THE EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION OF 2011 AND ITS AFTERMATH IN EDITORIALS’ HEADLINES: CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF THE REPRESENTATION OF EGYPT IN AMERICAN AND BRITISH

The Arab world, starting from December 2010 onward, has witnessed unprecedented revolutions during which many long-lasting Arab leaders were unseated. Western media has allotted much coverage to the uprisings especially in nations, such as Egypt, with which the West, namely the U.S, shares mutual political ambitions in the Middle East. This study analyses a sample of 101 editorials‘ headlines that were written, between 2011 and 2018, by the NYT, the WP, the Guardian and the Telegraph and suggests that these papers‘ treatment of the revolutions is reflective of Orientalist conceptualizations that inferiorize Egypt and the Egyptians. The study draws on Edward Said‘s postcolonial model of Orientalism (1978) to make sense of the selected sample and targets two main areas in critical media studies; quantitative content analysis and critical discourse analysis (CDA), to uncover whether or not the four newspapers editorials‘ headlines are suggestive of Orientalist modes of thought. The study concludes that the coverage under scrutiny connects the West with the East in a way that is characterized by power relations wherein the West is having the upper hand, and thus producing a rhetoric that is stereotypical and Orientalist. This study will examine the extent to which the sample (n=101) is reflective of Orientalist conceptualizations of the revolution participants. Two main areas in critical media studies will be targeted: quantitative content analysis and critical discourse analysis (CDA). Norman Fairclough‘s critical discourse analysis (1989, 1995a) and partially Van Dijk‘s (1988, 1991) are borrowed in this investigation. Their analytical strategies, textual and discursive, will be made use of for a better qualitative analysis of the editorials. The analysis will be supported by quotes from the studied sample.

The Arab world, starting from December 2010 onward, has witnessed unprecedented revolutions during which many long-lasting Arab leaders were unseated. Western media has allotted much coverage to the uprisings especially in nations, such as Egypt, with which the West, namely the U.S, shares mutual political ambitions in the Middle East. This study analyses a sample of 101 editorials' headlines that were written, between 2011 and 2018, by the NYT, the WP, the Guardian and the Telegraph and suggests that these papers' treatment of the revolutions is reflective of Orientalist conceptualizations that inferiorize Egypt and the Egyptians. The study draws on Edward Said's postcolonial model of Orientalism (1978) to make sense of the selected sample and targets two main areas in critical media studies; quantitative content analysis and critical discourse analysis (CDA), to uncover whether or not the four newspapers editorials' headlines are suggestive of Orientalist modes of thought. The study concludes that the coverage under scrutiny connects the West with the East in a way that is characterized by power relations wherein the West is having the upper hand, and thus producing a rhetoric that is stereotypical and Orientalist.
On the other hand, many other critics and theorists maintain that all the courage that Arabs summon to topple down their long-lasting rulers would absolutely invalidate the Orientalist clichés that portray Arabs as motionless and stagnant people who lack the agency of self-rule. One of these theorists is Hamid Dabashi who tells us that the Arab revolutions call an end to postcoloniality as a condition and mode of ideology formation (2012).
To evaluate the two opposing arguments outlined above, this study scrutinizes American and British editorials' headlines that cover the revolution and its aftermath in Egypt (2011-2018) and interrogate whether or not Orientalist rhetoric is present in 101 editorials' headlines written by the New York Time and the Washigthon Post The Western media's interest in covering Arabs and Islam increases whenever the East is involved directly or indirectly in crises. Many events, with or without any involvement of the West, were taken advantage of to represent Arabs and Islam in an already planned way. A sheer volume of researches have argued that the Western media's images, representations and discourses revolving around Islam and Muslims are hostile and negative (Poole & Richardson, 2006). Literature on this issue shows the way the Western media, namely the merican and the British, exploits crises or conflicts, where the Arabs and Muslims are involved, to portray and misrepresent Arabs and Islam.
The Western media considers the killing of few by an Arab or a Muslim perpetrator more newsworthy than the killing of many by non-Arab or non-Muslim killer. In this regard, Benjamin Kentish's article entitled -Terror attacks receive five times more media coverage if perpetrator is Muslim, study find‖ is very informative. Kentish draws on an academic study to argue that the U.S. media's stereotyping disproportionate coverage of Arabs and Islam is simply reinforcing -cultural narratives about what and who should be feared‖ (2017, para.13). By such intensive coverage, the writer tells us, the U.S. media is framing such events as more prevalent, and therefore, he sees no wonder that Americans are extremely phobic of perpetrators with Muslim names (2017, para.14). The academic study exploited by Kentish provides Analysis of coverage of all terrorist attacks in the US between 2011 and 2015. The study reaches the fact that there was a 449 per cent increase in media coverage when the wrongdoer was Muslim. Fries (2005) emphasizes the changing nature of the American media coverage of the Middle East. He argues that covering Islam and Arabs is always made to fit the -foreign policy realities of the United States across time‖ (p.320). The U.S. used to have no political ambitions in the region before WW2, and hence the portrayal emphasized mainly ethnic and stereotypical exoticism of the region (p.320). Subsequently, after the Iranian revolution, the Middle East came to function as a new political enemy to the U.S., and accordingly, the media portrayal stresses what's political. Post 9/11 events, the portrayal's main role is to project the meeting points of terrorism and Islam (p.320). The tone of reporting is therefore tailored according to the political circumstances the U.S. is experiencing.
Similarly, Said (1981) shows that reporting about Arabs and Islam does matter only if the U.S. is concerned or affected, in a way or another, by what is coming or happening in the Middle East. In Said's formulation, Islam was seldom referred to both in the culture and the media in the West until the moment when the OPEC price rose in early 1974. This leads some to say that the third world is violating the old order and that Westerners are -at the mercy of 865 foreign oil producers‖ (Said, 1981) . Said argues that Islam was reductively seen from this angle and nothing else  matters; -Who are the people, what are their actual desires, where did they come from, why do they behave as they  do?‖ were unnecessary questions to ask since they do not serve the American interpretation of Islam and Muslims‖  (1981, p.38). Esposito (2005) and Faruqi (2013) have shown the way Saddam's invasion of Kuwait in 1991 (the Gulf war) and the Iranian Revolution in 1979 were misrepresented by the media. They maintain that the way the Iranian revolution was reported helped in emphasizing a stereotype of Islamic revolution and fundamentalism. The same coverage strategy was followed when making sense of the Gulf war by the media. Though this conflict was local, it was actually made global by Western media reporting and the way it was perceived by the Western media's audience around the world (Virillio, as cited in Van Der Veer, 2004). Van Der Veer (2004) maintains that the way the world media, namely the American, covered the event is an evidence that journalistic work is by no means objective. Generally, Iraq was conceptualized as an enemy and Islam as a religion that is threatening the Western civilization and way of life (Sandikcioglu, as cited in Trivundza, 2004). Khan (2000) explains that Saddam Hussein was not reported as a ruler who is representing himself and his ambitions for war. For Khan, it is unfair to ascribe and connect the misconduct of people such as Saddam Hussein to Islam. As if that was not enough, even when different Arab Muslim leaders are involved in wars and conflicts in different countries, they are held responsible for boosting Islamic resurgence and fundamentalism (Esposito, 1995). Said (1981) discusses at length the U.S. media coverage of -The hostage crisis‖ (or the embassy seizure of fifty two American diplomats as a reaction of the Iranians to the U.S. support of the ex-shah of Iran who was toppled down during the Iranian revolution), and renders visible how selective, biased and unreliable the American informationgathering apparatus was when covering the issue. Said argues that the real reasons behind seizing the Americans hostages were always disregarded and covered up by the media and what was left to say is that -anyone who disliked America and held Americans captive was dangerous and sick, beyond rationality, beyond humanity, beyond decency‖ (Said, 1981, p. xxvi).
A large body of literature demonstrates that after the 9/11 attacks, the global relationships between the West and the Orient are a -Huntington's (1993) clash of civilizations‖, and it is the Western media mission to consolidate this opposition (Trivundza, 2004, p.481). The 9/11 terrorist events are considered the black day in the life of American people after which the global relations between the East and the West enters a new phase. 9/11 is the first shocking terrorist attack on American territory (Kakade, 2018). The Attacking of highly populated zones (Twin Towers in New York) in September 11 was performed by a terror organization called -AL-Qaeda‖. This organism was founded by a millionaire from Saudi Arabia who acknowledged responsibility of the attacks and that his terrorist attacks were a duty dictated by Islam (Poynting & Mason, 2006). Consequently, Afghanistan and Iraq were invaded by US-led Anglophone nations to prosecute their ‗war on terror' (Poynting & Mason, 2006). Amjad-Ali (2006) tells us that the 9/11 events were not mere attacks on the U.S soil and citizens, but rather they were an attack on -the American superpowers' hegemonic ego‖. Eventually, the bombings lead the Western audience to consider all Muslims as terrorists and all terrorists as Muslims, and the -war on terror‖ a war on Muslims or at least those Muslims the U.S. hates (Amjad-Ali, 2006). Imam Abduljalil Sajid (2005) argues that the Western media coverage of the 9/11 bombings intentionally disregard the real historical events that may lead to such horrible attacks, while the blame was put on Muslims' backwardness and barbaric mindset. Relatedly, for Karim Karim (2003), the media mystifies the public by attributing the killing of thousands of people to Muslims, and failed to make the U.S. appear as a superpower which is responsible for attacking many countries before 9/11. Karim adds that the media reported the events with governmental lenses and employed its label of ‗war against terrorism' as a rubric for the coverage of the American attack on Afghanistan (2003). Karim (2003) draws on Hamid Mowlana's 1984 study of the American mass media's coverage of the Iranian hostage crisis when he argues that the Northern media contributed to a crisis mood instead of creating nonconflictual attitudes when reporting about the hostage issue and its journalists inflame passions rather than assist in resolution. Therefore, Karim (2003) sees that the same patterns were reflected in journalistic work to report the 9/11 attacks in a manner that echoes par excellence the Bush administration's -us versus them frame‖. This is confirmed by Nurullah (2010) and Richardson (2004). They show that when covering the 9/11 attacks, the media emphasizes the classical dualism of -us‖ versus -them‖ by showing how -them‖ are different from -us‖. Richardson adds that dehumanizing the -other‖ was always accompanied by the praising of the -self‖ (2004).

866
Many other controversies that generated smoother conflicts and minor physical damage compared with the crises discussed above have also been taken advantage of by the Western media to single out Muslims and their religion. The Danish cartoons controversy is a case in point. In February 2006, the international media published Danish cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed's (PBUH) physical image after they, the cartoons, had been originally printed in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005. The cartoons portray -Islam's holiest figure as both a terrorist and an encourager of suicide bombers amongst other things‖ (Asmal, 2008, p.49). It goes without saying that the publication of the cartoons brought about anger, protest marches, burning of Danish flags, boycotting Danish products and boycotting the media that exposed the blasphemous cartoons (Jyllands-Posten, as cited in Asmal, 2008, p.47). Amjad-Ali argues that the Western media's reaction to the Muslims outrage was grounded on the right to freedom of speech which is a part and parcel of the notion of civilization, and since Muslims could not accept the provocative content of the cartoons, they ended up labeled as uncivilized (2006). Amjad-Ali bluntly declares that the cartoons are purely Islamophobic unmitigated hate speech that has nothing to do with freedom of expression (2006, p.160).
On the other hand, Northern media reported about the U.S. terrorist crimes differently. The U.S. war on Afghanistan after the 9/11 bombings was never given negative portrayal even when children's lives were lost in the war (Ain as The Western written as well as visual productions have portrayed Islam, Arabs and Muslims as a single entity in a way that serves the Western interests. The Western media under-reports how good the Other is and over-reports the opposite to reinforce the classical distinction between the West and the East. The Egyptian revolution of 2011 is the main focus of this paper. Therefore, a thorough analysis of the American and British editorials' headlines that cover this revolution will be conducted so as to see if the way the Western media covered the crises outlined above persists and to see, eventually, whether or not the coverage of Egypt and the revolution's participant is dominated by Orientalist frames.

Review of Theory
As a form of racism, prejudice, and stereotype, Edward Said's Orientalism (1978) forms the theoretical background of this study. Orientalism is seen in different interrelated disciplines. It is conceived of as an academic discipline, as a topic of learning, discovery and practice, and as a style of thought that distinguishes the West from the East (Ashcroft and Ahluwalia, 2001, p.55). Through Orientalism, Said reverses the gaze and scrutinizes the Orientalist narratives to see how they enable the execution of authority and domination over the Orient (p.55). The Orient and the Occident are seen in a relation characterized by Manichean division. The self-confirming parameters in which Orientalism circulates are -the superior ‗order', ‗rationality' and ‗symmetry' of Europe, and the inferior ‗disorder', ‗irrationality' and ‗primitivism' of non-Europe‖ (2001, p.49). Said's ideas serve as background knowledge that is necessary to locate Orientalist rhetoric in the selected editorials' headlines when covering the revolution and its aftermath in Egypt.

Newspapers Selection
The editorials' headlines are taken from two American and two British highly-read elite newspapers. They are the New York Time (NYT), the Washington Post, the Guardian (G) and the Telegraph (T). The choice of examining uniquely the American and the British print media can be justified by the fact that the U.S has always shown 867 noticeable geopolitical interests in any incident that might change the political scene in the Arab World (Salaita, 2012). Besides, it is argued that the classical Orientalist rhetoric is still being echoed in the American political and media discourse, especially after events such as the 9/11 bombings (Mustafa, 2015). The choice of the British media is relevant as Egypt and Britain share important colonial past besides the fact that they are more often than not referred to together in many discussions of Orientalism (Trauthig, 2018).
The New York Times and the Washington Post are ranked number one and two respectively in terms of their reach and circulation in the U.S. (Agilitypr, 2018). They are among the most respected and influential broadsheets. The broadsheets papers, compared with tabloids, provide in-depth coverage and a sober tone in articles and editorials, and their international far reached readers are often fairly affluent and educated (Rogers, 2018). This is while the British papers, The Guardian and The Telegraph, are the best-read broadsheets with a weekly readership of 5.3 million and 4.9 million respectively (Rogers, 2018).

Significance of editorials and headlines
Editorials are unsigned press articles with significant ideological connotations. They represent the view of the entire editorial board. They are defined as -a corporate voice or position of a media organization on any given issue of public interest‖ which is also known as the leader (Azeez, 2018, p.1). Having such ideological function, editorials remain the best unit of analysis to study ideological narratives such as Orientalism.
In racism and the press, Van Dijk (1991) argues that the main themes and topics are mostly presented in the headlines. The headlines, which are always conspicuous and clear, summarize the gist of the media text. They have an ideological function as they may guide the reader to understand the text in a certain way (p.50). The power of the headlines is that they tell the reader what to think about. That is, the journalist -may ‗upgrade' a less important topic by expressing it in the headline, thereby ‗downgrading' the importance of the main topic‖ (p.51). Moreover, they possess a cognitive function as the reader keeps the information expressed in the headline in mind through the entire process of reading the text (1991).
Headlines are also influential at the level of message decoding by the consumer; the information presented in headlines enables the reader to recall his prior knowledge about the issue being read. According to Van Dijk, if the word ‗riot' is used in a headline instead of the word ‗demonstration', the reader will activate his knowledge about riots. This ‗riot script' will guide the reader to understand the text in a certain way (1991). In this regard, choosing a word instead of another not only defines the topic of the text, but also unfolds the side the newspaper is taking (1991). For their important functions, headlines are not mostly written by reporters. Rather, they are tailored and written by special editors who insist on selecting catchy titles that urge the reader to read the whole text (1991).

The Sample
The case study in this paper is the 2011 Egyptian revolution and its aftermath (2011-2018). This paper examines the Western print media coverage of this uprising. It aims at investigating the nature of four U.S. and British print newspapers' coverage of events unfolded in Egypt to see whether or not the editorials' headlines sustain Orientalist rhetoric.
The number of editorials' headlines varies according to each newspaper (see table 1). Moreover, Table 1 shows the key words researched for collecting the needed editorials' headlines. What was time consuming is the process of consulting thousands of articles so as to check whether or not they are unsigned editorials written by the editorial boards of the selected newspapers.

Method of Analysis
This study will examine the extent to which the sample (n=101) is reflective of Orientalist conceptualizations of the revolution participants. Two main areas in critical media studies will be targeted: quantitative content analysis and critical discourse analysis (CDA). Norman Fairclough's critical discourse analysis (1989, 1995a) and partially Van Dijk's (1988,1991) are borrowed in this investigation. Their analytical strategies, textual and discursive, will be made use of for a better qualitative analysis of the editorials. The analysis will be supported by quotes from the studied sample.

Content analysis
Content analysis is the most used technique in communication research (Riffe & Freitag, 1997). It is one of the best known and most utilized methodology in the study of mass communication (Berger, 2007). It is defined as a -research technique for the objective, systematic and quantitative description of the manifest content of communication‖ (Berelson, 1952, p. 18).
It was also referred to as a method of -measuring the amount of something‖ (Berger, 1991) and of relying on a scientific method when analyzing messages (Neuendorf, 2002). Content analysis can be applied in the study of different issues, such as interviews transcripts, discussions in social studies, films, TV programs, editorials and advertisements in both newspapers and magazines (Neuendorf, 2002).
In this content analysis, I will focus on the quantitative properties of headlines. The main addressed property in headlines is the use of words. I will examine the lexical style of words used with the revolutions' participants in headlines. I will hereby uncover to which register those defining words are related. Attention will be paid to lexicalization of semantic content for it is, according to Van Dijk, -signal the opinions, emotions, or social position of a speaker‖ (Van Dijk, 1991). Moreover, the analysis of the lexical style of words will inform about the overall tone of coverage.

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
As the quantitative content analysis is unable to answer ‗why' questions, a critical discourse analysis will be applied to provide in-depth analysis of the coverage. CDA is the extension of Halliday's systemic critical linguistics which stemmed from the work coordinated by Roger Fowler at the University of East Anglia in the 1970s (Fairclough, 1992). Critical discourse analysis does not emanate from a unitary theoretical framework or methodology. It is actually viewed as an approach which consists of many methods. Dolon, Labarta and Todolí (2006) argue that critical discourse analysts share -the idea that choices made by speakers (regarding vocabulary and grammar) are consciously or unconsciously principled and systematic, and that they are ideologically based‖ (2006, p.9). They also share the view that CDA is a social science that intervenes in social practice and social relationships (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997). Therefore, the main concerns of critical discourse analysts is to demystify the ideological assumptions embedded or hidden in the structure of language so as to enlighten people to be aware of and resist different forms of power abuse (Dolon, Labarta & Todolí, 2006, p.9).
Fairclough guided the textual analysis on many areas. First, the analysis targets vocabulary so as to show, among other things, what they convey, how they reflect ideological connotations and what aspects of reality are overworded which is, for Fairclough, a sign of emphasis that might be suggestive of a focus of ideological struggle (1992a). Second, it tries to uncover the agency pattern of the text (transitivity); who is empowered and depicted as agent, and over whom, whether there is an omission of information (backgrounding) about agents of power, and what the ideological function of such omission is (Fairclough, 1992a, Halliday, 1985a. Third, mood and modality are also addressed in text analysis to show if the mood is declarative, imperative or interrogative, and to explain the choice of modals and what they actually convey (2006). Other features are also addressed such as topicality, or which themes are foregrounded; presupposition (or say what the writer or speaker takes for granted or consider a common sense), politeness and ambiguity (2006). These features will be discussed in the analysis of the headlines.

Results and Discussion:-
The study considers the coverage of seven years after the revolution (2011-2018) in an attempt to make the thesis contribution to the literature greater. A timeline of main events during and after the Egyptian revolution are briefly raised before the analysis, for a better understanding of the analysis has to be preceded by a mention of the reported news items. This part of the paper uncovers whether Orientalist understanding of non-Westerners, in this case Egyptians, is reflected in the editorials' headlines, and whether the Arab Spring has been framed on the basis of Orientalist modes of thought. To answer such questions, this part provides initially a quantitative content analysis as a counting tool of the most frequent themes in the headlines. The results are presented in tables. Generally, a quantitative and superficial content analysis -can yield useful but incomplete insights into the nature of the coverage‖ (Van Dijk, 1988, p.66). Therefore, -this combination of quantitative and qualitative analysis, is the only adequate approach to the study of mass media messages‖ (1988, p.66).

The Egyptian Revolution Context
The turmoil in Egypt starting from 2011 is seen within the context of the many revolutions that swept the Arab world starting from December 2010 in Tunisia. January 25, 2011 was the day when Egyptians took to the street and assembled in Tahrir square to ask for many social and political amendments among of which is unseating the longstanding regime led by the ex-Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak. The authorities responded violently to the street mass protest and tried to extinguish it by using tear gases to disperse the rebels, shutting the Internet services and setting up a curfew in the country (Abushouk, 2014). Though, at that time, Mubarak tried to start negotiations and to make concessions, via his vice president Omar Suleiman, to contain the Egyptians' anger, the rebels applauded to his departure after 18 days of street protest (2014).
Subsequently, the Egyptians realized that the ousting of Mubarak didn't lead to all that they strived for, as Egypt has gone through years of turmoil and transition after Mubarak left office. The elections post Mubarak unseating was won by the Islamist Organization the Muslim Brotherhood, represented by their candidate Mohammed Morsi (news24, 2018). After a year in office, the Egyptians, once again, took to the street to criticize Morsi's power grab and to ask for his resignation. Few days later (on 3, July, 2013), the military, represented by Chief General Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, announced Morsi's departure and installed an interim president (news24, 2018). Egypt witnessed violent incidents after what has been considered a coup d'état against Morsi. Many of Morsi's supporters were killed or jailed and the Muslim Brotherhood was announced a banned group and later designated as a terrorist organization by the authorities. Later, the year of 2014 was characterized by the electoral victory of Al-Sisi who is still in office until now -2021. All these events have been reported by world media as going against the ambitions on which the revolution in Egypt was grounded.

Quantitative Properties of Headlines
A detailed qualitative analysis of headlines has to be preceded by a quantitative analysis of headlines' properties. This study examined a corpus of 101 headlines, covering the Egyptian case, taken from The New York Times (n=43), The Washington Post (n=21), The Guardian (n=26), and The Telegraph (n=11). The main property of headlines is the use of words which manifest the underlying concepts used by journalists when defining situations, signal opinions, emotions, or social position of the news item writer (Van Dijk, 1991). According to Van Dijk (1991), headlines not only have a defining function that summarizes an event, but they also have an evaluative function.
Headlines are prominent textual categories of editorials. I projected the subjects that are frequently raised in 64 headlines shown in the American newspapers; The NYT and The WP. As stated in table 2, the headlines are dominated by specific subjects such as, the Egyptian crisis (n=13), the Egyptian regime and the military (n=10), Mubarak relation to the U.S. (n=6), the Egyptian election (n=6), the U.S. relation with its allies (n=4), The U.S. role (n=4), democracy (n=4), Egyptian law (n=3), Egyptian economy (n=2). Morsi, Israel, and terrorism are mentioned once each in the headlines.
The fact that the Egyptian crisis subject is mentioned in more than 26% of the headlines is logical because the Egyptian revolution is considered uniquely an internal local crisis. Similarly, mentioning the Egyptian regime in more than 15% of the headlines is justifiable because the revolution was basically triggered to oppose it. However, the U.S. media, through the headlines, show that the Egyptian crisis context is also a moment to zoom on Mubarak's relation to the U.S. and the West at large. The fact that Mubarak is combined, in headlines, with words such as -put on notice‖, -beyond‖, -break with‖, -change‖, and -offers less‖ means that the NYT and WP allocate more coverage 870 to start calling an end to the relations of Mubarak to the West. Similarly, the same media evaluates the U.S. relation with its Mideast allies in the light of the Egyptian revolution in more than 6% of the headlines. A focus on the Egyptian elections in 9.37% of the headlines shows how important the political future, and how defining the future Egyptian administration is important to the U.S. The issue of democracy is frequently referred to in headlines (6.25%) combined by words such as -interrupted‖, -no going back‖, -jailing‖, and -backtracked‖. Therefore, it is cynically reported. In more than 6% of the editorials, the U.S. role in the Egyptian uprising is raised with words such as -suspend aid‖, -save‖, and -sanctions‖. It presents the U.S. as having a concrete role in the context of the revolution in Egypt. Morsi, Israel and terrorism are equally written in the headlines once each.   Table 3 demonstrates The Guardian and The Telegraph's projection of a myriad of issues in their headlines similar to a great extent to the ones made salient by the American press. The Egyptian crisis or the ‗Arab spring' is raised 19 times out of 37 headline, Hosni Mubarak (n=6), the West is mentioned twice, elections twice, the Arab world, Mohamed Morsi, Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi, Britain's foreign policy, and the issue of democracy are raised once each.
The British newspapers; The G and The T, allocate an important space in the headlines to project the Egyptian crisis and the Arab spring. More than 51% of the headlines refer to the subject in their headlines along with phrases or words such as -pivotal moment‖, -storm‖, -dangerous‖, -big for its boots‖, -unfinished business‖, -surprise‖, -crushed‖, -self-destruction‖, -broken‖, -reform‖, -not blossoming‖, and -disastrous triumph‖. Overall, the issue raised in the headlines is tinged with a negative tone. The then president Hosni Mubarak receives important projection. His name is written in more than 16% of the British headlines with words and phrases such as -against‖, -beyond‖, -must step aside‖, -is going‖, -after‖, and -dictatorship‖. Such phrases reflect one of the British media's concerns, which is thinking about post-Mubarak Egypt.

871
The next most frequent subject is the West; used once by the G in its 26 headlines, and once by the T in its 11 headlines. That makes 5.40% of the British newspapers' headlines. The subject of the West is used with phrases such as -a duty to nurture democracy‖, which means that, like the American press, the British newspapers acknowledge the West a positive role to play in the Egyptian crisis. The phrase -must weigh its words carefully‖ shows that Arab crises are serious events that the West have to be cautious when dealing with. The issue of election is also raised in 5.40% of the headlines which reflects how interested the British media is in the results the ballot box may unfold.
Islam is mentioned once in The Guardian's headlines, together with two words: -fear and fantasy‖. These show in a clear way what type of sentiments The Guardian has towards Islam. The Army receives one mention. The Arab World used in the headlines once and referred to as new and brave. Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood group's representative, is mentioned once in the context of his prison sentence. Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi is raised in the headlines once with the expression -sup with a long spoon‖ to show how dangerous Al-Sisi might be. The G puts the issue of democracy once in its editorials along with the word -mirage‖. The topic is perceived with complete uncertainty by the examined media. Finally, Britain's foreign policy is raised once with the expression -need to be made clear on Egypt‖, which shows that the British relations with Egypt need to suit any political circumstances in the region. All that preceded is a quantitative and a superficial analysis of the editorials' headlines. An in-depth, discursive and textual analysis of all the aforementioned subjects are provided ahead in this study for a better identification of the ideological functions the headlines have when reporting about the Egyptian revolution 2011 and its aftermath.

Qualitative Properties of the Headlines
The Critical Discourse analysis of the headlines in this study aims to identify the areas where Orientalist modes of thought are reflected. I use Edward Said's concept of Orientalism to analyse the selected headlines that cover incidents taking place in the Middle East. Most framed issues especially those tinged with an Orientalist tone are emphasized and given great deal of analysis. Linguistic and discursive elements suggested by Critical discourse analysis theorists; especially Fairclaugh and Van Dijk, are made use of in this paper to better answer the research question and accordingly uncover how the revolution and its aftermath in Egypt have been framed. The analysis below uncovers strategies and linguistic elements employed by headlines' writers, such as the use of modality, presupposition and demystification that reveal the ideological positions of the headlines' writers.

Egypt and the U.S.: Implicit Power Relations in the Headlines
Among the most noticeable features of the headlines is that they include a recommendation to or an appeal for the U.S. government to express attitude or react to a certain issue. The following headlines are worth considering: 1) -The U.S. needs to break with Mubarak now‖ (WP, 29 January, 2011) 2) -Mubarak's dictatorship must end now‖ (G, 30 January, 2011) 3) -Morsi must moderate his power grab‖ (WP, 13 August, 2012) 4) -U.S. must suspend aid after Egypt's coup‖ (WP, 04 July, 2013) 5) -The U.S. Should Not Be Egypt's Accomplice‖ (NYT, 14 March, 2017) In headline 1 stated above, the U.S. power to call for an end to Mubarak's relation is needed. The U.S. is presented as the one controlling the relationship. Similarly, headline 5 reflects a call for the U.S. to stop supporting Egypt, (-The U.S. should not Be Egypt's accomplice‖). In Headlines 2 and 3 the media urges Mubarak to stop his autocracy (-Mubarak's dictatorship must end now‖), and Morsi, the elected President following Mubarak's ousting, to change his ruling policy (-must moderate his power grab‖). The financial agency that the U.S. possesses is reflected in headline 4 in the sense that the U.S., as a dominant force in international economy, has always a lever to press in any conflict, which is punitive in this case.
Linguistically speaking, these demands addressed to the U.S. as well as to the then Egyptian heads of state to take actions are conveyed using modality and modal verbs like -need to‖, -must‖ and -should‖. Modality, according to Simpson, -refers to the speaker's attitude towards, or opinion about, the truth of a preposition expressed by a sentence. It also extends to their attitude towards the situation or event described by a sentence‖ (as cited in Richardson, 2007, p.59). Modal verbs, such as those mentioned earlier, are frequently employed in ‗opinionated' genres of journalism such as editorials, for editorials contain, in addition to news items, the journalist's judgment, evaluation, or comment of an event (2007). The writers of the headlines mentioned above employ what Richardson calls -obligation modality‖, which is utilized when the writer believes that a certain decision or action must be taken 872 (2007). Moreover, through the use of modality, the speaker or writer has authority or superiority in relation to others (-relational modality‖), or to the truth or probability of a representation of reality (-expressive modality‖) (Fairclough, 1989). Put simply, Fairclough (1989) illustrates the -relational modality‖ in the following expressive example: Your library books are overdue and your library card may not be used until they are returned. If the books are not returned within a fortnight, you must pay the cost of replacing them before you borrow more books. (p.127) Here, -must‖ expresses obligation, which means that the addressee is required to pay the cost of replacement. In this example, the authority or the power relations that enable the person in charge of the library to impose obligations on the client is not explicit, but rather implicit (1989). The implicitness of this authority, for Fairclough, makes of ‗relational modality' -a matter of ideological interest‖ (1989, p.127) Bearing Fairclough's illustration in mind while considering headline 1, 2 and 3, -the U.S. needs to break with Mubarak now‖; -Mubarak's dictatorship must end now‖; and -Morsi must moderate his power grab‖, the addressee is taking-for-granted the U.S. superiority in controlling its relation with Mubarak by ending it. Additionally, the word -now‖ in the headline intensifies the degree of authority the addressee enjoys as to decide when exactly the relation should finish. Such authority or superiority reflects implicit power relations between the U.S. and Egypt. Similarly, headline 5 shows the U.S. authority to stop being Egypt's supporter, ally, or -accomplice‖. In headline 4, the same authoritative tone is reflected in the pressure the U.S. can put on Egypt by suspending the financial aid.
The durability of Orientalism, therefore, depends on the continuity of such power relationships that involve the West and Arabs. In Said's formulation: -Orientalism depends for its strategy on this flexible positional superiority, which puts the Westerner in a whole series of possible relationships with the Orient without ever losing him the relative upper hand‖ (Said, 1978, p.7).

Positive "Self"-presentation vs. Negative "Other"-representation
Covering the Egyptian revolution, by the selected papers, is mainly characterized by emphasizing the West's agency, power, and potential in creating positive change and putting pressure on others when needed. This is salient in a myriad of headlines in the selected papers' editorials. For illustration, I focus on some of the headlines: The U.S. in the first headline is presented as the one that has a role to do while people are struggling; a neutral arbiter that intervenes to strike a balance between two conflicting interests. It is represented, in the second headline, as a taken-for-granted rescuer; -how the U.S. can save‖, the implicit message is that the U.S. can absolutely save Egypt from Syrian's fate, which is a presupposition, while the journalist's inquiry is simply about ‗how' the saving process will happen. The idea that the U.S., and the West at large, is the classical promoter of democracy and democratic values is manifest in the third headline that acknowledges the duty of the U.S. to nurture democracy in Egypt.
Conversely, while the U.S. is presented as having the responsibility and the ability to nurture democracy in Egypt, the latter is situated in the headlines as the one that breaks, jails and interrupts it; and thus makes of it a thing that can never be achieved (‗a mirage', in The Guardian's formulation). Instead of naming precisely who is responsible for hindering the democracy process in Egypt, whether it is the regime, the military, the protesters or another element, the headlines' architects choose to hold the whole Egypt responsible for it. This is well illustrated in the following headlines: Most of the headlines are tinged with a violent tone. The focus is basically to attach Egypt to violence, terror, blood, chaos, and brutality in the reader's mind, and nothing else matters. Once again, Egypt is mentioned in headlines with these violent terms without naming the real guilty party or the perpetrator. The whole Egypt is therefore held This is an underrepresentation of Egypt in the media which is presented in a form of mystification. Put simply, consider for example headline 10, Egypt is held responsible for assaulting civil society, whereas the convict could be a small portion of society, such as the military or the regime. The same can be discerned in headlines 11 and 13; which party is responsible for the bloodshed or massacre, or for carrying acts of terror in Tahrir sqauare? Is it one person, many people, the regime or another segment of the Egyptian society? Similarly, editorial 15 refers to -political executions in Egypt‖ without naming the real executer. Such generalizing headlines put Egypt and examples of the most deadly acts of violence in a single entity to highlight Egypt but as a gloomy space full of terror, violence, killing and bloodshed.
The NYT goes further as to assume the existence of ‗guidelines' for repression in Egypt (see headline 16 above). Normally, a ‗guideline' is a code followed to fulfill goals or objectives the right way. According to The Merriam Webster dictionary, it is -an indication or outline of policy or conduct‖. In The NYT's case, Egypt has ‗guidelines' for exerting repression. The reader will therefore feel that repression is something institutionalized and organized in Egypt since there are guidelines to follow to exert it the right way. This clearly contributes to the negative portrayal of Egypt in the selected media headlines.
To push this argument further, there is a category of newspapers' readers who read just the headlines while skimming the content of the paper. These readers are susceptible to demystification if they are confronted with headlines such as -Terror in Tahrir Square‖ or -bloodshed in Egypt‖. That is, they are left with unanswered questions and hence totally mystified. Mostly, such readers will recall their background knowledge related to Egypt and Arabs at large, a process that mostly yields a negative image about Arabs.
There is one headline, written by The Guardian, that from an initial reading, the reader may conceive of it a benign portrayal of Egypt and the Arab world. It reads: 17. -Egypt: brave new Arab world‖ (G, 12 February 2011) And yet, here, going beneath the surface of the headline to identify the presence of an Orientalist attitude of the writer is needed. The attribute -brave‖ is not used alone in the sentence, but rather it is accompanied by the attribute -new‖. The use of the word -new‖ is not innocent in this context. It for sure attributes the notion of bravery to the ‗new' Egypt, the ‗new' Arab world that is revolting against dictatorship. Accordingly, ‗bravery' is implicitly assumed to be absent from the list of attributes that describe the ‗old' and pre-revolution Egypt and the ‗old' and pre-revolution Arab world. This is a real deployment of Orientalist argument in the Western media's depiction of Arabs who in fact, for Joseph Massad, have shown their bravery through revolting against -colonial and local tyranny every decade since World War I‖ (as cited in Salaita, 2012, p.134).

Islam and Iran in the Headlines
Islam and Iran are equally highlighted once in the examined headlines. Islam in headline 1 stated below represents fear and fantasy. This headline suggests that Islam is a fearful religion in Egypt, and a fantasy at best; a religion which is not compatible with the living reality. Unsurprisingly, Israel is presented in headline 2 as a victim, a scapegoat -the traditional victim in the Middle East -and the phrase -once again‖ shown in the headline suggests that it is not the first time wherein Israel is scapegoated. This is illustrative of how Edward Said clarifies the double standards involved in the Western press when representing Islam and Israel: "Israel's religious proclivity is rarely