Media Literature Review

MEDIA LITERATURE REVIEW
Name
Course
Date
Abstract
There can be no gainsaying as to the fact that the media is intrinsically responsible for not only informing the public, but also shaping its perception regarding key matters of concern. It is important to be cognizant that media refers to both television and radio, as well as print in the context of newspapers and books. By and large, the digital age, which is characterized by the prevalent use of technology in almost every aspect of life, has greatly impacted on how the public is informed. In this regard, the public is not only informed about what is happening locally, but also internationally. In most cases, the media covers issues that encompass political, economic, and social aspects of day to day living. It can also be used as an educative tool as seen in how it promotes culture and heritage. On considering single outlet television networks CNN has more trust votes as compared to NBC and has therefore more viewers (Jensen, 2013). The following fourteen literature reviews shows that media and especially CNN news has a lot of influence on U.S. foreign policy.
Besides influencing public opinion and perception, both these media stations have been known to have the similar effect on US policy makers and policy formulation. More often than not, both media stations highlight political and economic issues of concern with the objective of drawing responses from the public, which in turn is relayed to the policy makers. The million dollar question, however, is whether or not reporting by these media stations is relevant and of quality, not to mention free from prejudice and bias. In order to determine this, it is necessary to analyze how each one of these top American media stations reports across the political, economic, and social landscape. Ultimately, it will provide evidence to the effect that media reporting does intrinsically impact on policy makers.
Dumbrell & Barrett in their book; the making of US foreign policy, examined the link between foreign policy making, public opinion, as well as the media. In regard to this, they posed the question as to whether or not US foreign policy is influenced by the media. Walter Lippomann argued that the people had time and again forced governments to “too late with too little….. too pacifist in peace and too bellicose in war, too neutralist or appeasing in negotiation or too intransigent” (Dumbrell & Barrett, 1997 p145). The argument brought forth by Lippmann was that the Western democracies’ executives had been enfeebled by mass opinion irrationality and its natural associates in legislatures. Uncertainty, complexity as well as limited public information among the people allow presidents to mould and lead public opinion. Usually, this is achieved through elites, interest groups, elected representative, general public and the news media. The authors stated that it is common to find media distort news as well as substantial political power within their own right. As part of their evidence, the authors determine that indeed media coverage has some intrinsic impact on how US foreign policy is formulated. They provide examples of both President George Bush and Bill Clinton who were drawn into war because of US media’s non-stop coverage of the respective conflicts (Dumbrell & Barrett, 1997).
Smith et al. provide the dynamics that shape foreign policy by taking into account theories, actors, and case studies. In chapter nine, the authors examine the role of the media in shaping public opinion, which they state influences policy making. To this effect, Smith et al. mention that media affects policy making both directly and indirectly. In regards to indirect effect, the authors state that because policy makers are essentially politicians, they are sensitive to public opinion drawn from media reports. As it pertains to direct effect, Smith et al. state that policy makers can themselves be affected by what they see and read, and hence influence policy formulation (Smith et al, 2012).
Media influences the process of policy making through several ways. Ben-Yehuda et al (2013) pointed out that when the media and the global politics meet, there is a tendency of the media to single out particular events when covering conflict, crisis and war. The media transmits breaking news to and from the people globally and hence plays a vital role in positioning the conflict agenda as well as framing its reality. Studies on media in conflict and war indicates that rating is achieved at the cost of professional coverage hence may result in a rise in anxiety. The media often highlights particular topics and disregard others hence creates a unique news arena. In addition, media coverage is involved in framing where events are transformed through mechanisms that filter and also reflect images of reality in global politics. Irrespective of particulars of every event, general patterns of reporting emerges particularly in times of war. Consequently, the media ends up emphasizing on certain occurrences at the expense of others hence shaping how conflict is portrayed (Ben-Yehuda et al, 2013).
Schulz (2013) sheds more light on how media influences policy making. He acknowledges the fact that media plays the role of key mediating actor as well as primary medium between the public and the political decision makers. He argues that the influence of media on foreign policy making remains conditional across various phase and processes of foreign policy making; this means it is multidirectional and dynamic. However, the author argues that some researchers have both implicitly or explicitly indicated that the media’s autonomy differs under diverse levels of foreign policy involvement. As a result, there is a need to integrate conceptualized political context conditions as well as systematic typology of an apparent research variable. Such integration provides an analytical tool for comparative and systematic research which enables consideration of the diverse role played by media on foreign policy processes.
The argument by Seib (2000) adds more emphasis on how media influences foreign policy formulation. He argues that the impacts of live news reporting are associated to its content. Irrespective of the fact that live reporting on radio, television and internet may lack accuracy, context and details, such coverage especially when it contains graphic details as well as emotive reporting do capture the attention of the public and may affect public opinion. Consequently, due to the intrinsic urgency and at times emotional content, such news can compress the duration in which governments respond to sudden crisis or even new developments of occurrences in matters that affect foreign policy. However, the impact of news reporting on foreign policy varies depending on firmness or softness of the process of policy formulation. For that reason, a solid and principled policy foundation is unlikely to be influenced by news reports. In some situation, the government has been seen to influence the media by dictating what to be covered and what should not be given attention.
In his article, Baum tries to demonstrate how policies can be changed by expanding the audience. The mass media has managed to attract more audience through changing the mode of coverage of political stories such as foreign policy crises. Consequently, the information the public gets about such events has changed. Different media outlets reports major events more as compared with how they covered in the past. Currently, when covering political stories, they include soft news media that is entertainment- oriented. As a result, many people who previously ignored most political news are now able to follow up on major political events such as war through the soft news media. As a result of more audience, the public opinion has been affected to a larger extent and this has more influence on policy making (Baum, n. d).
Gilboa (2005) in his article, pointed out that the growth and diversification of CNN have affected many aspects of global communications as well as international relations such as economics, culture, technology, public opinion, law, diplomacy, politics as well as environmental degradation, warfare, terrorism, human rights, refugees and health. However, even though the CNN provides international coverage, report filtering is done through a Western bias. The author cites the example of China which is given a lot of attention by CNN when the political suppression responds to a prodemocracy movement but little attention when the matters are more localized. In addition, Balkans massacres got more coverage as compared to those in Africa’s Central Lakes Region. Also serious worldwide health problems like AIDS which has claimed tens of millions lives, attracted lower attention as compared to the less violent humanitarian crises which took place in 1990s. Observations have been made that global netw...