|
الجزيرة
News
Archives
Arab
Cartoonists
Columnists
Documents
Editorials
Opinion
Editorials
letters
to the editor
Human
Price of the Israeli Occupation of Palestine
Islam
Israeli
daily aggression on the Palestinian people
Media
Watch
Mission
and meaning of Al-Jazeerah
News
Photos
Peace
Activists
Poetry
Book
reviews
Public
Announcements
Public
Activities
Women
in News
Cities,
localities, and tourist attractions
|
|
TV
networks bring war realities home
by
James J. Zogby, Gulf News, Washington |
| 31-03-2003
This is a war like no other. I am not referring to
its preemptive, regime changing aims or its potentially dramatic regional
implications. What, in fact, makes this war so unique is its worldwide
audience. Never before has a confrontation of this sort been followed so
closely and covered by so many diverse and competing networks.
Americans are watching the drama unfold on any one of more than a
half-dozen U.S. television networks. Two additional venues provide U.S.
viewers with daily news broadcasts from France, Germany and the U.K. and
millions of Americans with access to satellite television can watch the
conflict as it is covered by multiple Arab networks.
In addition, every major newspaper has added a special section filled with
daily coverage, news reports and photographs. And the web provides
Americans access to a universal range of attitudes and coverage about the
war.
In a recent poll of more than 1,000 Americans conducted for Abu Dhabi TV,
we found that 67 per cent of Americans claim to be "very closely
following the war with Iraq", with 36 per cent saying they are
watching more than three hours of war coverage each day.
Another 44 per cent indicate that they are watching the war from between
one to three hours a day. With all of this information saturation, it is
not surprising that the U.S. media has begun to critique itself and their
news sources within the administration.
For example, all of the major U.S. TV networks and leading newspapers have
journalists "embedded" with U.S. forces travelling north to
Baghdad. Initially, the networks thought this would allow their reporters
first-hand coverage of the battles as they unfolded.
Some suggested that the Pentagon supported the idea assuming that it would
give them the opportunity to present a positive story of the war. So far,
however, what viewers have received are endless hours of tanks and trucks
rolling northwards through the desert and little else.
The Washington Post recently commented that one of the drawbacks of the
embedded system is that it "gives such intimate visual knowledge that
we may be deluded into thinking we actually know and feel what is going
on."
In other words, we see the bombs in far-off Baghdad and we feel ourselves
to be in the tanks in the desert but the amount of information actually
dispensed is quite minimal.
The Boston Globe commented on the difference between Arab and U.S.
coverage by noting: "The Arab world sees pictures of bloodied bodies
of young children. They watch scenes crowded with corpses, including
gruesome images of dead American soldiers. Americans see almost none of
that.
"Their view of the war in Iraq, through television and print, is
dominated by long distance photos of bombs going off in Baghdad, and
intimate battlefield scenes conveyed by reporters, who are travelling with
U.S. and British soldiers. The two contrasting visions of this war, one
seen by Americans and the other seen in the Middle East, help to sharpen
differences over the conflict."
It is intriguing that although all of the U.S. networks have been
regularly using live footage from the Arab television networks, (primarily
Abu Dhabi, Al Jazeera, and LBC), what they have used are largely long
range, shots of Iraq at night, with bombs going off in the background.
What it appears Americans will remember of this war are tanks in the
desert and explosions in Baghdad at night.
The major print outlets have been far more graphic and detailed in their
coverage. U.S. reporters working on their own in Baghdad have been able to
write powerful stories about the horrors of war.
This coverage and sharp questions from print media reporters at Pentagon
briefings has earned the media criticism from the government. They have
been accused of working to create a demoralised public.
More than one week into this conflict and already one important trend has
become apparent as a result of this media information saturation. For the
most part, despite extensive coverage and intense viewership, attitudes
have been dramatically unmoved either in the U.S., or in, I believe, the
Arab world. If anything they are being hardened.
In the United States those who are against the war are selecting out those
parts of the news that validate their opposition. Like-wise, those that
support this war believe the military briefings, Secretary Rumsfeld and
pieces of stories that fit their view.
Thus, even with all the access to information and coverage of the war from
multiple sources, it appears that viewers are selecting out of that
information evidence that validates their pre-existing prejudices.
Polling shows that rather than changing opinion, the war and coverage of
the war to date, has simply locked people more firmly into their views.
At the same time, there are a few issues that have crept through the
"fog of war" and these have begun to have an impact. Not on
support or opposition for the war but on the public concerns about the
war.
In particular has been the fact that the war has not been as its
supporters described it, "a cakewalk". Iraqi resistance has been
more intense than expected and U.S. casualties, though limited, have
played out on television. This has had a decided impact on attitudes.
For example, on the second day of the war 62 per cent of Americans thought
the war would be quick and successful with only 32 per cent thinking it
would be long and costly. Two days later those numbers had changed to 43
per cent believing the war would be quick and successful while 53 per cent
believed it would be a long and costly involvement.
This has further led the public to question the cost of the war and the
planning that has gone into it thus far. In the end, this erosion of
confidence can be as troubling to the Administration as opposition to the
war.
With the real battles still ahead, the role of media in this war has
become a factor of some importance. That may deserve as much scrutiny as
the actual combat itself.
The writer, president of the Arab American Institute. He can be contacted
at jzogby@gulfnews.com
http://www.aljazeerah.info
Opinions
expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors
and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah's.
|
|