Propaganda, Press And Public

These are trying times for all. The press is not immune to it. Truth is the first casualty in war and other crises. A news outlet is on the back foot when lies flow in news contents in a mission to put a brake on rivals or break them altogether. Some of the existing problems are of the media’s own making, having shown laxity in playing the role of a warrior of the truth. Imperialist mindset infects much of the mass media delivering news with space also for individual opinions from stake holders, decision makers, experts and general observers. 

Once news outlets bend to the wishes of vested interest groups, their conduct is bound to erode public faith in them. They might get away with it for a while but not for eternity. Many of them will be spotted and rejected early on. A few escape the scrutiny longer than others but will eventually get caught in their mischief like a thief caught red-handed. Track record gets incredibly creaky, shaky and shocking whenever an issue affecting bigwig is at stake. The politically or commercially powerful exert pressure on news channels for angling stories that suits their core wishes and shields them from exposure. As news disseminators manage and massage events, the choice of words and the slant adopted seep biases into the contents. They commend someone for doing or not doing something, only to condemn others involved in something similar.

Bias oozes 

China, according to The Economist magazine, is a “Rigid state-run education system that is heavy rote memorisation, discourages creativity and drives some leading minds to leave.” For the sake of argument, that may be true. But how come the Chinese are outpacing the US and its European cousins in space technology, artificial intelligence and breakthroughs in the super-hypersonic world. In fact, 260,000 foreign students are enrolled in the communist country’s colleges and universities as of now. 

Going through the news and views in dozens of major news media emanating from the West, there are familiar expressions such as “Iranian proxies” but no US proxies except “America-friendly” governments. There is a “pro-China president” in the Maldives but rarely pro-India president in the island chain or anywhere else. China’s “state-run media” are tagged as such but not the state-run media operating in most countries, which the media owners/editors do not want to displease. Blatant bias oozes when terrorists become “militants". The self-blindfolded see only Islamic “fanatics” and Hindu “fundamentalists” but never anoint other religious denominations with such epithets. 

That is precisely the reason why we get to be fed with descriptions like “Iran-backed” armed groups but never US-backed rebels. Bold and bizarre; careful and conspiratorial are terms employed in similar selective vein. India is described as a “regional powerhouse” but China, never acknowledged as a “global” power, is confined to an “Asian powerhouse”. High public ratings of friendly leaders are regularly cited when profiling them but not a Western rival like Russia’s President Vladimir Putin’s. Although Putin’s public approval rating has never fallen below 70 per cent even after being in power for 24 years, it is rarely cited as a reference point of any sort. Russia’s economic status, the largest in Europe in terms of purchasing power parity, is racing toward overtaking Japan for the fourth spot, notwithstanding the barrage of political and economic sanctions enforced on it. 

Iran and North Korea are treated as belligerents by major news outlets since at least 45 years, projecting them as the two Asian isolated “pariahs” that are inward-looking, backward and almost unearthly. Although isolated — rather, shunned — by much of the West, Tehran and Pyongyang have achieved remarkable feats in terms of national defence, weapons and infrastructure development.  In technology, theirs is a status distinctly above world average —and all this without any bailout from international lending agencies that basically play proxy to their top paymasters. However, one thing is certain: their ties with the US-led West are icy and close to inimical. They do not welcome any decision that the Western democracies propagate as a universal panacea for all across the world. 

That is why the media demonise Putin as a womaniser. He was berated as a leader with a limp who could face a military coup amid his repressive attitude and approach. The legacy media at the most give a passing reference to Biden’s many embarrassing gaffes, and frail health and questions over his cognitive power. They would have roasted endlessly if that had happened to Putin. Added were also suggestions that Russian army was losing in Ukraine, morale was low, shortage of fresh recruits hit the forces that were using World War II weapons.  Of course, the perpetrators never expected these to be proved. The “news” is no longer referred to by their inventors, now that the falsity is out in the open and public knowledge for what it is. 

Dogged deceit

Use of direct quotes in news stories is a norm. But it gets misused when a reporter ignores a context and does not bother to verify an “eyewitness” account, or an “expert” view or a source presented as a stakeholder or a decision-maker. All the reporter in such circumstances does is to quote that which makes a copy interesting and serves a political purpose of the “patriotic” variety. During the Iraq War (1990-91), the media quoted a 15-year-old Nayirah al-Sabah’s “eyewitness” account. Nayirah, a Kuwaiti, claimed to have seen Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators at a hospital only to leave the babies to die on the floor. The claim eventually turned out to be a black lie. Nayirah’s father Saud Nasser al-Saud al-Sabah was Kuwait’s ambassador to Washington, and he retained loyalty to the then annexed Kuwait. 

In the preceding days of the election for the European Union’s parliament in June, some experts warned of artificial intelligence supercharging the spread of fake news not only in the EU but also many other countries. The consternation might not be without basis. But it blatantly skips mentioning whether governments in the West engage in such sinister schemes against other countries. In wars, it is part of propaganda tactics to deny, exaggerate and underplay losses and gains. In their patriotic fervour, many media do their “patriotic duty” by dishing out information lies and biases as news. 

(Professor Kharel specialises in political communication.)