‘To what extent does modern media coverage and censorship of conflicts affect how people interpret them? Modern media coverage - the main means of mass communication - gives us news from around the globe, allowing us to develop an informed understanding of the world and its issues. Armed Conflict and tension between the world’s countries has only become more vehement, which has lead to an onslaught of media coverage, orchestrated by countries on either side of the conflicts, as well as countries that are regarded as outsiders. Information about these conflicts can be propagated by a myriad of different sources, which often besmirch its reliability by having a subjective stance. The biased viewpoints of this type of coverage can influence the views of people on a national and international level, depending on the influence and reputation of a nation’s media worldwide. This report will answer the research question ‘To what extent does modern media coverage of conflicts affect how people interpret them?’ by first evaluating how the media coverage of a conflict affects the direction of the conflict in the past, looking at the media situation in various countries, and finally come to a general consensus regarding the matter. The media has sunk its claws deep into conflict’s soft underbelly over the past century, and history is littered with examples of this. The Vietnam War, the first war where media coverage was prevalent, evoked chaos within the United States as the influx of uncensored media depicting the horrors of the Vietnam incited major protests all over the country, forcing the United States to withdraw their troops. With 800,000 casualties, the more recent Rwandan Genocide is also linked to the media. One radio station: t... ... middle of paper ... ...Web. Thussu, Daya Kishan., and Des Freedman. "Contextualizing Conflict - The US War on Terrorism." War and the Media: Reporting Conflict 24/7. London: Sage, 2003. N. pag. Print. "United States Internet Usage, Broadband and Telecommunications Reports - Statistics." United States Internet Usage, Broadband and Telecommunications Reports - Statistics. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2014. "US Plunges in World Press Freedom Index after NSA Leaks, Attacks on Whistleblowers - RT News." US Plunges in World Press Freedom Index after NSA Leaks, Attacks on Whistleblowers - RT News. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Apr. 2014. "World Press Freedom Index 2014." Reporters Without Borders. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2014. Xu, Beina. "Media Censorship in China." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 12 Feb. 2014. Web. 05 Apr. 2014. http://www.cfr.org/china/media-censorship-china/p11515
The media takes a biased approach on the news that they cover, giving their audience an incomplete view of what had actually happened in a story. Most people believe that they are not “being propagandized or being in some way manipulated” into thinking a certain way or hearing certain “truths” told by their favorite media outlets (Greenwald 827). In reality, everyone is susceptible to suggestion as emphasized in the article “Limiting Democracy: The American Media’s World View, and Ours.” The
398).It is also stated that news divisions reduced their costs, and raised the entertainment factor of the broadcasts put on air. (p. 400). Secondly, the media determines its sources for stories by putting the best journalists on the case and assign them to areas where news worthy stories just emanates. (p.400). Third, the media decides how to present the news by taking the most controversial or relevant events and compressing them into 30 second sound-bites. (p.402). finally, the authors also explain how the media affects the general public. The authors’ state “The effect of one news story on public opinion may be trivial but the cumulative effect of dozens of news stories may be important. This shows a direct correlation between public opinions and what the media may find “relevant”. (Edwards, Wattenberg, Lineberry, 2015, p.
This article considers how the representation of events in the news can serve to shape public opinion or discourage statesmanship. Through the example of the Rwanda Genocide my argument is that representation is constitutive of the ways in which we understand the world and of the hierarchy that currently exists within mainstream media. As (Michael J. Shapiro, 1989) discussed ‘The reason for looking at representational practices in relation to texts, language and modes of interpretation is because it is through these practices that ideas about International Relations are produced’.
Another consequence of the media picturing is, that fights and conflicts are provoked by the media. Speculations provoke people to fight, as seen in 2000 Euros.
Media coverage of news events can be disseminated to the general public in any number of different ways and media biases often “reflects certain organizational and/or professional preferences or values” (Bennett 2011, 173). In fact, Lundman (2003) points out “that journalists assess the newsworthiness of homicides occurrences using the relative frequency of particular types of murders and how well specific murder occurrences mesh with stereotypical race and gender typifications (357).” In addition, Johnson (2012) felt that the real job of media was to “create a message that…grabs public attention (62).” In other words, can the media grab the public’s attention and hold it?
Our views of world conflicts such as war are influenced by the part of the world in which we live. When exploring media coverage of discord, it is important to think about where the author is from and how it has influenced the way he/she has portrayed disharmony. Reports on a world conflict can express extremely different views depending on the social values and understandings of the writers. One must read articles that address the issue of war with cultural relativism by taking into account the local values and historical experiences of the writer. By neglecting this approach, a reader may be persuaded to believe biased and often untrue facts. When researching the war in the Middle East, for example, I found that different countries presented the fighting in different ways. A U.S. newspaper, the Chicago Tribune, presents the conflict in a biased manner and blames the Palestinians for the fighting because we are allies with the Israelis. On the other hand the Dawn, a Pakistani paper, presents the same issues but gives a more accurate and sympathetic view of the Palestinians’ situation. Reflecting on these differences, I realized that culture and national interests shape newspapers’ presentations of war. As an informed reader, it is important to know that I am often given a biased presentation of the facts surrounding a conflict and with this in mind I have changed the way I view reports on war presented by the media.
John Lennon once said, "If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there 'd be peace." In other words, he believed that the media was something that corrupted society and debased its morals. Media has always been around us; whether it is a persuasive billboard or a television commercial. It is inevitably everywhere bombarding society with violence. Today people are accustomed to this type of media, but one cannot neglect the correlations between some past incidents and media violence. Media coverage of violence is harmful to society since it has been associated with glamorizing crimes, causing children to behave aggressively, and creating motivation for criminals. Diminishing changes such as censoring the media and creating
The year is 2006,watching TV, you flip through the various news stations to learn about the recent news in Iraq, the majority of the news simply says that ‘x’ amount of soldiers or marines were killed in such and such attack. You don’t like what you are hearing so you go online to read an independent embedded (embedded refers to news reporters who are attached to military units) reporters story. Online you read that two new schools were built, and the Iraqis, supported by US forces, led an attack to capture an insurgent leader. The big media corporations such as FOX, NBC, CNN, and many others distort the facts that are on the ground. The small, mostly independent, reporters generally try to get a first-hand account of the situation on the ground. They are their alongside the soldiers, sailors, and marines. In some cases these reporters may need to drop their camera or pen and defend themselves. These examples bring many questions that I want to know. The biggest of these questions is how do these different types of reporting, the “main stream media”, and the small independent embedded reporters affect the views that the American people have back home? The reason I chose this topic is that after reading The Good Soldiers and Moment of Truth in Iraq, I was intrigued in the considerable difference between what was wrote in books and what CNN reported on the nightly news. I did not find a ‘good’ answer I could find to answer my question, however I did draw three conclusions. The conclusions are as follows: the ‘big media’ misconstrues the information from the battlefield to fit their own agendas; the media fails to obtain a personal more in depth view and instead report after the smoke has cleared instead of what happened during t...
Media reports everything violent or destructive in the world, they rarely talk about the better things that are happening. When we watch news or find things on the internet we have to decipher what to believe and what not to believe. “What the media reports, how, and who influences all this is no doubt important in how we understand the issues and what opinions are the perspectives we therefore form.” Everyone watches the news and forms an opinion about it but what people don’t realize is that news stations don’t tell the entire story they only tell what they want you to know or what they think is important. Without all the facts and knowing exactly what happened no one can form a correct and knowledgeable
News is often described as the ‘window of the world’, but sometimes what we see on the news isn’t necessarily the true facts of what is happening around the world. News is often very subjective, especially in television, and sometimes the best pictures are picked over the best story. As journalists, we are responsible for society and frequently news leads viewers to a narrow-minded view of the world, often showing them what we want them to see rather than what they need to see. As Harcup explains (2009, P3) ‘Journalism informs society about itself and makes public that which would otherwise be private.’
One example for such confliction is the coverage of the 2003 Iraq invasion. The invasion was largely supported by the press with the justified ideology of eliminating terrorism and liberating Iraq people from the tyranny reign of Saddam Hussein. However, according to The Guardian, very few media have accurately reflected the real purpose of the war – “oil”. Apparently, the phrase “war on oil” has become a taboo for many Americans since it describes dark pages of the nation’s history when the US invade and spread terror on other nations for the benefit of the wealthy. However, the following analysis were presented by The Guardian,
Xu, Beina. "Media Censorship in China." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 12 Feb. 2014. Web. 26 Mar. 2014. .
SCHECHTER, Danny (2001). "Covering Violence: How Should Media Handle Conflict?" mediachannel.org. Online at: http://www.mediachannel.org/views/dissector/coveringviolence.shtml, consulted on March 27, 2004.
In times of War, the media plays a crucial role both in reporting, monitoring and giving updates. During the Vietnam War of 1955-1975, the American press played crucial roles of reporting until it ended up shifting its tone under the influence of occurrence of some events like the Tet Offensive, the My Lai Massacre, the bombing of Cambodia and leaking of Pentagon papers resulting into lack of trust in the press (Knightly 1975). From the beginning of the war up to present times there have been undying debates over the role of media in the war. The have been various criticisms over the American News Media’s actions and influences on the outcome of the war. The debate is embedded on the particular political assumptions perceived across the American political spectrum. Those criticizing the media for its role are of the opinion that the media misunderstood the United States military effort hence hindering succession of the American will in a war which was to be won.
The power of the mass media has once become so powerful that its undoubtedly significant role in the world today stays beyond any questions. It is so strong that even politics uses it as a means of governing in any country around the world. The mass media has not only political meaning but also it conveys wide knowledge concerning all possible aspects of human beings’ lives and, what is utterly true, influences on people’s points of view and their attitude to the surrounding environment. It is completely agreeable about what kind of virtues the mass media is supposed to accent. Nevertheless, it is not frequent at all that the media provides societies with such a content, which is doubtful in terms of the role consigned to it. Presenting violence and intolerance as well as shaping and manipulating public are only a few examples of how the role of mass media is misunderstood by those who define themselves as leading media makers.