The Northern Ethiopia conflict between the Federal government and the Tigray armed forces has reportedly resulted in over half a million deaths. The violent conflict has received much more attention from various media outlets in Ethiopia and around the world. The study aimed at examining how the Ethiopian and international media outlets have represented the conflict, with a particular focus on Al Jazeera, BBC, CGTN, CNN, EBC and Tigray TV. More specifically, the study investigated the dominant types of frame employed in reporting the conflict across the selected Ethiopian and international media outlets; identified the sources cited in news items related to the conflict; examined how media outlets represented the conflict and its key figures; explored the extent to which journalistic professionalism was exercised in reporting; and analysed the factors that have influenced the reporting practices of journalists covering the conflict from November 03, 2020, to December 23, 2021. The study employed an explanatory sequential mixed research design through quantitative content analysis, textual analysis, corpus-based critical discourse, and thematic analysis. The study was informed by media representation theory, framing theory, the hierarchy of influences model and the propaganda model. The findings revealed that the selected international media predominantly utilised the military conflict frame over other important issues, such as the violence of war, diagnostic, and human-interest frames. On the other hand, the law and order frame was the dominant one in EBC’s coverage of the conflict. Although the global and Ethiopian media struggled to represent all parties in their war reporting impartially, Al Jazeera and the BBC demonstrated better efforts to cover multiple perspectives and utilised the most diverse range of sources. The examined Ethiopian media outlets faced critical challenges as they failed to represent all stakeholders. The use of anonymous sources remained a major issue in the media reporting of the conflict; while the BBC consistently provided rationales for relying on anonymous sources, many others failed to do so. The findings of the corpus analysis revealed that international media depicted Tigray as a region suffering from military aggression by the federal government and as a key agent of resistance. Al Jazeera and CNN represented Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed as a controversial figure who faced political and military challenges by juxtaposing the Nobel Peace Prize and violence. The BBC portrayed Debretsion, chief administrator of Tigray regional state, as a political leader seeking justice and diplomatic efforts, and was also described as a key figure at the heart of the conflict. The representation of "Ethiopia" by CGTN appears to be consistent with the foreign policy positions of the Chinese state with regard to respecting sovereignty, non-interference and maintenance of stability. Evidently, the representation of opposing parties by EBC and Tigray TV reflected starkly polarised narratives. The EBC represented the TPLF using ideologically charged terms like ‘terrorist’ and ‘junta’ to justify the action of the Federal government and to delegitimise the regional administration. In contrast, Tigray TV frequently used politically loaded terms to represent Abiy Ahmed and his government as the chief architect of a ‘fascist’ regime. Seemingly, journalistic practices in reporting the conflict were not only shaped by individual or professional orientations but also by entrenched political, structural, and organisational forces that restricted autonomy and credibility. The selected Ethiopian media outlets took partisan ideological positions and, thus, acting beyond the bounds of professionalism, served as government propaganda apparatuses and functioned in the interests of their patrons rather than operating as institutions accountable to the public. These constraints were further amplified by limited access, communication blackouts, and safety concerns, which resulted in incomplete and often compromised reporting. The research concludes that the media contributed to deepening divisions and intensifying the conflict in Northern Ethiopia via inflammatory and polarising reporting.