The above loop shows how the media through biased coverage incites public fear which in turn causes conflict to continue to rise between the two opposing sides. Extreme and biased media coverage focuses on conflict rather than conflict resolution. Extremely biased coverage causes the public to misinterpret the true story which then ultimately creates public outcry and fear. The increase in public outcry and fear then increases the perceived threat that one side has for another. This fear is created through the public ignorance to the true story due to the media's one sided portrayal of the story. When unbiased and moderate media coverage is used the systems tend to de-fuse because the public is now well informed of the issue which will decrease public outcry and fear and thus decrease the perceived threat that one side has for another. By increasing public awareness the media must continue to not used biased media coverage and thus public fear due to the media will not continue to escalate the problem.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
The Media's Role in Conflict Escalation
The above loop shows how the media through biased coverage incites public fear which in turn causes conflict to continue to rise between the two opposing sides. Extreme and biased media coverage focuses on conflict rather than conflict resolution. Extremely biased coverage causes the public to misinterpret the true story which then ultimately creates public outcry and fear. The increase in public outcry and fear then increases the perceived threat that one side has for another. This fear is created through the public ignorance to the true story due to the media's one sided portrayal of the story. When unbiased and moderate media coverage is used the systems tend to de-fuse because the public is now well informed of the issue which will decrease public outcry and fear and thus decrease the perceived threat that one side has for another. By increasing public awareness the media must continue to not used biased media coverage and thus public fear due to the media will not continue to escalate the problem.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a solid, concise CLD displaying the role of the media in a conflict between two sides. It does a good job showing how an external, unbiased source can lead to a better public understanding of current events. If misinformation and propaganda can be avoided, it ultimately benefits both sides instead of contributing to the escalation.
ReplyDeleteThe only critiques I have are the variables "public misinterpretation" and "public fear" were a little ambiguous the first time I went through the diagram. They make sense upon reading the explanation, but I'm not sure they can stand by themselves within the diagram without some clarification or wording change.
I like how the unbiased third media party is exogenous. My only problem with it is how difficult it would be to find a third party that both sides listened to and respected. If one side likes it, the other won't, and vice-versa. However, that's a problem with the de-escalation strategy itself, and not an error of Jamie's.
This is well detailed CLD and description of the problem with biased media. I like how the addition simply attaches to the bottom of the original escalation cycle; making it easy to comprehend where and how the influence enters. Jamie’s description is also clear in explaining how biased media has a larger scale effect than simply misinforming the public. He does use a negative in one of his elements (Unbiased Media Coverage) but I think it fits in this context. Maybe he could separate it into two exogenous factors, Biased and Unbiased.
ReplyDeleteI would be interested to see how less biased media might effect the escalation cycle. For example, a key component to modern terrorism is the use of media to spread horrific images. Sensationalism demands that the media report this, but isn’t that perhaps exacerbating the problem by helping terrorists achieve one of their goals?