"The newspaper’s sense of what the story is about influences who is considered qualified and appropriate to quote. Conversely, quotes are blocks that build and legitimize the narrative; they are all the more important in a journal, like The Economist (TE), not known for doing investigative journalism. In our sample of articles, over 80 percent (33 of 40) included at least one source from Western countries – European NATO members, the U.S., and a handful of fellow travellers, like Finland. Ukrainians were cited in 19, Russians in 16. Just 13 had voices from the global South, anti-Western regimes, and/or international institutions like the UN. Thus, TE defines the conflict through Western eyes, more than those of the direct combatants. Not surprising, given its historical roots and publication base in the U.K. and its increasing orientation towards an American readership. Perhaps more significant is the type of sources who anchor TE’s reportage. Over three-quarters of the articles (31 of 40) quoted official State sources – heads of government, senior government officials or politicians, diplomats, national intelligence agencies, security advisers, occasional regional or city officials, or countries-by-name. Sixty percent cited independent academics, research institutes, analysts, consultants or experts. Most of these were from American or British institutions; a few were experts with non-European names but working in the West." (Pages 27-28)