Social Media Communication And Framing of The Gaza Conflict: Impact On Public Opinion

This study examines how the Gaza conflict is framed on social media in Jordan and how such framings influence public opinion. The research aims to explore the emotional, political, and ideological dimensions of digital discourse in a highly sensitive geopolitical context. Employing a qualitative methodology, the study is based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 25 Jordanian participants, including social media users, journalists, and political analysts. The analysis draws on framing theory and connective action to interpret emerging themes. Findings reveal that digital conversations are dominated by humanitarian and moral narratives, often conveyed through emotionally charged content that is perceived as both authentic and politically meaningful. Moreover, a pervasive mistrust of mainstream media has led to the formation of echo chambers, prompting users to rely more on peer-generated content and digital influencers. These dynamics underscore how social media platforms in Jordan function not merely as channels of information, but as active spaces where collective identities, emotional solidarity, and political positions are constructed and contested. The study concludes that while social media amplifies marginalized voices and facilitates engagement, it also reinforces polarization and limits critical deliberation. The research highlights the need for enhanced media literacy programs that foster critical engagement with digital content, particularly in conflict settings. It offers important implications for policymakers, educators, and scholars seeking to understand the evolving role of digital communication in shaping public discourse in the Global South.