II. A) The Syrian situation and the conflict between Western and Russian Medias
The Syrian Civil War is an "ongoing multisided armed conflict in Syria" (BBC, 2017) that started in 2011. This conflict first started with the "Arab Spring" and the many manifestations of the established regimes in the region, which were most often dictatorship.
The Western Medias saw these protestations as a revolt of a Modern and Free World against an old and archaic system that did not have any more legitimacy and yet, was still present.
Today, with the interventions of Western powers in Lybia and other countries, the consequences of these movements caused the region to be under the rule of many extremist Islamist movements that created an unprecedented chaos and no way of direct communications towards these new ruling regime.
However, the situation in the Syrian Republic differs from its closest neighbors. In this conflict, are involved many actors, which creates confusion:
-The Syrian government army, defending the current regime.
-The Syrian opposition, who wish to establish a more democratic state
-The Islamic State, who wish to take the power for themselves
-The International Community, including Russia, US, France, Turkey, Iran, U.K. and Saudi Arabia.
Due to the complexity of this conflict and the many actors involved, the position of the international community is not clearly defined. From this confusion, also comes propaganda from both sides, with two major groups: Russians Media and Western.
Due to its support of the Syrian established Government led by Bachar el-Assad, Russia, by its military action but also political, comes depicted as an enemy of "democracy" and "freedom" in a Westerner point of view.
What is important in this conflict, is the way the Media are taking positions regarding the country they are coming from. For this reason and quite obviously, the vast majority of the Medias are supporting their countries actions.
What comes as interesting is not only the situation opposing one country to another organisation but also the conflict between government-owned and private medias, who are supposed to show a more open view of the conflict. Yet, with such an opposition, we come to the conclusion that even if some are privately owned, they finally act in the same way as if they were government-owned.
With this conclusion also comes the question of objectivity that media should have towards actuality. In this case, could we even consider one media to depict and analyses the situation for its readers without taking a subjective side?
With a wide majority of media being Western-minded orientated, it could appear for Russian Media difficult to maintain and affirm their position. What is even more interesting is the reaction these institutions took towards such an important "enemy". The creation of international media such as RT news or Sputnik is the reaction to counter the effects of the propaganda made. And give direct information about what is happening not only in Russia but also the World, in a different view, but also, pro-Russian orientated.
The conclusion regarding the Media war happening in this region is that no newspaper, radios... will succeed to be totally neutral. As even the news shared can inform the reader of which side is the journal he is reading. However, it is important to not only have a one-sided view that only takes in count a part of the information. The recent events following the attack of the US against the Syrian Forced army proved that perfectly, with a fake information having a severe and direct impact.
What is shared and promoted by these Media have an influence on our way of doing, thinking, and most importantly, acting.
To know more about the situation:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/syria-civil-war-explained-160505084119966.html
http://syriancivilwarmap.com/
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/364377-stoltenberg-militry-syria-nato/
The Western Medias saw these protestations as a revolt of a Modern and Free World against an old and archaic system that did not have any more legitimacy and yet, was still present.
Today, with the interventions of Western powers in Lybia and other countries, the consequences of these movements caused the region to be under the rule of many extremist Islamist movements that created an unprecedented chaos and no way of direct communications towards these new ruling regime.
However, the situation in the Syrian Republic differs from its closest neighbors. In this conflict, are involved many actors, which creates confusion:
-The Syrian government army, defending the current regime.
-The Syrian opposition, who wish to establish a more democratic state
-The Islamic State, who wish to take the power for themselves
-The International Community, including Russia, US, France, Turkey, Iran, U.K. and Saudi Arabia.
Due to the complexity of this conflict and the many actors involved, the position of the international community is not clearly defined. From this confusion, also comes propaganda from both sides, with two major groups: Russians Media and Western.
Due to its support of the Syrian established Government led by Bachar el-Assad, Russia, by its military action but also political, comes depicted as an enemy of "democracy" and "freedom" in a Westerner point of view.
What is important in this conflict, is the way the Media are taking positions regarding the country they are coming from. For this reason and quite obviously, the vast majority of the Medias are supporting their countries actions.
What comes as interesting is not only the situation opposing one country to another organisation but also the conflict between government-owned and private medias, who are supposed to show a more open view of the conflict. Yet, with such an opposition, we come to the conclusion that even if some are privately owned, they finally act in the same way as if they were government-owned.
With this conclusion also comes the question of objectivity that media should have towards actuality. In this case, could we even consider one media to depict and analyses the situation for its readers without taking a subjective side?
With a wide majority of media being Western-minded orientated, it could appear for Russian Media difficult to maintain and affirm their position. What is even more interesting is the reaction these institutions took towards such an important "enemy". The creation of international media such as RT news or Sputnik is the reaction to counter the effects of the propaganda made. And give direct information about what is happening not only in Russia but also the World, in a different view, but also, pro-Russian orientated.
The conclusion regarding the Media war happening in this region is that no newspaper, radios... will succeed to be totally neutral. As even the news shared can inform the reader of which side is the journal he is reading. However, it is important to not only have a one-sided view that only takes in count a part of the information. The recent events following the attack of the US against the Syrian Forced army proved that perfectly, with a fake information having a severe and direct impact.
What is shared and promoted by these Media have an influence on our way of doing, thinking, and most importantly, acting.
To know more about the situation:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/syria-civil-war-explained-160505084119966.html
http://syriancivilwarmap.com/
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/364377-stoltenberg-militry-syria-nato/
Commentaires
Enregistrer un commentaire