MC417 Media and DemocracyDr. Carolina Matos

Media and international communications: media influence,

conflict and war

Key texts

Tumber, Howard (2005) “Journalism and the War in Iraq” in A. Stuart (ed.) Journalism: critical issues, Milton Keynes: Open University Press

Zelizer, B. and Allan, S. (2002) “The Trauma of September 11” in B. Zelizer and S. Allan (ed.) Journalism after September 11, NewYork: Routledge, part 1, p. 25-69

Further reading: Livingston, S. Clarifying the CNN Effect; Baudrillard, J. The Gulf War Did not Take Place

Core issues The role of television in contemporary society (Pierre Bourdieu,

1996) “The Gulf War Did Not Take Place” – virtual media events and

hyperreality (Jean Baudrillard, 1991) Media events (Dayan and Katz, 1992) US foreign coverage debates The relationship between the media and policymaking; the role of

global media in the coverage of conflicts and wars Key controversies concerning the “CNN effect” (Robinson;

Livingston) The “framing” of the US war agenda in the media (Entman, 2003) Threats posed to journalistic professionalism in the aftermath of

Sept. 11 (Tumber; Zelizer) Video: Correspondent: Al-Jazeera Exclusive (BBC, Ben Anthony,

2003)

Pierre Bourdieu On TelevisionText On Television (1996) provoked a lot of controversy

when it came out, mainly attacked by journalistsRole of television and journalism in contemporary

France – “TV does not live up to its democratic potential”

Discusses the ways in which intellectuals should use the media to promote their work and interfere in public debate

The severe limits imposed on contemporary journalism by the market forces; the ways in which the media pay particular attention to spectacle, disasters and human interest stories to the detriment of political/social issues

TV war coverage – key pointsCritique to Bourdieu: how can television work

without cuts, sound-bites and graphics? How can it live up to its “democratic potential”?Critics (Thussu, 2003) have argued that the

television coverage of war conflicts has been immersed in economic constraints and inserted in entertainment formats (“infotainment” – information and entertainment)

The “game” of war; predominance of the visual; wide use of graphics; the avoidance of showing shocking images and pictures of the deaths of civilians

On Television continued

“....we are dealing with an instrument that offers, theoretically, the possibility of reaching everybody (1996; 14). Television...has a great deal of promise as a tool for democratic dissemination of information. Of course, it has hardly every fulfilled this promise: it is instead one of those things in social life that ‘nobody wants but seem somehow to have been willed’.” (Bourdieu, 1996, 45).

Media eventsWhat is known by “media events”? (Dayan and Katz)“...the conjunction of ‘live’ and ‘remote’..and

interrupted and pre-planned...we find that these broadcast events are presented with reverence and ceremony.....the diplomatic ceremony of being escorted from the plane...Even when these programmes address conflict, they celebrate not conflict but reconciliation...These broadcasts integrate societies in a collective heartbeat and evoke a renewal of loyalty to the society and its legitimate authority” (1992, 51).

Television “naturalises” the event...; the power of images to reshape perceptions of public opinion of certain issues

“The Gulf War Did not Take Place” – Jean Baudrillard

Provocative essay published in Liberation on January the 4th, 1991

Text interrogates the nature of the Gulf war as a “media event” (Patton, 1991)

Emphasis on technology in the reporting of the war – technological simulacrum or dissimulation turning into an integral part of the operational procedures (a “clean” war)

Virtual media events – real events lose their identity when they attain the velocity of real time information (“the structural unreality of image”, 1991, 46-47)

Hyperreality – results from the fusion of the virtual and the real into a 3rd order of reality.

Post-modernism thinking – Attacked from both the left and the right; extreme anti-realism and cynicism that does not attempt to propose any resistance or alternative

“Is it really taking place?” (1991,31)

“Thus ‘real time’ information loses itself in a completely unreal space....furnishing the images of purer, useless, instantaneous television where its primordial function irrupts, namely that of filling a vacuum, blocking up the screen hole through which escapes the substance of events...The media promote the war, the war promotes the media, and advertising competes with the war. The war, along with the fake and presumptive warriors, generals, experts and TV presenters...watches itself in the mirror”

US foreign policy and the “CNN effect”

What is meant by the CNN effect?CNN emerged in the beginning of the 80’s

through the vision of Ted Turner“CNN broadcast news around the clock and

around the world via a combination of satellites and cable television” (Gilboa, 2005, 27)

Consolidated its dominance as main international 24 hours news TV network following coverage of Gulf War

Emergence of studies on CNN addressing policy forcing effect on humanitarian decisions and new approaches to foreign policymaking (Gilboa, 29)

Studies on the CNN effectContradictory results – many link media influence

on policy to the impact of the coverage on public opinion and to public pressure on leaders to adapt policy advocated by media

In short – the media cover a horrid event, public sees pictures (i.e. deaths in Africa)...and demands action

Gilboa (2005) and Neuman (1996) describe effects in terms of a curve

Belknap (2002) on double-edged sword: strategic enabler and potential operational risk

CNN’s real-time coverage has destroyed the conventional diplomatic system and determined political/diplomatic outcomes (O’Neill, 1993)

Communication frameworks and debates on the CNN effect

Communication frameworks include agenda setting theories (McCombs and Shaw and Weaver, 1997); framing (Entman, 2003); indexing hypothesis (Bennett, 1990) and “manufacturing consent” (Herman and Chomsky)

Robinson (2002) – policy-media interaction model that says that media influence is likely to occur when policy is uncertain and media coverage is critically framed; sympathetic to suffering

Ammon (2001) – telediplomacy depends on 5 conditions (global crisis; leadership vacuum, media autonomy, high visibility, real-time global TV); Edwards (2001) – mediapolitik

The CNN effect – further definitions

“The CNN effect is a theory that compelling television images, such as images of a humanitarian crisis, cause US policymakers to intervene in a situation when such an intervention might otherwise not be in the US national interest” (Feist, 2001; 713).

Livingston and Eachus (1995,413) have defined it as “elite decision makers” lose of policy control to news media”

Chomksy and the “propaganda model” – argues that the powerful control both the media and the government through economic power; media used to support US foreign policy interests (anti-communist bias)

Model more relevant to analyse conflicts during Cold War (Compaine, 2002); can change anti-communism to anti-terrorism

Figure 1 -Conceptual Variations of CNN Effect (Livingston,1997, 2)

Livingston points to eight types of intervention and differentiating several CNN effects:

Media as Impediment – Two types: 1) Emotional, grisly coverage may undermine morale. Government attempts to sanitize war (emphasis on video game war), limited access to battlefield; 2) Global, real-time media constitute a threat to operational security.

Media as Accelerant – Media shortens decision-making time..Television diplomacy evident. During time of war, live global TV offer potential security-intelligence risks.

Agenda Setting Agency – Emotional, compelling coverage of atrocities or humanitarian crises reorder foreign policy priorities (i.e. Somalia, Bosnia and Haiti).

Eight intervention types - Livingston

1) Conventional warfare – stakes are high; generates media interest and military will attempt to control movement of journalists;

2) Strategic deterrence – willingness to use force to maintain status quo;

3) Tactical deterrence – Response to tactical developments, such as deployment of a Navy carrier....media content may accelerate decision-making;

4) Solic – counterterrorism, hostage rescue; will stimulate high interest but will be secretive;

5) Peace Making – Third party attempts to foster peace in a country immersed in conflict;

6) Peace Keeping - Bolster an accepted political solution made by a third party; produces moderate interest;

7) Imposed Humanitarian Operation – Apolitical aid policy (i.e. Sarajevo in 1994);

8) Consensual Humanitarian Intervention – Military will address needs of country.

Framing of September 11th Entman (2003) states that the Bush administration

adopted a strategy of framing September 11th to unite country behind military intervention to overthrow the Taliban;

How the Saudi Arabia connection was not framed in the same way as Afghanistan; attempts of some journalists

“George W. Bush invoked “evil” fully 5 times and “war” twelve times in his State of the Union Speech in January” (2002,29)

Definition of framing – “Framing entails selecting and highlighting some facets of events or issues...making connections among them so as to promote a particular interpretation....”

Framing of 9/11 continued

“The Bush administration’s recurring use of words such as evil and war in framing September 11, paired in many media reports with searing images of the burning and collapsing World Trade towers, provide a textbook example of high magnitude, high resonance framing…..Some words and images possess sufficient resonance to impress themselves on public consciousness without requiring a significant number of exposures: airliners flying into the World Trade Center on September 11th” (Entman, 2003, 416-417)

The Trauma of September 11th and American journalism

Tumber (2005) notes that ever since Vietnam War, governments and the military have tried different methods of “controlling” and “managing” the media

By the time of Gulf War 1, journalists covered military events via organised pools and formal briefings

Media coverage of Gulf War II saw a large-scale presence of journalists on the battlefield (“500 embedded journalists”)

Raised concerns about impartiality of the coverage; the safety of journalists and how many began to be a target from the Iraq war onwards

Some facts and figures- Howard Tumber

Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) indicated that 17 journalists died or media staff were killed covering the war in Iraq

In the Iraq war, the casualty rate among media staff was higher than in any other conflict – International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) report showed that 1.100 journalists were killed in the line of duty over the 12 years leading up to the report (2003b; 375)

Problems for journalists; for CNN (expelled from Iraq 6 x)

Over the 21 years of the Vietnam war, between 1954 and 75, some 63 journalists were killed

American journalism and issues of objectivity

Jay Rosen and Michael Schudson discuss how the attacks got to the heart of American journalism;

Problems for objectivity – “An American first, journalist second”;

Hallin on Vietnam – journalists commitment to objectivity has been problematic; spheres of controversy; sphere of consensus and sphere of deviance;

Schudson – marginalising opinions and silencing dissent

In what way did the growing opposition to the Iraq war begin to change the international coverage of the conflict?

The power of the image in war conflicts

The role of image and photography in moulding public opinion and in consolidating the government’s agenda (Zelizer, 2002)

Photographs help people come to terms with what happened; this contributed to shape public response to the events of 9/11, building public support for military actions

“Governments the world over have recognised the power of the image in helping them reach strategic aims (2002, 50)

US/UK coverage accused of biases – Tensions in the BBC

CNN competitor - Al Jazeera’s aims to show the “horrors of the war”

Some conclusionsMedia coverage of conflicts and war is constrained

by the demands of the medium (television) and of markets

(TV) media coverage is immersed in the values and mode of our current (post-modern) era;

CNN effect is hard to measure; Livingston among others has offered a sophisticated

way of looking at the relationship between CNN and policy-making and public opinion

Balance and objectivity become more problematic to sustain in the media coverage of international conflicts

Seminar activities and questionsIn groups, examine critically the media coverage of an

event of the US war on terrorism:Do what extent did the international media organisations

contribute or not to accelerate and/or impede policies? Discuss with reference to particular examples.

Was the coverage balanced or influenced by “infotainment” techniques? Did it take into account all sides of the dispute?

Did the media contribute to reinforce particular prejudices (i.e. “clashes of civilizations”), or did it widen debate on core issues?

* According to the texts that you have read, what are some of the threats posed to journalistic independence and media freedom ?

Set reading for Politics and the Media

Mancini, P. and Swanson, D. L. (1996) “Politics, Media and Modern Democracy: Introduction” in (ed) Politics, Media and Modern Democracy – an International Study of Innovations in Electoral Campaigning and Their Consequences, London: Westport, p. 1-29

Baker, C. E. (2001) “Implications of Rival Visions of Electoral Campaigns” in W.L. Bennett and R.M. Entman (ed) Mediated Politics – Communication in the Future of Democracy, Cambridge University Press, p. 342-62

Further reading: Gurevitch, M. and Blumler, J. G. (2001) “Americanization Reconsidered: US-UK Campaign Communication Comparisons Across Time”, in Mediated Politics, Cambridge Press, p. 380 - 403

Video: Dispatches: Why Politicians Can’t Tell the Truth (C4, 2005)