What is the relationship between war and media? Theoretically, the literature about the positive impact of media in conflict appears deficient. Practically, no academic study has attempted to bring together the variety of peace-oriented media projects, and therefore, the full scope of the practice is unknown. The goal of this study is to respond to each of these problems.
The study aims to become an initial attempt to assemble and organize practical case studies describing media promotion of peace across the world. A total of about forty media projects in 18 countries on four continents are examined.
Key findings:
- Well-organized media programs can impact conflict audiences. However, just like pro-war propaganda did not single-handedly cause the war, peace-oriented media cannot single-handedly end a conflict. Even a very successful media project may not be able to prevent violence if the formation of violence is caused by a combination of multiple causes and conditions out of the media’s control. Despite the limitations, media appear to be a necessary element of every future peace operation.
- Despite the appearance of an orchestrated message apparatus, current media efforts in peace development are haphazardly organized. In addition, the lack of coordination among projects and the absence of an overarching strategy are apparent. What is needed is a peace relations agenda closely resembling a commercial public relations campaign. A joint and integrated set of measures involving more than a single media channel or technique is vital to the success of the practice. In the absence of an integrated effort, a single broadcast program or even a single radio station is unlikely to make a significant impact in a sea of media messages and outlets.
- Despite the ability to shape attitudes and opinions in favour of peace, media institutions remain only a segment of a conflict society. The transformation of violent conflict requires an integrated plan of action. In order to be productive, media need to accompany the other social and political institutions in their pursuit of peace building. Media can be only as strong as social institutions and processes. Legal, political, economic and other social institutions must assist in transforming the conflict. The media must be understood as an integral and important segment of peace development.
- The most important feature of the immediate post-violence conflict state is the regulation of propaganda or hate media. Reducing the level and amount of hate messages inciting violence during the conflict would significantly minimize the negative impact of the media on the audience. Even if no peace-oriented media were produced, minimizing the negative impact would translate into a relative success. An unregulated media environment is able to prolong conflict by minimizing the impact of positive media projects. Peace-oriented entertainment, journalism and any other peace media programs would be most effective in an environment where sensationalist hate media do not distract the public’s attention. A system of rules and regulations and the ability to enforce sanctions or penalties is a precondition for the successful implantation of peace-oriented media. Nonetheless, regulatory efforts need to be sensitive to the specific socio-cultural conditions. While some societies may not object to strong regulation efforts (e.g. Rwanda), others believe that regulation should be left to the media market itself (e.g. Northern Ireland).
Recommendations:
