Wars worth condemning: Is media setting the agenda? - The Malay Mail Online
JULY 15, 2014 — Apart from the civil war in Syria, there is a war going on in Ukraine, another one in Iraq and yet another in Palestine. Horrific stories of the violence and the human cost of these conflicts are pouring in, amplified by the virality of news and social media in the Internet age.
At first glance it would be safe to assume that the Malaysian reaction to the violence would be broadly similar in its abhorrence of the carnage and sympathy with the victims, but on Facebook, that is anything but the case. While the official reaction has been anaemic and generally full of platitudes, there is widespread anger online at the perceived bias in favour of Israel of the global news media in its coverage of the violence in Gaza, and broad silence at the fate of victims of the other conflicts.
In terms of the scale of the violence it is the wars in Syria and Iraq that have been the bloodiest. Syria has attracted jihadi militants from across the world, especially since it was cast as a sectarian fight rather than one for democracy. ISIS, the radical Sunni militant movement fighting to dominate not just Iraq, but to create a caliphate with its version of Islam ruling the entire Muslim world, has been fighting in both Syria and Iraq, recently advancing rapidly into central Iraq leaving behind a trail of destruction worse than even the barbarism of previous jihadists in Iraq.
The Ukraine conflict is clearly a fight over territory based on ethnicity and control over economic resources. The Syrian and Iraq wars can be characterised as being over competing visions of Islam. The Palestine conflict is the longest running of the lot, where territorial conflict is combined with a religious tinderbox with the opposing sides divided neatly into Jews and Muslims.
The global media coverage of the various conflicts may have been roughly equal in terms of airtime, but their refusal to unequivocally condemn Israel’s actions in Gaza has drawn the most ire. While it may then seem obvious that a Muslim majority nation like Malaysia would be most exercised about the conflict where Muslims are victims at the hands of infidels, it still does not explain why non-Muslim Malaysians are also equally more upset at the violence in Gaza than any of the others.
It may be the case that the war in Ukraine has so little resonance here because there is no religious element involved to draw in the locals, it seems to be more of a skirmish between the US and Russia on European soil and the images of the war involving relatively wealthy Europeans are just not as viscerally shocking.
The violence in Syria and Iraq while clearly bordering on the genocidal is probably harder to feel personally outraged by, perhaps because of the difficulty in choosing a clear cut aggressor and victim. Both sides have the same religion, neither is likely to win anytime soon and everyone apparently has blood on their hands.
Building a compelling narrative of atrocity becomes much harder when fingers can easily be pointed at both sides. Gaza though provides a clear narrative of the good versus evil archetype. While the overall issue is multi-layered and complex, it is hard not to feel any emotion at the sight of a much stronger adversary, backed by the only global superpower and a compliant global media pummelling its much weaker, poorer adversary daily and then casting it as an act of self-defence because “they started it.”
Images of the Gaza conflict have such virality on social media precisely because of the seeming bias of mainstream news television. For Muslims and non-Muslims alike in this part of the world, the images of the war cannot be reconciled with the news commentary. Equally importantly, the images of civilian casualties in the Gaza conflict circulating on social media are the most graphic of all, to the point that they cannot be shown on mainstream television, thus adding to the perceived injustice.The war in Gaza provides a clear narrative of the good versus evil archetype.
Whatever be the cause, it is one of the few instances where it seems at least on the Internet that Malaysians have been able to rise above the daily diet of racial and religious differences to take a common stand on an issue beyond the domestic “us vs. them.” Having said that, the difference in reactions to the various wars demonstrates the power of the media, mainstream or social, to evoke powerful emotions when it can construct clear cut archetypical narratives of its choosing with the right imagery.
The ability of social media to trump mainstream media in this instance by constructing an alternative narrative possibly heralds a new way of consuming news for all of us. While we will always need images interpreted for us, increasingly we can choose who does the interpreting, and thus construct our individually authentic worldviews based on a global diversity of sources.
Social media may just allow us to take back control from CNN over what we believe.
At first glance it would be safe to assume that the Malaysian reaction to the violence would be broadly similar in its abhorrence of the carnage and sympathy with the victims, but on Facebook, that is anything but the case. While the official reaction has been anaemic and generally full of platitudes, there is widespread anger online at the perceived bias in favour of Israel of the global news media in its coverage of the violence in Gaza, and broad silence at the fate of victims of the other conflicts.
In terms of the scale of the violence it is the wars in Syria and Iraq that have been the bloodiest. Syria has attracted jihadi militants from across the world, especially since it was cast as a sectarian fight rather than one for democracy. ISIS, the radical Sunni militant movement fighting to dominate not just Iraq, but to create a caliphate with its version of Islam ruling the entire Muslim world, has been fighting in both Syria and Iraq, recently advancing rapidly into central Iraq leaving behind a trail of destruction worse than even the barbarism of previous jihadists in Iraq.
The Ukraine conflict is clearly a fight over territory based on ethnicity and control over economic resources. The Syrian and Iraq wars can be characterised as being over competing visions of Islam. The Palestine conflict is the longest running of the lot, where territorial conflict is combined with a religious tinderbox with the opposing sides divided neatly into Jews and Muslims.
The global media coverage of the various conflicts may have been roughly equal in terms of airtime, but their refusal to unequivocally condemn Israel’s actions in Gaza has drawn the most ire. While it may then seem obvious that a Muslim majority nation like Malaysia would be most exercised about the conflict where Muslims are victims at the hands of infidels, it still does not explain why non-Muslim Malaysians are also equally more upset at the violence in Gaza than any of the others.
It may be the case that the war in Ukraine has so little resonance here because there is no religious element involved to draw in the locals, it seems to be more of a skirmish between the US and Russia on European soil and the images of the war involving relatively wealthy Europeans are just not as viscerally shocking.
The violence in Syria and Iraq while clearly bordering on the genocidal is probably harder to feel personally outraged by, perhaps because of the difficulty in choosing a clear cut aggressor and victim. Both sides have the same religion, neither is likely to win anytime soon and everyone apparently has blood on their hands.
Building a compelling narrative of atrocity becomes much harder when fingers can easily be pointed at both sides. Gaza though provides a clear narrative of the good versus evil archetype. While the overall issue is multi-layered and complex, it is hard not to feel any emotion at the sight of a much stronger adversary, backed by the only global superpower and a compliant global media pummelling its much weaker, poorer adversary daily and then casting it as an act of self-defence because “they started it.”
Images of the Gaza conflict have such virality on social media precisely because of the seeming bias of mainstream news television. For Muslims and non-Muslims alike in this part of the world, the images of the war cannot be reconciled with the news commentary. Equally importantly, the images of civilian casualties in the Gaza conflict circulating on social media are the most graphic of all, to the point that they cannot be shown on mainstream television, thus adding to the perceived injustice.The war in Gaza provides a clear narrative of the good versus evil archetype.
Whatever be the cause, it is one of the few instances where it seems at least on the Internet that Malaysians have been able to rise above the daily diet of racial and religious differences to take a common stand on an issue beyond the domestic “us vs. them.” Having said that, the difference in reactions to the various wars demonstrates the power of the media, mainstream or social, to evoke powerful emotions when it can construct clear cut archetypical narratives of its choosing with the right imagery.
The ability of social media to trump mainstream media in this instance by constructing an alternative narrative possibly heralds a new way of consuming news for all of us. While we will always need images interpreted for us, increasingly we can choose who does the interpreting, and thus construct our individually authentic worldviews based on a global diversity of sources.
Social media may just allow us to take back control from CNN over what we believe.
Comments
Post a Comment