| Home |
| Contents |
| World Links |
| Book Store |
| Additional Information: |
| Articles & Reports |
| Links to Organizations |
| Glossary of Psychological Warfare Terms |
Only what we learn through the media. But is the information we receive the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, or something less?
After years spent researching the background and events related to world
conflict some disturbing trends have emerged - a media predilection for
partial truth, selective memory and strategic omissions. One learns to
expect this from governments that “manage” information to
present their official positions is the best possible light (i.e. propaganda),
but when the free media participates in the management and filtering process,
it raises serious concerns. “An Informed citizenry is vital to democracy” said Thomas Jefferson. To have meaning and value, information must be
accurate, objective and reasonably complete. Hence, a cornerstone of democracy
is freedom of the press and objectivity of the press.
 |
Freedom of the press entails having access to people and events, the ability to collect news and information, as well as the ability to distribute information and our right as citizens to receive the information. In the case of political disputes, violent conflict and war each of these elements is at risk. Indeed, the first casualty of war is truth. With freedom comes responsibility and challenge. Correspondents are just people, people who invariably must struggle to remain balanced and objective, despite their personal views and often in the face of the most horrible aspects of the human condition. Faced with the tragedies of conflict, it’s difficult to remain a detached observer, though this they’re expected to do. Under pressure to deliver compelling and captivating reports, it’s difficult to resist the temptation to sensationalize, and to maintain access it’s often impossible to avoid compromising one’s reports to satisfy those holding the power of access. |
|
| A. Raffelle Ciriello,
|
||
| What we hear, read and see on television, or in newspapers and magazines are the accounts of reporters and correspondents that have survived filtering by network and newspaper editors and producers. Networks and publications face their own set of challenges, the requirement for financial performance, the pressure for ratings and readership, as well as the constraining influences of governments, politicians, advertisers and interest groups. Given the myriad of potentially adversarial interests, it’s a wonder we get any real news, and, in fact, this is part of the problem. Collecting foreign news is expensive, especially from war zones where the need for security, travel and mobile infrastructure add significant costs, without corresponding increases in viewers or readership. The ethical and operational challenges to maintain a press freedom and effective flow of information are enormous. For the news recipient, the task of discerning facts and truth are no less daunting. |
||
Few
professional fields are more diligent in self-examination and self-criticism
than journalism. Activities and reporting are continually subjected to
industry and peer review in an effort to maintain high journalistic standards.
Whether this analysis is actually reflected in the news the public receives
is a subject of continuing controversy. The sad truth is that networks,
newspapers and other media outlets strive to give the public what it wants.
In fact, one of the key issues is whether the media should act as policy
advocates and use news coverage to force public awareness and concern.
For example, the media was criticized by some for advocating international
intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo, and by others for failing to provoke
intervention in Rwanda. It's been faulted equally for providing too much
coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and for providing too little.
Europeans receive far more extensive coverage of world affairs than do
Americans, which ultimately broadens the divide when issues of controversy
and disagreement arise.
Following is select group of issues that affect media professionals, the
parties to conflict and the general public. When it comes to debates over
war and peace, terrorism, conflict resolution and security these issues
influence what we know and how our countries act. For some they determine
whether they will live or die.
Terrorism and the Media
What’s in a Name? A key objective of any political campaign is publicity, which requires attracting media coverage. Coincidently, there is also the news maxim - "if it bleeds, it leads". Add to these, common government restrictions often denying a political voice to extremists and it’s a recipe for terrorism. Although experts can’t agree on a definition of the word terrorism, there are few media reservations in using the term to demonize opponents.
The journalistic challenge is to avoid using the term indiscriminately, or to apply it equally to any reasonable case where non-combatants are targeted, regardless of whether the violence is perpetrated by a government or militant group. Nonetheless, we hear far less about rebels, guerrillas, freedom fights, extremists, liberation armies, dissidents. insurgents, militants, or subversives, than terrorists. Ttoday virtually all armed, non-governmental actors are condemned by government officials as "terrorists". But what about suicide bombers versus homocide bombers? The term homicide bomber has become subtle code, suggesting support for President Bush's policy views.
Ironically, the term terrorist is almost never applied to governments (or pro-government paramilitaries), which historically claim a monopoly on the “legitimate” use of force, regardless of the terror actually inflicted on non-combatants. In Northern Ireland, for instance, the IRA is almost always referred to as a terrorist group. Violent Loyalists, equally deadly and active, are typically called paramilitaries, not terrorists, even though they have repeatedly terrorized, killed and butchered innocent Catholics and firebombed their homes. Several of the loyalist groups are listed in the US State Departments list of terrorist organizations, yet the media refers to them as paramilitaries.
Meanwhile, a number of Latin American regimes organized paramilitary
forces. In actuality many of these are "death squads, " and
are reported as such by the media. They're still not called terrorists.
Words do matter. The term terrorist carries a perjorative stigma and is
used specifically to de-legitimize, condemn and demonize an organization.
Other words used for the same purpose include: Marxist, communist, socialist,
leftist, extremist, fascist and radical. When these words appear, it’s
wise to be alert for propaganda.
IPI
World Press Freedom Review
In The Name Of Terror
The
Press Under Fire: Media and Terrorism
Poynter Online
"Terrorism"
Is a Term That Requires Consistency:
Newspaper and its critics both show a double standard on "terror"
FAIR Media Advisory
Terrorism
& the Domestic "War on Terror"
FAIR Media Advisory
The
Propaganda War and the War on Terror
Prof. Philip Taylor
Media and Access
One of the most common ways to control press coverage of conflict and
posiible atrocities, or war crimes is to restrict media access to key
people and places where events unfold. A more extreme corollary is to
threaten, intimidate, kidnap, or kill journalists who venture to places
where they aren't welcome.
Algeria is been embroiled in a visciuos conflict since 1992, when Islamic
Fundamenatlists won control of government in the country's first election,
only to be blocked from assuming power. Since then Islamist rebels have
been on a rampage. As much as they hate the unelected secular rulers,
their primary targets have been journalists. As a result very little news
comes from Algeria.
In the Israeli Occupied Territories of Palestine, journalists are discouraged
from entering restricted military zones to cover Israeli Defense Forces
(IDF) attacks against the Palestinians, presumably for the protection
of the journalists. The IDF is apparently even worse than the Americans
at hitting proper targets, having mistakenly shot 45 journalists. In each
case, the IDF has called the incidents regrettable.
During the US bombing campaign against Afghanistan a highly touted precision
bomb went astray, striking the al-Jazeera (the Arab version of CNN) television
facility in Kabul. During the bombing of Iraq, another precision-guided
bomb missed its target and, by incredible coincidence, struck the al-Jazeera
television facility in Baghdad. Accident or coincidence?
However, the U.S. broke new ground during the Irag War by permitting "embedded
journalists" to accompany U.S. Forces during the invasion. This unprecedented
program brought the world first-hand images of war, but has also been
critized in some quarters for delivering sanitized images and censored
reporting, and from others for providing too much information that threatened
the safety and security of the soldiers. Walter Cronkite, among others,
has applauded the media access in the belief that after the fighting ends,
what has been seen and experienced will ultimately be reported and discussed.
Without media access, truth, or the many truths may never be known.
The World’s Worst Places to be a Journalist
Rules
for Embedded Journalists in the Iraq War
Articles
on Media Freedom from International Press Inistitute
Propaganda and the Media
Almost every conflict involves a battle for public opinion, as various
adversaries exchange charges and counter charges, seeking to demonize
their opponents and build support for their own views, positions and actions
- the proverbial war of words. Words and images are powerful weapons.
When the smoke clears and guns fall silent, the time comes for a political
settlement, but rarely does the propaganda battle end, as opponents continue
to maneuver for the best possible outcomes.
The Propaganda War
The Economist
On
the Frontline Online
Andrew Stroehlein
For
the Full Story Watch Arab & US Television
Rami G. Khouri
Through
a Glass, Darkly
Jake Lynch
Propaganda
Website
Propaganda
and Psychological Warfare Studies
Propaganda
in Theory and Practice: How Does It Wok?
Entertainment
as Propaganda
Propaganda and Psychological
Warfare Studies
Media as Policy Advocates
As witnesses to injustice, suffering, starvation, genocide and warfare, a common response is to ask, “Why doesn’t someone do something?” Correspondents are in a position to ask this question for all the world to hear, but if they do they cross the boundary between journalism and advocacy. It’s referred to as the CNN effect and has become a topic of considerable debate. Can and should the media influence governments to intervene?
Kevin Sites and the Blogging Controversy
World
in Crisis, Media in Conflict
MediaChannel
Diversity
Of Views, Balance & Bias: How Media Take Sides
Photojournalism
Photojournalists are exposed to the most visceral cruelty of war and conflict.
Unlike war correspondents photojournalist's images are collected first-hand,
right at the site of fighting or of the horrific aftermath. Their images
they may not be distributed and published, but they're unedited - they
tell it the way it is. Few photojournalists can escape emotional involvement
with the lives and struggles of the people they meet and photograph, or
the psychological consequences of what they witness.
Digital
Photojournalism in Wartime
J.D. Lasica
The
Digital Journalist
ARTICLES, REPORTS & PUBLICATIONS
Deep Trouble
from Shallow US Media
Keith Spicer
Professionalism
in War Reporting: A Correspondent’s View
Tom Gjelten
Beyond
Scapegoats and Stereotypes
Charles Haynes
Portraying
the Graphic Face of War
J.D. Lasica
Covering
Violence: How Should the Media Handle Conflict?
Danny Schecter
The
Dangers of Disinformation in the War on Terror
Maude S. Beelman, The Nieman Foundation for Journalism
Harvard University (for sale)
Institute for Media, Peace & Security
Institute for War and Peace Reporting
UC Berkley Graduate School of Journalism
USC Annenburg – Online Journalism Review
Committee to Protect Journalists
International Federation of Journalists
Reporters
Sans Frontières (Reporters Without Borders)
http://www.rsf.fr/
Center for Journalism in
Extreme Situations (Russia)
http://www.cjes.ru/
Index
on Censorship and Index on Free Expression
International
Press Institute
The following definitions come from the US Department of Defense:
Covert Operations – Operations, which are so planned and executed as to conceal the identity of or permit plausible denial by the sponsor. They differ from clandestine operations in that emphasis is placed on concealment of identity of sponsor rather than on concealment of the operation.
Perception Management - Actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning; and to intelligence systems and leaders at all levels to influence official estimates, ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator's objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception, and psychological operations. See also psychological operations
Psychological Consolidation Activities - Planned psychological activities in peace and war directed at the civilian population located in areas under friendly control in order to achieve a desired behavior, which supports the military objectives and the operational freedom of the supported commanders.
Psychological Operations – (NATO) Planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign government, organizations, groups, and individuals. The purpose of psychological operations is to induce or reinforce foreign attitudes and behavior favorable to the originator's objectives. Also called PSYOP. (See also perception management.) These operations include psychological warfare and, in addition, encompass those political, military, economic, and ideological actions planned and conducted to create in neutral or friendly foreign groups the emotions, attitudes, or behavior to support the achievement of national objectives.
Psychological Situation - The current emotional state, mental disposition or other behavioral motivation of a target audience, basically founded on its national political, social, economic, and psychological peculiarities but also subject to the influence of circumstances and events.
Psychological Warfare - The planned use of propaganda and other psyche logical actions having the primary purpose of influencing the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of hostile foreign groups in such a way as to support the achievement of national objectives. See also psychological warfare consolidation.
Psychological Warfare Consolidation - Psychological warfare directed toward populations in friendly rear areas or in territory occupied by friendly military forces with the objective of facilitating military operations and promoting maximum cooperation among the civil populace. See also psychological warfare.