Communication and International Relations

On the footsteps of what can be charitably called “miscalculations” in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq the US looks poised to extend its military arm into the country of Iran.

Did you know...

Geographical Meltdown
By Dustin An

According to a recent study the United States ranks 117th of 193 countries in terms of accuracy and knowledge of other nations. The magazine poll shows only 37 percent of Americans could find Iraq on a map, despite American troops having been stationed there since 2003. Furthermore, 20 percent of Americans believe Sudan is in Asia. Is 4th grade geography class to blame, or perhaps U.S. media?

In his piece, September 11 and the Structural Limitations of US Journalism, Robert W. McChesney analyzed media coverage following the attacks of September 11 th and in the lead up to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Here he points to the historical inadequacy of the media to provide fair, balanced reporting of US actions leading up to a war. “I argue that the US press coverage of the political response to the September 11 attacks was exactly what one would expect from looking at historical precedent. September 11 may be changing a lot of things about our world, but with regard to journalism it has merely highlighted the anti-democratic tendencies already in existence.” Why does this argument demand discussion now? Well, the US government looks geared to start selling us a new war and maybe we should question whether the media bear some responsibility if we the people decide to buy it.

One initial question you may have is: How are the media going to get us to the check-out-stand? Nancy Rivenburgh, Professor with the Department of Communication, University of Washington, published a study in 2000 that investigated the how Social Identity Theory (SIT) influences news coverage of international affairs. In that news context, she found that the media more often play the role of “nation builder” and “cheerleader” than of objective educator.

Part of the idea of SIT is that we need to reinforce and defend the groups to which we belong. Media plays an essential role in this regard to our national group. This is an interesting and apt finding which goes to the heart of the architectural flaw of the current media system. When media is tasked with this role of group defense, a task we assign to it, it often defends us at the cost of educating us. While many Americans assume that media just reports the facts, the truth is that the way in which media has been structured severely limits their ability to do just that; this structural limitation is drastically exaggerated in a lead-up to war.

In a lead-up to war, when heightened patriotism and national-self reinforcement and identification become the status-quo – arguably when journalists should be the most skeptical – and we don’t have a system which honors and demands a free, grounding, press, we suffer.

Due to limited resources media often find they need to prioritize. When prioritizing occurs media’s role as “nation builder” and “cheerleader” trumps their role as legitimate educators.

What does it all mean? Is it all the media’s fault?

In short, it means that our system of journalism is flawed. It is particularly flawed in times of war and in relation to foreign actors. As rhetoric heats up about the threats Iran poses to the US we can be sure that the media will, in large part, act as an obedient administrative lap-dog, toe the company line. And really the saddest thing is… we’ve asked them to. By punishing those who give us news we don’t want to hear and rewarding those who coddle us, we teach that we don’t want to learn. The media is accountable. But we are too.

Keep your wits about you; we’re in for a bumpy ride.