The press is critical to war, especially in communicating events that happen and keeping the public informed. Yet, the press often oversteps these duties, instead pushing narratives that encourage war. This sometimes even means that the press inaccurately describes events and exaggerates them to convince the public that a war is necessary, such as Robert Hearst inaccurately accusing the Spanish of destroying the USS Maine in order to convince the public of the necessity of the Spanish-American war. War is, ultimately, highly beneficial and profitable for the media.
While the media itself has no power to actually start a war or send troops, they hold the dangerous power of spurring both the government and the people into believing that such acts are not only necessary, but important. In times of war, erroneous information can have massive effects. This was seen in the lead-up to the Iraq war, where incorrect information regarding Saddam Hussein’s government and their possession of “weapons of mass destruction” was widely circulated after being published by reporter Judith Miller in the New York Times. Miller was not the only reporter guilty of this, but her report was the most prominent. The evidence the reports were founded on were sourced from so called Iraqi defectors. With the Bush administration already set on launching an invasion, the press drumming up public support for the invasion was the final straw that set forth a misguided and horrifying war that would take countless lives of innocent people.
This is not something new, as during the First World War, famous author Rudyard Kipling was quoted as saying that “There are only two divisions in the world today, human beings and Germans.” That sort of idea has stayed in the wartime press; Hussein was painted as the second coming of Hitler, a man so barbaric that he was beyond human.
At the end of the day, for the press, ratings are what come first. War captures everyone from every corner of the world and as the guns keep firing, people keep reading and watching. Today, during the Ukraine-Russia War, visitation to the BBC news website has soared; during the first week of the war, the weekly audience went up by 252 percent. Nearly all of the main prime-time news channels had 50% growth in viewers. Viewers are drawn in to tragedy and horror, and nothing stirs that up in viewers more than war. When viewership equals profitability, it isn’t surprising that the press will promote war. Though it may be horrifying for everyone else, war is a blessing for the media.
Even today, events that will draw in clicks are often portrayed inaccurately. Just earlier this year, it was reported that the Ukrainian soldiers of Snake Island were killed after defying a Russian Warship’s orders are insulting them. It was also reported that a major Russian warship was sunk, a stunning victory for Ukraine. Both of these claims were sourced from Ukrainian military reports, which certainly have a reason to be biased or inaccurately report during the war. As it turns out, the soldiers of Snake Island were alive, and the warship was unharmed. Still, these were huge stories that went viral, drawing in huge viewership. The press today continues to prove that as long as they can get attention and profit, they will publish wartime claims no matter the source, whether it can be proven valid or not, as long as it will make an attractive article.
Sources:
https://www.cato.org/commentary/yes-press-helps-start-wars
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780230393295_20
https://www.cato.org/commentary/us-press-again-becomes-conduit-pro-war-propaganda
No comments:
Post a Comment