07907184.2015.1082814. Jaber, Fadi. 2025. “Framing Pro-Palestine Protests: A Comparative Analysis of News Coverage by The Guardian and USA Today.” Studies in Media and Communication 13(1):72–82. doi: 10.11114/smc.v13i1.7245. Kasmani, Mohd Faizal. 2025. “Contrasting Narratives: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the BBC and Al Jazeera’s Coverage of the October 2023 Gaza War.” SEARCH Journal of Media and Communication Research. Khamaisi, Rassem. 2008. “From Imposed Ceasefire Line to International Border: The Issue of the Green Line between Palestine and Israel.” Journal of Borderlands Studies 23(1). doi: 10.1080/08865655.2008.9695690. Lombard, Matthew, Jennifer Snyder-Duch, and Cheryl Campanella Bracken. 2002. “Content Analysis in Mass Communication: Assessment and Reporting of Intercoder Reliability.” Human Communication Research 28(4):587–604. doi: 10.1093/hcr/28.4.587. Matthes, Jo rg. 2012. “Framing Politics: An Integrative Approach.” American Behavioral Scientist 56(3):247–59. doi: 10.1177/0002764211426324. Moharam, Mohammed Mostafa Refaat. 2025. “Framing UNRWA’s Visual Content on Nazifatul Mardiah, Abdul Basid Framing in News Coverage of the Israel–Palestine Ceasefire by Arab Media: An Analysis Based on Robert Entman’s Model 7074 Instagram for Humanitarian and Relief Aid during the First 100 Days of War in Gaza.” Dirasat: Human and Social Sciences 52(6):1–18. doi: 10.35516/hum.v52i6.8141. Nael, Jebril. 2025. “Balance and Impartiality in Public Service News: The BBC’s News Framing of the 2023.” Journal of Arab and Muslim Media Research. Nasereddin, S. 2023. “Impact of Social Media Platforms on International Public Opinion during the Israel War on Gaza.” Global Change, Peace & Security, 35(1), 5–31. Ninan, Johan, Ashwin Mahalingam, and Stewart Clegg. 2022. “Power in News Media: Framing Strategies and Effects in Infrastructure Projects.” International Journal of Project Management 40(1):28–39. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.09.003. Okaz. 2025. “االتفاق إلى للعودة نزع سالح حماس تشترط ,Okaz.Com. Retrieved April 7 ”.إسرائيل 2025 (https://www.okaz.com.sa/news/politics/2184045). Palinkas, Lawrence A., Sarah M. Horwitz, Carla A. Green, Jennifer P. Wisdom, Naihua Duan, Kimberly Hoagwood, Los Angeles, and Kaiser Permanente Northwest. 2015. “Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research.” HHS Public Access 44(12):20. doi: 10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.Purposeful. Paramitha, Gilang Aulia, and Ahmad Abdul Karim. 2022. “Analisis Framing Berita Penembakan Jurnalis AS Di Ukraina Pada CNNIndonesia.Com Dan Sindonews.Com.” Jurnal Ilmiah Wahana Pendidikan 8(5):376–83. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.6504844. Pratiwi, Eriska Nanda, Ma’ruf Chandra Utama, Satrio Sanggano Pratama, Moh. Azamudin Syair A., and Doan Widhiandono. 2025. “Analisis Framing Berita Pertemuan Donald Trump Dan Volodymyr Zelenskyy Di Gedung Putih Dalam Pemberitaan Detik.Com Dan Cnn Indonesia.” RELASI: Jurnal Penelitian Komunikasi (e-ISSN: 2807-6818) 5(02):38–57. doi: 10.69957/relasi.v5i02.2070. Qorib, Fathul, Akhirul Aminulloh, Tutut Ismi Wahidar, Romdhi Fatkhur Rozi, and Mahfudlah Fajrie. 2025. “Practices of Peace Journalism in Indonesian Media on the 2023-2024 Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Comparative Study of Kompas, Republika, and Detik.” Dirasat: Human and Social Sciences 53(1). Ramadhana, Rizky, Muhammad Alfikri, Universitas Islam, Negeri Sumatera, Deli Serdang, Correspondence Author, Cnbc Indonesia, Robert N. Entman, Namun Tribunnews, Cnbc Indonesia, Cnbc Indonesia, Cnbc Indonesia, Analisis Framing, Konflik Israel-palestina, Cnbc Indonesia, and Media Online Pendahuluan. 2025. “Keywords : Analisis Framing; Konflik Israel-Palestina; Tribunnews; CNBC Indonesia; Media Online Pendahuluan.” 673–84. Ben Saad, Helmi, and Ismail Dergaa. 2023. “Public Health in Peril: Assessing the Impact of Ongoing Conflict in Gaza Strip (Palestine) and Advocating Immediate Action to Halt Atrocities.” New Asian Journal of Medicine. doi: IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 7075 10.61838/kman.najm.1.2.1. Ben Saad, Helmi, and Ismail DERGAA. 2023. “Public Health in Peril: Assessing the Impact of Ongoing Conflict in Gaza Strip (Palestine) and Advocating Immediate Action to Halt Atrocities.” New Asian Journal of Medicine 1(2). doi: 10.61186/najm.1.2.1. Shaban, Omar. 2025. “A Reading of the Ceasefire Agreement Between Israel and Hamas – Dimensions and Challenges - CIP.” Center For International Policy. Siregar, Ade Kurniawan, and Eka Fitri Qurniawati. 2022. “Analisis Framing Pemberitaan Buzzer Di Tempo.Co.” Journal of New Media and Communication 1(1):1–15. doi: 10.55985/jnmc.v1i1.1. Sky News Arabia. 2025. “حماس ترد: مقترح ويتكوف بشأن هدنة رمضان.” Sulaeman, Arif Ramdan, and Arina Islami. 2024. “Pemberitaan Palestina Dalam Analisis Framing Robert N Entman.” Ittishal (Jurnal Komunikasi Dan Media) 1(1). Tsfati, Yariv, and Gal Ariely. 2014. “Individual and Contextual Correlates of Trust in Media Across 44 Countries.” Communication Research 41(6):760–82. doi: 10.1177/0093650213485972. Vericat, Jose S. 2020. “A Palestinian Statelet in Gaza.” Journal of Palestine Studies 49(4). Wells, Karen, Susana Corte s-Morales, James Esson, Deirdre Horgan, Fikile Nxumalo, Ann Phoenix, Pauliina Rautio, and Rachel Rosen. 2024. “Israel’s War on Gaza and the Violation of Children’s Rights.” Children’s Geographies 22(2). Wienanto, S. A. 2024. “Pengakuan Jurnalis Soal Bias Media Barat Atas Konflik Palestina-Israel.” TEMPO. Zawawi, Moh, Mellinda Raswari Jambak, Ummi Hasanah, Abdul Basid, and Khoirul Anas. 2024. “Framing of Hamas Attacks on Israel in Al-Jazeera and BBCCoverage.” Eralingua: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Asing Dan Sastra 8(1):81. doi: 10.26858/eralingua.v8i1.59353.