Сөрөг мэдээллийн үзүүлэх нөлөөлөл

Negative news on media and its effects on public perception

When you watch international news, I am sure that you are bombarded with negative news like homicide, bombing, killing, and conflicts. The world seems to become dangerous and unstable than ever, especially since the rise of terrorism and conflicts in Middle East and other parts of the world. But, do you know that we are living now in the most peaceful era of human history? The research indicates that the 21st century, which began with the 9/11 attack, is the most peaceful time in history. It says that during the World War II, the human population lost 300 of every 100,000 people each year. During the Korean War, it was in the 20s, before dropping into the teens during the Vietnam war. In the 1980s and 1990s, it fell into the single digits. For most of the 21st century, it has been below one war death per 100,000 people per year. This trend is also true for homicides. [i]

Then, why we are so overwhelmed by stories of crime, conflicts and wars? This is because of increasingly great focus of international media on negative news, specially conflicts and wars. This effect of media has become increasingly larger since the development of social media. Satellite televisions, the Internet, and social media accelerates the spread of negative news and global public reaction. Supposedly, free media helps to build peace by allowing people to represent their opinions and delivering unbiased information. Specially, by means of peace journalism, media is supposed to deliver balanced and unbiased reports when it describes events in conflicts, but not in neutral and passive ways as peace journalism  aims to actively encourage peaceful resolutions and approaches to course of conflicts.

While the role of media is crucial in promoting peace by giving voice to those who are disadvantaged and directing worldwide attention to those who need desperate help, it is also true that there is serious lack of peace media in these days. Wolfsfeld, one of the leading peace media scholars, states that "media can stress the advantages of peace building, promote individuals and groups involved in peace initiatives, and balance the view of the actors. Often, however, media conveys the opposite type of messages to the public". [ii] According to the study which covers 37 TV news and current affairs programmes from 23 networks in 15 countries, positive-peace stories made up just 1.6% of the total. [iii]

The reason why negative stories are dominant is that mostly violent news attracts more public attention than peace reporting. Also, all the reports on international news cannot potentially cover all the details and the complexity of the problems due to time and space restraints, therefore, most reports tend to take short-term views, and usually illustrate bloody pictures, negative statements, frustration, hopelessness and death, without covering positive sides of story such as peace initiatives and  progresses. This surely contributes to create a sense of danger and anxiety among the public. It seems that there should be some limits in reporting violence for the balanced view about the shape of the world. Of course, the negativity is the part of reality, however, what's missing in large extent is reporting events that make us feel more hopeful, safe or encourage people to take positive actions.

Moreover, by delivering one sided reports on events, media can increases opinion polarization and hatreds among the public. Many major media organizations seem to providing relatively biased coverage in reporting on conflicts. For example, the western media sources such as the BBC and CNN, are bias against Russia, thus; the public lacks balanced views because those sources are the most popular and accessible international news sources.

Even more peaceful days may be yet to come. But, as long as violence exists in the world, media may keep making you feel that the world is falling apart.