Abstract
This article examines what scholars can learn about civilian killings from newswire data in situations of non-random missingness. It contributes to this understanding by offering a unique view of the data-generation process in the South Sudanese civil war. Drawing on 40 hours of interviews with 32 human rights advocates, humanitarian workers, and journalists who produce ACLED and UCDP-GED’s source data, the article illustrates how nonrandom missingness leads to biases of inconsistent magnitude and direction. The article finds that newswire data for contexts like South Sudan suffer from a self-fulfilling narrative bias, where journalists select stories and human rights investigators target incidents that conform to international views of what a conflict is about. This is compounded by the way agencies allocate resources to monitor specific locations and types of violence to fit strategic priorities. These biases have two implications: first, in the most volatile conflicts, point estimates about violence using newswire data may be impossible, and most claims of precision may be false; secondly, body counts reveal little if divorced from circumstance. The article presents a challenge to political methodologists by asking whether social scientists can build better cross-national fatality measures given the biases inherent in the data-generation process.
repository
Continue to search the repository
You might also like
Some Infos
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor.
Pages
- About Our County Profiles
- Blog
- Case Studies Grid
- Central Equatoria
- Conflict Sensitivity Resource Facility South Sudan
- Contact Us
- Contribute a Repository Article
- County Profile HTML links
- County Profiles
- COVID-19 HUB
- Covid-19 information page
- CSRF About Us
- CSRF Helpdesk
- CSRF Helpdesk Form
- CSRF Login
- Dashboard
- Deliverables
- Demo
- Events
- Forgot password
- Guides, Tools and Checklists
- Helpdesk
- Home
- Latest
- Looker Studio
- Subscribe