The war against terrorism, the media and national identity
...together in the spirit of rebuilding and defending American and, more so in the UK’s case, western freedoms beliefs and traditions from the threat of “Evil” and “Terror” much in the way the people of New York united after the attacks on the world trade centre. “Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings but they cannot touch the foundations of America” George W Bush 11th September 2001 The media uses traditions of countries in times of conflict to illustrate what the fighting is for. Anything the enemy stands for becomes real threat to our ways of life, “Today, the greatest threat to human freedoms and human rights is terrorism” (Jack Straw, “Terror is the new totalitarianism”, BBC news online) and that the conflict, particularly in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq about liberating them and giving them the better way of life that we as westerners have. “We” as westerners is another commonly used statement in the media in times of conflict, along with any other words that give us a sense of belonging. “They were brave men who knew the risks, faced them and had the courage to serve their country and their world” (Mirror, 22 March, 2003) This quote from the Mirror illustrates perfectly how the press gives us the sense of belonging to the country and to the cause by using simple words and phrases. By using the phrase “Their” when talking about acts of heroism in conflict it shows patriotism and of them belonging to a nation, or more a nation being there own. The media uses words similar to this such as “Terrorist threat to your homes”, “To our way of life” to great effect to encourage patriotism and unity to the cause by making us feel personally involved. They can also use this to distance the public view from errors or mistakes in war time i.e. “The accidental killing of civilians by coalition forces” by making these sort of statements less personal it lifts the responsibility from the public for these errors. The idea of “us” versus “them” is the driving force for media coverage on how the enemy’s culture is a threat to ours. “In this kingdom of hatred, religious intolerance is the very bedrock of the state” (Kevin Tools, Terrorism expert, in the Daily Mirror) During the war against terror the emphasis on the evils of our enemy and the differences to our way of life has been apparent all the way through the campaign. The quote above is speaking of the conflict in Afghanistan but the same language was also used before the war in Iraq, this sort of media coverage aims to work by illustrating how subversive these cultures are by using words such as “Hatred” and “Evil”, words that we don’t associate with ourselves or our culture. This creates monsters for people to target such as Saddam Hussein is “a crackpot, a tyrant, an evil dictator” this influences the national feeling by giving a figurehead to target and want to see the end of. The media in Iraq also used the same techniques to create public distaste towards George Bush. “The American cowboy is reaping the benefits of his crimes against Humanity” (Baghdad radio, 2001) One Major problem with this approach has been the effects on race and particularly peoples opinions of certain races. Since the 9/11 attacks religion has been a constant feature of talk on the war on terror. “The doctrine of hatred is spread in Saudi mosques every week by preachers” (Kevin Tools, Daily mirror) The often fundamentalist views of members of terrorist groups have been widely documented in the press and have lead to mixed messages about Muslim beliefs and practices being interpreted by the public. “These terrorists aim for the annihilation of all unbelievers and only the total conversion of the West to fundamental Islam is acceptable to them” (Readers letter to Daily Mirror) Whilst these statements of atrocities such as torture, religious hatred and murder are often true about the fundamentalists it doesn’t represent the beliefs of regular Muslims. Following the declaration of war on terror there were many arrests of Muslims across the globe on suspicions of them being linked to terrorist groups or to religious groups linked with terrorist organisations and for a period there was a backlash reaction to the Muslim religion. Strangely this, accompanied by many other aspects including what many saw as the unjust invasion of Iraq, led to something never before seen in times of conflict the media showed signs of turning against the Government and against the conflict. “The Promised attack on Iraq will test free journalism as never before” (John Pilger, 21 March 2002) The media during the war on terror had a tough job of trying to form a national opinion when people’s views were so divided, particularly in the UK. Certain aspects of the media and selected news papers actually printed very ant-war articles exposing the errors that have been made during the campaigns, particularly against Iraq, showing the amounts of civilian casualties during the “Targeted bombing raids” made by coalition forces and the invalid reasons for going to War with Iraq. The Daily Mirror in particular took a very anti-war approach highlighting the fact that through the conflict and right through to the present day that the Weapons of Mass destruction that was the major factor in going to war with Iraq have never materialised. The “WMD-ometer” became a daily feature in the paper highlighting the number of days since the beginning of the conflict that the weapons have not been found. This sort of press was forming a split National identity never before seen in a conflict, the discourses formed by this approach still appealed to the same kind of beliefs as previous propaganda campaigns. They still held the beliefs of our culture being a democracy that was just and honest and their enemy became the people who tell lies and commit atrocities against innocent people. Even going as far as writing an article on the life of Saddam Hussein, “Saddam Hussein, Dictator, 1937-200? A life of Evil”, which although has a very anti Saddam Hussein feel to it offers reasons from his early days on how he grew to have so much hatred. “Mirror Columnist Tony Parsons has admitted he was wrong for supporting the war against Iraq – and says Tony Blair must take the blame for misleading the public and for the deaths of thousands of Iraqis.” (We were utterly betrayed on Iraq, Mirror.co.uk) This was something that the pro-war aspects of the media had to react to; to keep the side of the nation that still supported the action feeling they have an identity as part of this. They kept focusing on the good that came out of the campaign such as the liberating of people, particularly women, from the oppressive Taliban regime and the removal of an “Evil Dictator” in Saddam Hussein. They also utilised a tactic used effectively by the American media in keeping support for the war. Terror and fear. “What happened on September 11... is but a pale shadow of what will happen if terrorists use weapons of mass destruction” (Paul Wolfowitz, BBC News online) Phrases like “axis of evil” and “weapons of mass destruction” have been utilised through the campaign to keep public opinion in support of the War against terror by making people believe they need the campaign to keep themselves their homes and their families safe. There were often articles and Television features about terror tips and what to do i...