Trump’s new year tweet about Pakistan’s role in the fight against terrorism ignited a controversy and a war of words between Pakistani officials and the US. This thesis studies newspaper coverage of both countries on this particular issue. Dawn and The News International are chosen from Pakistan and The New York Times and The Washington Post are selected from US media. The aim of this research is to analyse and compare the media discourse. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) was adopted as the most suitable choice. A sum of eight articles, comprising two from each newspaper, is analysed intensively. Outcomes of the analysis are discussed in relation to ‘framing’ and ‘agenda setting’ theories.

Five key elements from the theories are listed including: language (vocabulary), conflict presentation, sources, related issues and emphasis. Results reveal that Pakistani newspapers use very strong, rather harsh vocabulary while reporting response to Donald Trump’s tweet. The US newspapers adopted literary phrases and less harsh tone to report this issue. Conflict presentation was focused on Trump’s tweet as a central idea in all the newspapers. Pakistani newspapers focused on the coverage of reaction from military and government officials of the country. On the other hand, US newspapers included sources from both countries to have an objective view. But they have included some controversial issues, which do not have a direct link to this debate starting with Trump’s tweet.

Keywords: Twitter and news media, Trump’s tweet about Pakistan, Afghan war, CDA, Framing.