The media has a great role to play in the production and reporting of news to shape public opinion and perceptions. TVs, radios and the internet can deliberately or inadvertently be used to mask the political interests of the government. According to Keeble, Tulloch, and Zollman (2010), peace journalism can be referred to a situation whereby reporters and editors choose the stories to share and the way they report them in a way that enables the entire society to respond in a non-violent manner to conflicts. Journalists tend to report the facts as presented by a third person. However, to adhere to the ideals of journalism, the truth of the story should be published also in a first-person perspective. At the event of a conflict. Journalists need to showcase their understanding of conflicting stories and their impact on each party in the dispute. Before publishing a story, they have to choose what to accept and what to reject. Some media coverage would only fuel the conflict instead of advocating for peace.
Journalistic objectivity and fairness rules were highly violated in the media coverage of the Syrian conflict. The American commentators and reporters were biased and only presented the side of the story in that conflict which seemed to favor the Americans (Pantti, 2016). Assad, the Syrian leader is depicted as a power-hungry demon campaigning to retain power against the rebels being supported by the United States. The death of civilians due to this war is blamed on the Syrian government led by Assad. The State Department press releases attribute the brutal killings to Assad’s regime without consulting the view of the Syrian side.
In the commentaries and reports, the fact that the United States involvement in Syria is against the international law is entirely ignored (Arend & Beck, 2014). The US troops have been actively involved in aiding the forces rebelling the Assad’s regime including Al-Qaeda fighting ISIS. The Syrian government had in no way wronged the United States and the United Nations had not requested for the US intervention in the conflict. The US and its NATO allies are merely imposing their power on Assad and ISIS in Syria. This fact of the illegality of the operation is clearly ignored by the media thus depicting biases in the coverage.
The article released by the New York Times with the heading “Divided Syrian City Plunges Back Into War as Hospital Is Destroyed,” clearly shows how the reporting was one-sided. This is the incident was as a result of an air attack on the hospital causing twenty-seven deaths of children and hospital staff members. The reporter said that according to the hospital workers the attack was carried out by Assad’s government forces. The Syrian government had not been consulted on the reporting of this matter. Publishing such news of a terrible bombing without inspecting the truth of the allegation was definitely meant to fuel the conflict (Maras, 2013). This horrendous attack is war crime advocating for heated civil war.
The article also draws witness from the Human Rights physicians to testify that the Syrian government was indeed targeting health service centers for the bombing. This is a serious allegation on the government and any professional reporter would interrogate the alleged side before publishing such a story. The story needs to be verified and sources like an independent investigation by journalists stated (Maras, 2013). However, none of these measures were undertaken before publishing this New York Times’ story. This article also lacked context as it didn’t show that the conflict had lasted for five years with various parties. The rebels were being aided by the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey to overthrow Assad while Assad’s government had requested help from Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah to retain power.
Another piece of publication by MSNBC’s Chris Hayes was also biased. Reporting the words of the State Department, Hayes insisted that the Syrian government was responsible for the hospital attack. He even went further to blast Assad’s regime for violating human rights. Chris Hayes solely blamed Assad and termed his engagement as the worst war crime of the century and suggested that any solution to the conflict in Syria must hold Assad accountable. Hayes words were a clear reflection of President Obama’s view that the conflict in Syria could not come to end unless Assad is removed from power (Maras, 2013). Just like the Time’s reporter, Hayes had not consulted any representative from the Syrian government and ignored the impact of the involvement of the United States government in the Syrian war in aiding anti-Assad forces hence prolonging the conflict.
Chris Hayes categorically indicated that the Assad’s regime was responsible for an exact number of 183,827 deaths resulting from the conflict without stating a source. The number not only included civilians but also combatants. The United Nations later reported that over 100,000 pro-government and government fighters had also been murdered by the US-backed anti-Assad forces. Hayes chose to ignore this number in his report as if the Syrian soldiers are not human beings.
CNN was also biased in presenting their views on foreign affairs in the Syrian conflict. They sided with the America-aided rebel forces while portraying Assad’s regime and his supporters like Russia negatively. One of CNN reporter, Wolf Blitzer reported on the continued involvement of Russian troops in Syria for months even after their president Vladimir Putin had promised to withdraw his forces from the Syrian war (Maras, 2013). The reporter never bothered to note the continued presence of the American forces in Syria. The US planes were still bombing Syrian countryside with over 250 American Special Forces still deployed to fight ISIS. The United States, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey were still offering arms to the anti-Assad forces. No video was aired on CNN with the caption “America still Bombing Syria”. This is biased of the highest order and contributed to the prolonged conflicts in Syria.
Regardless of the many wrongs by the Syrian government, no one should have been allowed to delay the efforts to restore peace in Syria. The U.S government claimed that the Deir al-Zour bombings in Syria were accidental though records show that they are fond of terming their inappropriate attacks as accidental. All governments tend to lie but it is inexcusable for the media to choose to lie along and propagate the government lies to the public. In the Syrian conflict, the media was misused to depict Assad’s regime as the wrong side and justify humanitarian interventions leading to a military war (Chesterman, 2011). The media failed in its moral duty to report with fairness and objectivity for the interest of the public. The Syrian conflict was escalated by unprofessional journalism, political interference and misinformed public opinion.
References
Keeble, R., Tulloch, J., & Zollman, F. (Eds.). (2010). Peace journalism, war and conflict resolution. Peter Lang.
Pantti, M. (2016). Seeing and not seeing the Syrian crisis: New visibility and the visual framing of the Syrian conflict in seven newspapers and their online editions. JOMEC journal, (4).
Arend, A. C., & Beck, R. J. (2014). International law and the use of force: beyond the UN Charter paradigm. Routledge.
Maras, S. (2013). Objectivity in journalism. John Wiley & Sons.
Chesterman, S. (2011). “Leading from Behind”: The Responsibility to Protect, the Obama Doctrine, and Humanitarian Intervention after Libya. Ethics & International Affairs, 25(3), 279-285.