Persuasion in media discourses produces certain meanings and mobilizes public attitudes in a set direction. Logical appeals, for instance, are created to gather public support for a particular viewpoint, which propagates a specific cause. This paper critically investigates the newspaper's use of persuasion strategies employed by editorial writers to represent the 2011 Arab Spring conflict. The data consist of 20 newspaper editorials published in the Arab News (AN) belonging to the Arab region yet presumed as a newspaper's voice from a non-Arab spring country. The purpose is to probe journalistic roles and discursive positions taken in representing the conflict. The content analysis technique is used to examine the selected editorials. Findings reveal that the newspaper (AN) constructed the events persuasively and portrayed different aspects of the uprising. This study points out that editorial writers relied on several logical appeals to, almost, set a pro-Arab Spring stage. In addition, it has been noticed that the AN adopted a more compassionate attitude towards protesters' losses, and their ambitions for bringing a 'change' were justified, generally, than the ruling authorities. Overall, the findings reaffirm the media's contribution to represent conflicts in different societies under social, cultural, political, and national parameters by using certain tools of persuasion. This study recommends that future research should draw a comparison between news reports and editorial opinions, and investigate post-Arab Spring situations.