Influence of media on public opinion and foreign policy formulation - Essay Example

? Influence of media on public opinion and foreign policy formulation Introduction The issue of public opinion and its influence in foreign policy making has been a matter of dispute between different schools of thought both during and since the Cold War. On the one hand realists find public opinion volatile, emotional, lacking coherence and structure, and with little if any influence on foreign affairs. On the other, liberalists suggest that public opinion on international affairs is stable, sensibly structured, consistent, and influences foreign policy making in a ‘reciprocal relationship’. Hence, some leaders take into account the public opinion when making important decisions others ignore it (Guraziu, 2008, p.2) In most of the democratic countries, governments often consider public opinion seriously since they need the support of the public to stay in power. If they avoid or neglect public opinion, it is difficult for them to win future elections. On the other hand, in countries where communist or totalitarian administration prevails, governments often neglect the public opinion because of the superior power enjoy by such governments. Such governments often put some control over the media in order to block the media from spreading information against the government. For example, in communist China, all the television programs and internet coverage of incidents were strictly censored before displaying it in front of the public. The advancements in science and technology caused tremendous changes in every segment of human life. The introduction of computers, internet, television, mobile phones and other digital equipment has made drastic changes in the communication world. It is often said that the information is at the finger tips at present. Earlier, people relied heavily on newspapers for getting information and therefore they succeeded in getting only delayed information. At present it is possible for the public to see the live telecast of incidents. In other words, public are able to get the information as soon as it happens now. Instant communication helped the public to respond more effectively to the information they are receiving. “Media is all about connecting people and mirroring the society that we live in. Media is all about reflecting on daily happenings around the globe. People are not just the audience but also an essential element of news in itself” (What is the Importance of Public Opinion in Media, 2011). Moreover, “The media are the deliverers of a message, and through this message the audience comprehends and forms opinions on events. This makes the mass media both an opportunity and a threat for the sides engaged in a conflict”(Simons, 2008, p.79). Media plays an important role in influencing public opinion on various issues. “In the vein of political theorist V.O. Keyes, I believe that the validity of public opinion is only as good as the what the media leads them to believe”(Jones, 2008). In fact ordinary people may not bother much to analyze the information when they receive it. Media helps them to understand the consequences of certain information because of the in depth analysis and coverage of news and information happens in the current media. For example, US foreign policy and the Middle East affairs undergo immense public debate only because of the micro level analysis of these topics by the media. Public opinion is a dominant force in American politics. Research produced by the Statistics Department in Washington for the end of the 1990's indicated that in one year the average American would: watch about 1000 hours of network television watch about 400 hours of cable television spend 150 hours reading a newspaper spend 100 hours reading magazines (Public Opinion, 2011) This paper analyses the influence of media in formulating public opinion and foreign policy, taking US foreign policy and the Middle East affairs as examples. Influence of Media on Middle East Affairs & US Foreign Policy Significantly, during a Senate committee meeting on American foreign policy priorities, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted that Al Jazeera English (AJE) was gaining an audience in the United States because it was “real news,” which she contrasted with American television news. Clinton said, “Al Jazeera has been the leader in that they are literally changing people’s minds and attitudes. And like it or hate it, it is really effective” (Youmans and Brown, n. d, p.3) Mrs. Clinton’s opinion seems to be a realistic one. It is a fact that Americans perceive AJE as a television channel which is spreading information against the interests of the Americans. In fact CNN and BBC are generally labeled as the pro-American or Britain channels whereas AJE is believed as a pro-Arab channel. In fact most of the television channels functioning in this world have some kind of political agenda even though these channels may not admit it publicly. The so called neutral channels are spreading their secret agendas one way or other. CNN and AJE may telecast an incident happening in the Middle East in different manners. These channels may try to twist the facts in order to safeguard the interests of the people it stands for. Americans trusted their own media blindly and they thought that the information communicated to them through these channels were out of any prejudices or biases. However, the entry of AJE has changed the scenario completely which is reflected in the words of Mrs. Clinton. Americans were watching only one side of the Middle East issue so far. But the entry of AJE helped them to see the other side also. For example, American channels tried to hide the massacres at the Abu Ghraib prison whereas AJE like Middle East channels unveiled the brutalities of American soldiers. It was a stunning experience for the Americans. For the first time in their history, they have witnessed the baselessness of their argument as the saviors of human rights. Abu Ghraib prison incidents were an eye opener for the Americans and they realized that the claims of the administrations or the media may not be true always. The above incident helped Americans to come out strongly against Iraq war and currently the administration is withdrawing its troops from Iraq. In other words, media can definitely affect the public opinion and foreign policy formulation. Public opinion should influence foreign policy making because of ‘democratic norms and the public’s moderating effect on possibly adventurous and overambitious elites’. Woodrow Wilson believed that only popular opinion could offer a direction to a wise foreign policy since ‘only a free people could hold their purpose and their honor steady to a common end and prefer the interests of mankind to any narrow interest of their own’(Guraziu, 2008, p.7) It is difficult for a media to spread rumors at present because of the availability of information at different channels. If one media tries to portray an incident in one manner, the other media may try to portray it in another manner. Fortunately, current generation has the ability to identify the motives of media and they may make their own conclusions after watching the arguments of different media. Guraziu, (2008) has pointed out that “The American people are not fickle; they may be ill informed, but they are still capable of holding coherent, stable beliefs about the role of the US in world affairs” (Guraziu, 2008, p.8). The debate whether the government should function in accordance with the public opinion or not, is growing everywhere. It is a fact that in a democratic country, the government is elected by the people and it is difficult for it to work against the public opinion. A democratic government should work for the people and therefore it is difficult for it to avoid the public opinion. For example, during his visit to China in 1998, “Bill Clinton had to satisfy the domestic opinion by publicly criticizing the Chinese government’s poor record on human rights, at the same time making sure that he was not going to upset his hosts” (Guraziu, 2008, p.9). It was difficult for Clinton to justify his visit to China without criticizing the controversial policies adopting by the Chinese communist administration. Most of the political leaders normally praise the political, social or economic systems in a country before they visit those countries. For example, President Obama has praised India very much before his recent visits to India in order to prepare a friendly atmosphere for his dialogues with his Indian counterparts. Since, both India America are democratic countries, it is possible for Obama to shower praises upon India whereas in the case of China, even Obama may follow the same path adopted by his predecessor. At the same time it is difficult for the administrations to follow the public opinion always. Evidence, suggests that in 1979 only 23 percent of the adult population in the United States knew the two countries involved in the SALT (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks) negotiations; or that in 1985 less than two thirds of the public knew that the United States supported South Vietnam in the Vietnam War, which cost some 58,000 Americans their lives. Further, evidence suggests that in 1970 only 7 percent of the American people favored an invasion of Cambodia. On the other hand, it is obvious that in today’s world with advanced information technology the public is better informed on issues concerning both domestic and foreign affairs (Guraziu, 2008, p.8-9) It was easy for the administrations to adopt policies against the opinions of the public earlier. They were able to hide many of its controversial foreign policies from the public eyes. The facts presented in the previous paragraph clearly show that the administrations in the past succeeded in misleading public opinion in order to gain support for their domestic foreign policies. However, it is difficult for the current administrations to do so because of the huge developments in communication channels. People will reverse their opinions when they realize the facts. For example, when President George Bush declared war on terror, majority of the Americans supported it. “Public relations techniques are used frequently in many world societies, especially in the United States, as the Bush Administration has used many deceptive techniques to justify its policies in the years following September 11, 2001”(Jameson, 2008, p.2). Bush succeeded in educating the public that Saddam and Osama are the major enemies of America. However, the support for Iraq war, Afghan war, or war on terror started to decline as time goes. This is because of the increasing awareness of the public about the facts and truth. “According to a NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted in December 2007 only 33 percent of the American public approve of the way George Bush is handling the current situation in Iraq” (Guraziu, 2008, p.11). A new study based on a series of seven US polls conducted from January through September of this year reveals that before and after the Iraq war, a majority of Americans have had significant misperceptions and these are highly related to support for the war in Iraq. The polling, conducted by the Program on International Policy (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and Knowledge Networks, also reveals that the frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according to individuals' primary source of news. Those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely (Misperceptions, the Media and the Iraq War, 2003) The above statistics clearly indicate the differences in reporting styles of different medias and the influence of media in formulating public opinion. Earlier, Americans trusted their own channels very much; however, later they realized that their domestic channels are spreading exaggerated or fabricated stories about current situation in Iraq and the activities of American troops in Iraq. “Public opinions that have political components can vary on a number of different dimensions. They can vary in intensity, concentration, stability, distribution, and salience” (Chapter Overview, 2010). The following statistics seem to be interesting while analyzing influence of media on public opinion. Do you approve or disapprove of the way the president of America, George W. Bush is handling the current situation with Iraq? May 2007 Jan. 2003 Sept. 2002 Approve 9% 19% 30% Disapprove 85% 68% 59% (Guraziu, 2008, p.10) It is evident from the above statistics that the public support towards Iraq war came down drastically over the period between 2002 and 2007. In other words, the public started to oppose a policy which they supported earlier. In 2002, 59% of Americans supported Iraq war whereas in 2007 85% opposed it. This is because of the late awareness of the public about the actual facts. Earlier, political leaders and media labeled Iraq as the major enemy of America with the help of the theory of weapons of mass destruction. Even after years from the execution of Saddam, American troops failed to seize even a single nuclear, biological or chemical weapon from Iraqi soil. Moreover, even after the death of Saddam, peace in Iraq is a distant dream. In other words, Americans have realized that the media and the political leaders were exaggerating the facts and they were trying to mislead the public. Lack of coverage and biased portrayals of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Gaza by Western media are partially to blame for the absence of international intervention in the fighting, claims Ayman Mohyeldin, Gaza Correspondent for Al-Jazeera English, in an interview with Journalism. co.uk. Other alternative media journalists in the region agree with Mohyeldin, adding that unbiased coverage of the Palestinian experience in Gaza is key to gaining international sympathy and action. “The Western media has failed tremendously in covering the Israeli- Palestinian conflict accurately and contextually” (The Layalina Review On Public Diplomacy And Arab Media, 2009, p. 4) External world knows little about what is actually happening in Gaza or Palestine. America’s pro-Israel stands prevent western media from telecasting actual events or incidents taking place in Palestine. Israel is violating all international laws in Palestine and still able to escape from severe criticisms from external world. At the same time, it should be noted that the recent political unrests developed in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia etc were telecasted with much enthusiasm by the western media. For example, Libyan leader Gaddafi’s effort to suppress protests against him is reported with more enthusiastically than the massacres of Israel. In other words, western media is keeping double standards while reporting incidents related to Israel’s massacres and that of the leaders of the Arab world. “Despite the widely-held tail-wagging-the-dog assumptions, history has shown that the United States has frequently used Israel to advance its strategic interests in the Middle Eastern region” (Zunes, 2006). It is difficult for America to advance in Middle East without the help from Israel. So they are doing everything possible to defend Israel as much as possible. “Since 1982, the US has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of Israel, more than the total number of vetoes cast by all the other Security Council members” (Mearsheimer & Walt, 2006). It should be noted that the public opinion against Israel in America is weak compared to the public opinions against the Arab world. Of course some cultural reasons are there for these dual standards in public opinion while facing issues of similar nature; however, the role of media in forcing the public to respond differently on similar issues cannot be underestimated. In short, America is using the services of media effectively to generate public opinion in favor of its controversial foreign policies in Middle East. According to the third person effect, “perceptions of the influence of media reports on others were found to be consistently greater than perceptions of influence on self. Findings were strongly supportive of this component of the ‘third person effect’ hypothesis” (Mutz, 2011). Ordinary people may not have much self confidence in their critical thinking abilities. They usually rely on the opinions of others in order to make judgments. Media knows this psychology very well and convinces the people with the help of opinions and analysis done by the so called experts. These experts are often ready to make changes in their opinion based on the money they receive from the media. Poor people often trust the words of experts and make judgments. For example, George Bush was succeeded in convincing American public about the necessities of conducting Iraq war with the help of his theory of weapons of mass destruction possessed by Saddam or Iraq. Later it was revealed that Bush was aiming the oil resources and the fresh water resources of Iraq rather than destroying the WMD. Moreover it is suspected now that he had a secret agenda to take revenge upon Saddam for humiliating his father Bush Sr in an earlier encounter. In any case, Bush used the support of media well to gather public support for his missions in Iraq. “The inability or refusal of the media to report all the news in a fair and equitable manner not only supports the enemy’s propaganda campaign but gives empowerment to every nut case and extremist movement in America” (Is the Media trying to influence our public opinion by selective reporting?, n. d) Conclusions “Media has as much power and influence as elected politicians” (Leading article: Misunderstanding media influence, 2009). Media can fine tune public opinion as they like and force the public to support or oppose certain policies. In America’s foreign policy making and in Middle East affairs, media play an important role in shaping the public opinion. The over influence of media on building public opinion may sometimes positively and sometimes negatively affect the policy making of the government. In other words, media can control the governmental policies, especially the foreign policies, with the help of the public. In order to convince the public and to bring the public in their own track, media plays lots of tricks. These tricks sometimes positively and sometimes negatively affect the interest of the people and the country. Over influence of media on shaping public opinion is not always good. Media spreads fictions most of the times rather than facts. Media should be able to report news in an unbiased manner and the public should be able to make their own decisions based on the facts presented by the media in order to help the country in making sound and meaningful foreign policies. References 1. Chapter Overview, (2010). [Online] Available at: http://wps.prenhall.com/hss_volkomer_amgovern_11/46/11893/3044851.cw/index.html [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 2. Guraziu R. (2008). To what extent is foreign policy making affected by public opinion in a liberal democracy? [Online] Available at: http://www.atlantic-community.org/app/webroot/files/articlepdf/To%20what%20extent%20is%20foreign%20policy%20making%20affected%20by%20public%20opinion.pdf [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 3. Is the Media trying to influence our public opinion by selective reporting?, (n. d) [Online] Available at: http://devildog6771.wordpress.com/2005/10/27/is-the-media-trying-to-influence-our-public-opinion-by-selective-reporting/ [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 4. Jameson, A. (2008). Public opinion, the media and their influence on public policy. [Online] Available at: http://www.helium.com/items/1036958-public-opinion-the-media-and-their-influence-on-public-policy [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 5. Jones T (2008). Public opinion, the media and their influence on public policy[Online] Available at: http://www.helium.com/items/1071803-public-opinion-the-media-and-their-influence-on-public-policy [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 6. Leading article: Misunderstanding media influence, (2009) [Online] Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-misunderstanding-media-influence-1795606.html [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 7. Mearsheimer J and Walt S (2006). The Israel Lobby. London Review of Books. [Online] Available at: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 8. Misperceptions, the Media and the Iraq War, (2003). [Online] Available at: http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 9. Mutz D.C. (2011). The Influence Of Perceptions Of Media Influence: Third Person Effects And The Public Expression Of Opinions*[Online] Available at: http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/1/3.abstract [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 10. Public Opinion, (2011). [Online] Available at: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/opinion.htm [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 11. Simons G. (2008). Mass Media and the Battle for Public Opinion in the Global War on Terror: Violence and legitimacy in Iraq. PERCEPTIONS • Spring-Summer 2008 [Online] Available at: http://www.sam.gov.tr/perceptions/volume13/Mass%20Media%20and%20the%20Battle%20for%20Public%20Opinion%20in%20the%20Global%20War%20on%20Terror,%20Violence%20and%20Legisimacy%20in%20Iraq,%20Greg_%20Simons.pdf [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 12. The Layalina Review On Public Diplomacy And Arab Media, (2009). Layalina Productions Inc.,1250 24th Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20037 Vol. V No. 10, April 24, 2009-May 7, 2009. [Online] Available at: http://www.layalina.tv/publications/review/PR_V.10/PR_V.10_0507_09.pdf [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 13. What is the Importance of Public Opinion in Media, (2011) [Online] Available at: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/what-is-the-importance-of-public-opinion-in-media.html [Accessed on 10 July 2011] 14. Youmans W and Brown K. (n. d). After Egypt: Can Al Jazeera English Leverage its 'Moment' into an American Audience?. [Online] Available at: http://www.arabmediasociety.com/articles/downloads/20110317090740_YoumansBrown.pdf[Accessed on 10 July 2011] 15. Zunes S. (2006). The United States, Israel, and the Possible Attack on Iran. FPIF Policy Report. [Online] Available at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/3251[Accessed on 10 July 2011] Read More