With the ever-growing favorable requirement of multi-tasking across society today, many are seemingly zeroed in on self-gratification in the avenue of speedier access to mass media mediums on a plethora of devices. “The rapid development of live round the clock international news programming has since morphed again to provide for live and instant news broadcasting via the Internet” (Rawnsley, 2016). Although the invention of the internet has made our lives easier, surrendering to it fully can open the door to the manipulation of our minds with relative ease. Interestingly enough, as Christians God warns us to protect ourselves from the numerous evils of this sinful world in the New Testament of the Holy Bible. Romans 12:2 of the King James Version states, “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God” (Holy Bible, 1997). To clarify, when we submit to God we glorify His will here on earth through our actions and deeds. It should be stated, that this does not mean that using the internet is in violation of God’s will. The key is how we as believers in Christ Jesus use the internet as a tool for His glory. Generally speaking, the direct effect of the internet fused with apps and mobile technologies via communication amongst our society has evolved into such a catastrophic situation today, that the introduction of the colloquial term “fake news” has now entered our popular lexicon. With this in mind, an analysis of journalism and how propaganda can be used in media across the interwebs can shed light upon how we as Christians can separate fact from fiction.
To begin with, the American Press Institute defines journalism as, “the activity of gathering, assessing, creating, and presenting news and information. It is also the product of these activities” (American Press Institute, 2018). With attention to this definition, a noticeable parallel to the pillars of research begins to develop. The research process itself is a profound systematic operation that is crucial to placing ourselves in the seat of another. In order for us to engage in the act of comprehending the intention or purpose of another’s viewpoint, we need to immerse ourselves into their perspective lens along with a list of questions. It is when we (the readers) and journalists fail to ask questions that we both do not to learn, and we both do not grow our own personal knowledge. With the evolution and blending of technology in 2018, the state of journalism is attempting to play catch-up and has currently failed to maintain a solid-state of objectivity. In Journalism After Trump, Ronald N. Jacobs quotes CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour regarding the current state of journalism:
“It appeared much of the media got itself into knots trying to differentiate between balance, objectivity, neutrality, and crucially, truth. We cannot continue the old paradigm – let’s say like over global warming – where 99.9% of the empirical scientific evidence is given equal play with the tiny minority of deniers ….I learned long ago, covering the ethnic cleansing and genocide in Bosnia, never to equate victim with aggressor, never to create a false moral or factual equivalence, because then you are an accomplice to the most unspeakable crimes and consequences….The winning candidate did a savvy end run around us and used it to go straight to the people. Combined with the most incredible development ever – the tsunami of fake news sites – aka lies – that somehow people could not, would not, recognize, fact check, or disregard.” (Jones, 2017)
In view of this, a perfect example of truthful objective journalism which should be observed with the intention get things back on track for the legacy media outlets occurred in November of 1963 as Walter Cronkite reported on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. “Throughout the morning, he calmly filled in the story, squelched any information that hadn’t been verified, reduced speculation to certainty — until he was handed a dispatch confirming that the President of the United States was indeed dead. He pulled off his glasses, looked to the clock to repeat the time, and seemed to subdue a sudden wave of emotion, before he continued with the broadcast” (Clark, 2006). By all means, an adamantly sound contention can be made here that Walter Cronkite maintained journalistic integrity by holding back announcing the death of the president until verification had been absolutely confirmed.
Moving forward, in general, it is considered blasphemous to examine history through the perspective lens of presentism, but just imagine if the technology of social media was around back in 1963 at the time of the assassination of President Kennedy. A pretty solid argument could be made that a variety of false propaganda reports would be floating across the world wide web because we see this happen every time a life-altering event occurs today. “The problem of misinformation on the Internet has come at a dangerous time, when growing resentment over inequality and the worsening state of the American middle class have stoked a deep mistrust in institutions of education, science, and media that have traditionally served to keep “false facts” and demagoguery at bay” (Schiffrin, Fall 2016-Winter 2017). In the present day, media outlets appear to be more concerned with being the first to break a story rather than publish quality with any substantial truths, and this all begins in the online gossip channels of social media platforms which we all use daily. “For example, Seo’s (2014) analysis of Twitter images posted by the Israel Defense Forces and Hamas’ Alquassam Brigades during the November 2012 Gaza conflict showed that both sides used various themes and frames to emphasize casualties of their own side and to portray the other side as the aggressor” (Seo & Ebrahim, 2016). To emphasize, each party here was engaged in propaganda in an attempt to make the other side look bad. Once photographs like these have been uploaded to the internet people share them, like them comment on them, and form opinions without even knowing the objective truth. There is no research being done because speed is of the essence on social media platforms, and news outlets pick up these stories to report on them. The key is though that the “original sources” have been altered using the propaganda tactic of one-dimensionality. Essentially, the there is a blend of truth mixed in with a carefully crafted one-sided narrative about a person place, thing, or idea which can be determined as good or evil without dictating so in the medium because so-called “objectivity” would then be ruined. Don Fallis states, “It should be noted that while a piece of disinformation must have the propensity to mislead, it does not have to actually mislead someone on any given occasion” (Fallis, 2015). People take sides of the one-sided imaginary hero or villain portrayed, and conflict is created by their outrage establishing an object to crucify on the other side of the propaganda spectrum.
By the same token, we see newspaper outlets, magazines, and public relations firms engage in similar tactics within articles written for the purposes of simply generating clicks to their websites for advertising revenue, or for the intent of shifting public perception. Journalists and governments do this by carefully using the tactics of leaving out necessary facts, shifting the structure of the events in the articles, or failing to fully check facts given to them from an anonymous source. This type of disinformation creates a panic in society and eventually generates conflicting opponents for which anger, frustration, and violence can break out. The biggest and most recent campaign which engaged in propaganda using these tactics was during the build-up to the Iraq War. “During the war on terror, the U.S. government ran propaganda offices and outsourced think tanks, while consulting companies sought to create a more favorable image of the United States. In 2003 alone, the U.S. government spent $600 million on pro-war public diplomacy” (Ekici & Akbulut, 2015).
Ultimately, due to all of this confusing misinformation in the world today, as Christians, we need to heed the instruction of the Lord by beginning to evaluate where we are with our own personal identities in Him. John 15:5 (the King James Version) states, “I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing” (Holy Bible, 1997). This verse is indicating that we will not be able to use the fruits which Christ Jesus blesses our lives with if we are not properly aligned with Him. Furthermore, since one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is discernment, if we are not walking with our Lord and Savior then, we will not have the full armor of God on to protect us from the wiles of the Devil. Additionally, we cannot allow the technology of today to consume our lives to such an extent that God begins to become an after-thought. Satan will use everything in his arsenal to create a wedge between ourselves, and the Lord. When we are immersed in Jesus Christ we understand how the Devil works, and we can resist the Devil’s temptations with the help of our Creator. For example, in Genesis chapters two and three, in the Garden of Eden, we learn that Satan did not have to tempt Adam and Eve to eat the forbidden fruit from the tree. In fact, Satan only had to tempt them both to live independently from God. All in all, the same tactics apply to our usage of technology, and media today. We cannot give in to the temptation to live independently from God by placing other things in front of Him because if we do we will never realize we are being deceived. The only truth is found in Christ Jesus. John 14:6 of the King James Version states, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (Holy Bible, 1997).
Works Cited
American Press Institute . (2018). Retrieved from American Press Institute : https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/
Clark, L. (2006, July 26). Walter Cronkite: Witness to History . Retrieved from PBS American Masters : http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/walter-cronkite-about-walter-cronkite/561/
Ekici, B., & Akbulut, A. (2015). REVISITING ASYMMETRIC PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE: WHY THE U.S. LOST THE BATTLE OF IMAGES AFTER IRAQ? Uluslararasi Hukuk Ve Politika, 11(44), 33-69. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/rinlp11&div=40&id=&page=
Fallis, D. (2015). What is Disinformation? . Library Trends, 63 (3-Winter ), 401-426. Retrieved from https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/89818/63.3.fallis.pdf?sequence=2
Holy Bible . (1997). Thomas Nelson Publishers .
Jones, R. N. (2017). Journalism After Trump . American Journal of Cultural Sociology , 5(3), 409-425. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-95945-0_5
Morning, C. T. (Director). (2013). JFK assassination: Cronkite informs a shocked nation [Motion Picture]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PXORQE5-CY
Rawnsley, G. D. (2016). Introduction to “International Broadcasting and Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century”. Media and Communication , 42-45. Retrieved from https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/download/641/641
Schiffrin, A. (Fall 2016-Winter 2017). DISINFORMATION AND DEMOCRACY: THE INTERNET TRANSFORMED PROTEST BUT DID NOT IMPROVE DEMOCRACY. Journal of International Affairs, 71(1), 117-125. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/26494367?seq=1
Seo, H., & Ebrahim, H. (2016, August 05 ). Visual propaganda on Facebook: A comparative analysis of Syrian conflicts . Media, War & Conflict, 9(3), 227 – 251. Retrieved from https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/handle/1808/27615
