War and the reporter

Mainstream media conglomerates still play a vital role in forming public opinion in a war situation, although the growing plethora of alternative news sources is here to stay

Aniket Alam Delhi

Sometime in November 2005, reports emerged that US President George W Bush had contemplated bombing the headquarters of the Arab television channel Al-Jazeera. Reportedly, the leader of the free world wanted to take this precipitate action to stop the broadcasting of reports that "inflamed" the Arab world against the US/UK occupation of Iraq and "gave further impetus" to terrorism. Whatever the reasons, thankfully this criminal and foolish act was not carried out.

Despite this "news item" getting washed away by the daily tide of breaking news, it will remain a stark reminder to the central role the media plays, and is perceived to play, in modern warfare.

The media, or press, as it was known before the advent of audio-visual news, has always been an important part of modern warfare. It has partnered nationalism in raising support for wars and helped resistance movements sustain morale. But it is now a common refrain among the chatterati to complain of the growing complicity of the media, specially the mainstream variety, with state power and political bias. But those who think they have discovered a new partiality in the role of the media are perhaps being a bit too naïve in imputing originality to the original sin.

But the media has witnessed large-scale transformations in the past decade and more, both in its internal structure as well as in its role in society at large. And nowhere has this transformation been more visible than in the reporting of war. Therefore, the present book under review is an important read, not only for those interested in the business of the media, but for citizens concerned about what this transformation means for the future of this important pillar of liberal democracies.

The book itself has contributions both from journalists who have experience in reporting on war as well as from academicians and intellectuals who have analysed these efforts from a distance. The contributors' range is also laudable for the ideological and political spaces which these cover. From known Marxist critics like Aijaz Ahmad to BBC World anchor Nik Gowing to CNN reporter Kieran Baker, the book

has contributions which span the entire range of opinion on the different aspects of media reporting on war. It also has an interesting article by Yvonne Ridley, former chief reporter of the British paper Sunday Express, who was captured by the Taliban while reporting the war in Afghanistan in September 2001.

Much of the arguments put forward in analysing the role of the media in reporting war are well known and have been part of public debates over the last decade. The transformation of war into a video game simulacra, the coagulation of the media and military-industrial empires through the workings of international capital, the growth of sensationalism riding on the pressures inherent in the 24X7 model of news delivery and the parallel strains of explosion of media content with the implosion of diversity in opinions are all covered with reasonable ability.

Reading this book at the end of 2005, it does feel somewhat dated. Despite the abiding relevance of the issues covered, Iraq and its coverage has been a watershed in media affairs. The dialectics of technology, corporate control and democratisation of the medium has unravelled itself in and through the coverage of the Iraq war.