This Master's thesis, "Whose Suffering Gets More Space? A Critical Discourse Analysis of Dagens Nyheter's Reporting on Ukraine and Gaza", investigates how Dagens Nyheter (DN) covers the humanitarian crises related to the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, with the aim of analyzing whether media apply consistent standards when reporting on human suffering in different geopolitical contexts. The study aims to uncover the discursive mechanisms influencing media reporting and how textual properties, language use, structure, and grammatical patterns shape public understanding of these crises. Norman Fairclough's three-dimensional model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is used as the theoretical framework and method. The study primarily focuses on the text dimension and analytical tools such as transitivity, nominalization, and modality. A central premise is that our perception of reality is always mediated through language, which actively creates our understanding rather than merely reporting it. The material consists of 20 news articles from DN (including two TT articles), 10 on Ukraine (February 24 – March 24, 2022) and 10 on Gaza (October 7 – November 7, 2023). These periods were chosen to represent the initial, most intense phases of each conflict with a focus on humanitarian aspects. DN was selected due to its significant position and extensive foreign coverage in the Swedish media landscape. The results show clear and systematic differences in DN's reporting between the two crises, observed in language use, source selection, and overall perspectives, leading to distinct constructions of suffering, responsibility, and empathy. Reporting on Ukraine tends to be more domesticated, with a strong focus on the aid efforts of Swedish and European actors and a clear discourse of accountability towards Russia. Here, active verb forms are often used for Swedish/European actors, while Ukrainian civilians are frequently positioned as passive victims. The language is immediate, emotional, and characterized by high modality, reinforcing the severity of the crisis. Suffering in Ukraine is portrayed as close and manageable through collective efforts. The Gaza conflict, on the other hand, is presented with a more complex and often conditional narrative, where the humanitarian crisis is linked to geopolitical and security policy demands, and where Hamas is stigmatized as a "terror organization". Despite a strong humanitarian focus with direct, personal testimonies from affected civilians in Gaza, linguistic choices contribute to a certain distancing regarding accountability for some military actions, and the focus may shift to diplomatic processes. This reporting shows less domestication, and the suffering may thus appear more distant, often framed as "their war". The study's conclusions confirm and deepen previous research on the media's "hierarchy of suffering" and the media's role as active agents shaping public perceptions, rather than merely neutral information providers. The observed differences highlight how geopolitical interests and domestication influence media representation of humanitarian crises, which in turn can affect political decisions and aid efforts.