Propaganda and the subversion of objectivity: media coverage of the war on terrorism in Iraq

Abstract

Osama bin Laden must be supremely confident about the continuing success of international terrorism, given events of the seven years following the 9/11 attacks. The West's response thus far has weakened the United States and its allies and generally strengthened terrorist organisations across the globe. We argue that the terrorist victory stems in part from media coverage of the George W. Bush administration's march to war. We argue that the media (1) failed to employ time-honoured principles of objectivity in covering the run-up to war, and (2) endorsed the Bush administration's exploitation of propaganda techniques to rally public support for war. We conclude that the media have not accepted that this constitutes a failure in professional ethics – even as journalists and news organisations acknowledge lapses in judgement in their coverage of news about Iraq – and we offer a few suggestions about what journalists could have done to alter the media's stance on terrorism and the war. It is doubtful, however, whether the media have learned from this experience or will act any differently the next time the nation faces a crisis.

Keywords:

• ethics
• propaganda
• objectivity
• terrorism
• Iraq
• war

Notes

1. One researcher coded all 91 editorials and one coded 25% of those editorials. Intercoder reliability was 91.3%.

2. To be included, editorials had to refer to the pending invasion of Iraq, and each had to devote at least two sentences to the pending war. This article is a secondary analysis of data reported by Ryan and Switzer (2008) in their study of the extent to which the media reflected a Conservative Christian war agenda in covering the lead-up to the war in Iraq.

3. Yellin made these comments when she was interviewed on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360° on 28 May 2008. For the story, see Anderson Cooper 360° (2008).

4. Proponents of the just-war position claim a middle ground between the extremes of the crusader and the pacifist in arguments about the appropriate response to war. The Christian position begins essentially with Augustine (354–430) and his reflections in the City of God – as reworked, refined and expanded by subsequent generations.

5. ‘Of course,’ Colson said, ‘all of this [his argument that an invasion of Iraq was just] presupposes solid intelligence and the goodwill of US and Western leaders. I find it hard to believe that any President, aware of the awesome consequences of his decision and of the swiftness of second-guessing in a liberal democracy, would act recklessly’ (Colson 2002, p. 72).