Transformations - 2003 Conference Session 3

Session 3: Image, Media and Transformations
Chair: Peter Remington

The Changing Character and Image of War - "New Wars" in the Hierarchical International System
Tiina Seppälä
Researcher, International Relations, University of Lapland, Department of Social Studies, Rovaniemi, Finland

For some researchers the Kosovo War, as a “humanitarian intervention” implied the end of war. However, war has not disappeared, but the concept of war is changing. According to e.g. Federico Boni (2001), now the world faces “new wars”, referring to conflicts which are (re)presented as operations of “international police” to punish national actors threatening the international order. The West and particularly the U.S. has taken the role of “international police” and “punisher” in the post-Cold War era. In “new wars” media strategies are as important as military strategies. According to Boni, there are three main characteristics of “new wars” relevant to media strategies: 1. The conflict must be brief and should not involve losses or test the political consensus – or, even better, not to lacerate the public opinion which could discover the “reality” of war. 2. The “global military intervention” should be concentrated, fast and definitive. 3. To satisfy the strategic necessities of the first two points, every means of the war is legitimated (but it is not possible to admit it publicly).. I'll argue that all this is related to changes in international (political) system, particularly war, as well as to changes in propaganda methods and terminology. Therefore, I propose a paper that examines some political, strategic, methodological and terminological aspects of management of image of war, not to forget the implications the management of image of war has on social and political reality. The U.S. “War on Terrorism” will act as a case study. The changing nature of war, war as a logical and “natural” extension of the U.S. led hierarchical international system, will also be considered.

Download Full Conference Paper -

State Regulation of Mass Media: Russian Experience
Veronica Usachyova
Centre for Civilizational and Regional Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

At the beginning of the 1990s, a transfer to a libertarian model of relations among the mass media, authorities and society was declared to be the goal for transforming the mass media in Russia. It endowed the media with the role of a "fourth power" that is economically and politically independent of the state and controls it in the name and interests of its citizens. This understanding of the functions of the mass media implies the social responsibility of journalists, who are obligated to reflect the plurality of opinions and, in the event of an acute conflict, channel contradictions into debate in order to prevent extreme aggravation of social tension. The declared goals were not achieved. The mass media were unable to completely overcome the heritage of the Soviet totalitarian model. The electronic media are still dependent on the authorities, the journalistic community has not developed efficient mechanisms of self-defense and self-control, and society does not have levers to influence and control the media. Only the authorities can have a direct and effective influence on them. During the past decade, it was only the inside struggle within the power elites that made it possible to create the illusion that the Russian media had become a "fourth power." But as soon as the powers that became more or less consolidated and realized their interests in their relationships with the mass media, their policy in this sphere instantly acquired distinct authoritarian features.