In the feature Taliban, television, telephones and terror, Paul King, editor of the NATO Review, interviews Nick Grono of the International Crisis Group on a topic that has not received a lot of international attention, but is all the more important in the battle for the "hearts and minds" of the people of Afghanistan. Their discussion draws on a report by the International Crisis Group entitled Taliban Propaganda: Winning the War of Words? Whether by digital media or by flyers distributed by hand, the Taliban are waging effective media campaigns. What do they look like, and how are they combated?
In part one the discussion looks at the media strategies of the Taliban:
- How they communicate in several different languages, depending on audience;
- The oversight the West has used to analyze the Taliban message;
- A lack of legitimacy in local authorities, and how little has been done to challenge a competing legitimacy of Taliban governance;
- The pressure under which the local media works and the current limits on media freedom in Afghanistan;
- The Taliban media mix, including everything from word of mouth to advanced digital media;
- The Taliban’s responsiveness and readiness to communicate with media, when compared to international forces and media in Afghanistan.
In part two the interview with Nick Grono looks at the initial failures of the international forces and what can be done from henceforth:
- The mistake of not agreeing to send peacekeeping forces to the troubled south;
- What can be done to combat the Taliban’s media production located outside Afghanistan, especially in Pakistan;
- Getting across the reality of the "numbers game," with insurgents killing four times as many civilians as international forces;
- Increasing the local media’s trust for the international forces by gearing communication efforts directly toward them;
- How Taliban media exploit local authorities’ corruption;
- The disturbing new trend of jihadism within Taliban propaganda.
Go directly to NATO's website for more on the media campaign of the Taliban.
- 16
December 2, 2008
John Hadjisky, Blogger, Platinum Contributor (324)
If anything, the interview understates the effectiveness of the Taliban and similar groups in altering Western media reports in their favor.
Western reporters operating in the region face an ethical dilemma that is too often ignored. That dilemma is, due to the pervasive threat that various terrorist forces pose to journalists, they are not free to report what they know, and are often forced to set aside the normal skepticism that is required for good reporting.
It seems to me that publishers and senior editors could do a much better job at helping their reporters address these ethical concerns. Each media organization should adopt a non-negotiable policy of issuing a standard disclaimer in any news item containing reporting from terrorist-controlled areas, or terrorist sources, that the journalist or their parent organization is subject to censorship by the very persons or organizations they are covering.
In the 1990-1 Gulf War, Saddam gave CNN unprecedented access. CNN was religious about including a disclaimer in every report; even though there was considerable pressure from the regime to drop this disclaimer, CNN proved it was possible to resist this pressure, at least to the extent of keeping the disclaimer.
Later, after the war, this disclaimer was dropped, even though Saddam continued to exercise the same degree of control over all media operating in Iraq. Similarly, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, and many others control or exercise undue influence over Western and other media organizations operating in their areas or covering their issues. It should be made clear to readers that casualty reports (civilian and otherwise) are routinely exaggerated, and that these organizations have been caught issuing wholesale fabrications, multiple times. Readers should also be reminded that journalists are routinely monitored, interrogated, kidnapped, tortured, and killed by these organizations.
Some will point out that Western governments, including the military, might also attempt to influence journalists. This is a legitimate question, of course, but anyone with any experience in journalism knows that attaching disclaimers to Western government or military reports and sources is standard practice. In fact it is so routine, it has become unremarkable. I'm proposing that the same rules be applied when reporting terrorist reports and sources.
Consistently striking the right note on this issue is difficult. A case in point is former CNN head Eason Jordan who, after Saddam fell, famously apologized for failing to tell the truth about the horrors of the regime. See http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9506e7dc173bf932a257...
And yet, balancing that one acknowledgement and apology, Mr. Jordan has been caught out time and time again omitting, distorting, and even fabricating news, in order to ensure the safety and, above all, access of CNN to "newsmakers" in the terrorist community.
See:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110003336
http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/CNNs_Iraqi_Cover-...
There is every reason to believe that reporters face the same sort of ethical problems when covering the Taliban and al Qaeda. Unfortunately, the smoking-gun proof that some people will require, won't be available unless or until the Taliban and al Qaeda are defeated decisively enough to permit those journalists with integrity to write their acknowledgments and apologies.