We investigate how media coverage influences the timing and public perception of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan. Specifically, we ask: How does news congestion in the U.S. and Pakistan affect the likelihood of a drone strike, and how is this coverage shaped to serve political interests? Using American drone warfare as a focal case, we analyze how drone strikes are not only timed but also reported in both countries, examining the strategic role of the media in shaping public opinion. Our analysis uses an instrumental variable approach to explore whether media pressure correlates with changes in the probability of drone strikes. We find that major news events in the U.S. decrease the likelihood of a strike, while similar events in Pakistan increase it by 6.5% the following day. Our findings suggest two possible mechanisms: U.S. leaders may seek positive media attention by publicizing successful strikes, or they may strategically time strikes to coincide with major events in Pakistan to avoid backlash. To further investigate these mechanisms, we analyze how media in both the U.S. and Pakistan cover these attacks and incorporate public opinion data to assess Americans’ views on terrorism and the perceived success of the U.S. government's fight against it. The Bush and Obama administration’s use of drones exemplifies how media manipulation serves both domestic political gain and international strategic goals. These insights are supported by robustness and mechanism tests, providing a comprehensive look at the intersection of media, military intervention, and political accountability.