Political maneuvering is a very daisy analysis and varies with the core ideologies of the political parties... however the stance can vary depending upon situation and the immediate gains in the fore-run.

Take an issue convert them in to KEYWORDS and have them in one column, insert two more columns as PRO and Other as CON; Insert one more column for Time frame.

Fill the stances taken by the Political parties against each keyword as PRO or CON and identify the time period associated.

Through this a relative LIFE TIME of associated maneuvering can be calculated over iterations.

Hello Ayesha

Try comparing what gets written in national and international media. Sometimes what gets written is as interesting as what is left out and don't forget sometimes individual newspapers have their own political agendas!

Thankyou Krishnan  and Erum for your detailed insight, but my focus of study is just national print media of Paklistan, as I am not targeting the international perspective. i am actually wanted to compare the political regimes here in Pakistan and how they tackled different issues politically.

This question is quite broad and extremely open-ended. Let me first state that, you need to set out the key variables (which in your opinions constitute political manoeuvres) that you would like to measure in this case. At the same time, you should define what you term as conflicting issues. These could be social, economic, political, legal, or environmental issues. This is a bright question.

The next thing that you need to know is that newspapers (broadsheets or tabloids) have their political or policy leanings, and this is normal. But these do not affect news columns because of the professional requirements of good journalism. However, newspapers provide special opinion columns for debates and these are clearly identified as opinions (Op-Eds).

As you plan to measure the variables based on selected criteria, there is a need to select or identify the newspapers (tabloids or broadsheets) to be assessed using a method or procedure called Content Analysis. Read more about this methodology. For example, decide on which issues are to be analysed (duration), and the contents involve size of columns, headings, pictures, personalities, and the frequencies of the coverage in the selected publications. Find the details from the internet.

I suggest this question is reviewed. My opinion is that manipulations are usually unfair or dishonest tactics which are intended to achieve specific ends or objectives. In this case, it involves two or more competitions or opposing sides. These may at times be synonymous with propaganda, misinformation, deception, or disinformation. This means they are quite aware of the falsehoods.

In addition, it may also involve very competitive debates or serious arguments by the contestants in question. Political arguments by politicians or policy makers, academic debates by professionals or intellectuals; may present conflicting views, but these cannot be called manipulations. It is normal for people to agree to disagree on an issue.

In a free society, dissenting views are not only encouraged but also promoted by laws, institutional practice, and constitutions. There is a need for evidence of manoeuvres, the standard of evidence is very critical to justify any claims for political manoeuvres. There is a need to define the term in question or present an operational definition of it. You may have columns on (on the political manoeuvres) on social, economic, political or legal, and environment issues.

The phrase conflicting issues need to be well clarified because issues by themselves do not conflict. Instead there are conflicting views, decisions, laws, or policies on issues. My view is that, issues by definition are facts which people interpret or perceive differently (have different points of view). So the conflicts are about attitudes, perceptions, or misperceptions or manipulations. Our perceptions or attitudes are formed by our background or upbringing (social (e.g. culture and religion), economic, environmental, and political beliefs, orientations, or practices).

The reasoning here is that, issues are by definition, facts which people interpret differently (the conflicts are in the interpretations of issues but not in the issues themselves). For example, people may have different views about what they think are the causes of deforestation or land degradation in a particular place. The issue (fact or reality) is deforestation or land degradation.

While one side of the arguments may attribute deforestation or land degradation corruption, international trade in timber, or agricultural expansion; another side, may blame them on population pressure, lack of public awareness, weak environmental laws, or even mass poverty. For example, others argue that, poverty is both the agent and victim of environmental degradation.

The other issue that should be considered is that newspapers represent different political shades. Their editorial policies defend or propagate the proprietors’ points of view such as political agenda. Likewise, in a democratic society, it is not only normal to have alternative views under freedom of expression, democratic, pluralistic society, and media pluralism.

The media such as newspapers have a social responsibility to act as a market place of ideas as they provide the public sphere (debating arena) for all kinds of views. Political debates or disagreements are promoted by the media for better accountability and transparency as well as policy elaboration on various platforms for citizens or as part of civic or voter education at times. It is during such debates that the audience (the public) will judge if anyone is simply manoeuvring or not.

Thankyou so much Wilson Truman for your expert opinion. I have read it thoroughly and found so intresting and relevant to my area of research. I am extremely thankful for this new direction you mentioned and I never noticed that issue itself is not a conflict but its all about perception, misperception or opinon. Ill keep in touch with you for further guidance and opinion. 

And thanks erum n krishnan, especially krishnan point of view is also the part of my analysis.