In 2012, at least 67 journalists had been killed in action in different conflict areas across the globe, making it one of the deadliest years for media persons in action (CPJ, 2012). Never before in the recorded history, have so many journalists lost their lives in conflict zone. There was a time when media in war was treated at par with Red Cross Samaritans. But, now journalists are seen as polarised agents of either side (Aday et al., 2005: 6; CPJ, 2012). Perhaps the notion has befallen as a result of increasingly state controlled and propagated media content. Several scholars have researched and argued that in contemporary era, media objectivity is almost invisible and the tactics that make it biased are hidden from masses. Although, there is no deniability in the argument that media has the power to filter certain content in specific style to get desirable response from the public, but unfortunately, it has lost majority control over making that decision. Now it is being used by the governments as a tool to generate consensus over its operations, however outrageous they might be. Researches indicate that in case of ongoing ‘war on terror’ media has been effectively used to create mass support for war, dehumanise enemies, create a fake sense of victory and even as a strategic method to instil positive image in hostile countries. This paper is classified as follows. The first part deals with the concepts of framing, elite and pluralist theories and propaganda model suggested by Herman and Chomsky. Second part attempts to elaborate on the various roles that media plays in the war on terror under, with a brief discussion about the counter forces acting in the information technology that may revolutionise the war reporting in future and challenge the state’s control over the information flow like never before. Finally, the third section looks at how media can be used to instigate peace in conflict regions.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Media on War
3. Media in War
4. Media in Diplomacy
5. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper examines the symbiotic relationship between media and military operations during conflicts, specifically focusing on how media is utilized as a tool by governments to shape public opinion. The central research question explores how media framing, elite/pluralist models, and propaganda techniques are employed to maintain consensus for war, and how emerging information technologies and social media may challenge this state-controlled flow of information in the future.
- Theoretical frameworks of media influence (framing, agenda setting, priming, propaganda model).
- The role of mass media in manufacturing public consent for war and military intervention.
- The impact of technological evolution on conflict reporting and government news management.
- Media diplomacy as a strategic tool for public influence in the Middle East.
Excerpt from the Book
Media on War
News media is inherently a mediator between public and administrators. It is a carrier of information which bridges the information gap and gives the general masses the ability to analyse, evaluate, criticise and respond towards the actions of their leaders. Thus, free and objective press is treated as a basic constituent of a democratic set up (Robinson, 2008: 139). However, media is not the most neutral transponder of the news. Even if unconsciously, media is prone to framing a piece of information in a way that it leads its audience to certain perspectives and thought processes.
In the words of media scholars, frames can be defined as ‘principles of selection, emphasis and presentation composed of little tacit theories about what exists, what happens and what matters’ (Gitlin cited in Matthes, 2009: 350). Thus, framing is a process of highlighting certain connections between a few elements of perceived reality ‘to promote a particular interpretation’ (Entman, 2007: 164). The concept is also closely linked to priming and agenda setting. Agenda setting refers to the media's ability, by focusing on some issues rather than others, to direct people to think about those issues. Priming refers to the ability of media to prepare and direct publics to the issues by which they should judge their leaders (Robinson, 2008: 145).
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides an overview of the dangerous environment for journalists in conflict zones and introduces the paper's focus on media framing, elite models, and the propaganda model.
Media on War: Explores the theoretical underpinnings of news building, including framing, priming, agenda setting, and the influence of ownership patterns on media neutrality.
Media in War: Analyzes the practical application of media as a 'faithful servant' to government interests, discussing how official narratives and terror-frames are used to secure public support.
Media in Diplomacy: Examines the US government's efforts to influence public sentiment in Islamic states and the challenge posed by alternative media sources like Al Jazeera.
Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, confirming that while media often acts as a government tool, the rise of social media and new information flows suggests a shifting landscape for future war reporting.
Keywords
Media, War on Terror, Framing, Propaganda Model, Elite Model, Agenda Setting, Public Opinion, Journalism, Information Technology, Social Media, Media Diplomacy, Conflict Reporting, Public Diplomacy, News Management, Terrorism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The paper examines the symbiotic relationship between media and war, analyzing how news organizations facilitate or challenge government narratives during conflicts.
What are the primary theoretical themes discussed?
Key themes include media framing, agenda setting, priming, the propaganda model of Herman and Chomsky, and the debate between elite and pluralist models of media influence.
What is the central research question regarding media?
The work investigates how media is used as a strategic tool by governments to generate consensus for military operations and how it frames violent conflicts to influence public perception.
Which scientific methods are employed in this study?
The study utilizes a qualitative approach, synthesizing existing academic literature, media theories, and case study analyses of historical conflict reporting.
What aspects of media behavior are covered in the main body?
The main body covers the mechanics of how news is framed, the role of bureaucratic domination, the 'terror-frame' utilized post-9/11, and the use of 'media diplomacy' in the Middle East.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Core keywords include Media, War on Terror, Framing, Propaganda, Public Opinion, and Social Media.
How does the author describe the influence of social media?
The author views social media as a potentially disruptive force that threatens state control over information, citing its role in movements like the Arab Spring.
What is the author's conclusion regarding the future of war reporting?
The author concludes that while traditional media has largely served as a tool for government agendas, the emergence of decentralized, digital communication channels will likely change information flow and public engagement in future conflicts.
- Citar trabajo
- Arshi Aggarwal (Autor), 2013, Media and War on Terror, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/285550
