War on propaganda: West vs. East

W E S T

On September 9, 2013, Syria's President Bashar Al-Assad appeared on an hour-long interview with American broadcast journalist, Charlie Rose, which aired on CBS.

The interview given by president Bashar Al-Assad to Charlie Rose in a one hour slot on CBS gave us a chance to see Syrian conflict through the perspective of the country's leader. Al-Assad, often labeled as oppressive and criticized by American media for running a dictatorship regime, this was a rare opportunity to hear from the "other side". I find that this interview, if arranged by the American network, was an attempt to be "balanced". However, if this interview was asked for by Al-Assad, then it was possibly an attempt to defend his government and deny the blame of chemical attacks in Syria that was placed on them. 

The interview is a dialogue between respected reporter, Charlie Rose, and the Syrian president.  It was aired live on CBS and was also made accessible on Youtube. It was taped in Syria. The journalist put Al-Assad on the "hot seat", asking him hard and pressing questions that challenged Al-Assad. The interview's attempt to achieve the notion of balance was over-shadowed by the anti-middle east discourse and pro-America filters followed by Rose. The questions laid on Al-Assad were challenging, accusative, and critical towards his leadership and his government's role in the chemical weapons of mass destruction. 

However, the interviewer did not critique the Obama administration and their approach towards the conflict. Al-Assad constantly pointed out that the accusations against him and the information released in American news networks about the Syrian conflict were false and unproven. Rose seemed to vilify Al-Assad and the Middle East as a whole, asking questions that labeled the U.S. as the defenders and Syria as the offenders. CBS news used the interviewer as a filter, to direct Al-Assad's answers that would fit the discourse they want to follow. They also included graphics at the bottom screen of the interview, emphasizing keywords that they wanted us, as the audience, to focus on. It was also cut and edited some clips of the interview, so we are not receiving the full and raw answers from the Syrian President.

In addition, racial and religious misrepresentation were present in the presentation and context of words and vocabulary. Looking specifically at war language, many journals have discussed the pro-war discourse created by the American government and media, which stems from placing the prejudicial identity of terror to words like "Islam", "rebels" and "Middle East". Issues of Western globalization were also discussed by Al-Assad, condemning what he says are lies and propaganda that are being spread by the U.S. government and mass media. When Rose said to him that "conclusive evidence" was found that Syria waged a chemical attack on it's own people, Al-Assad countered that they presented convictions and confidence, not evidence. 

For interest's sake, this was President Obama's National Address on Syria, two days after Al-Assad's interview. This address was aired on all major U.S. networks by the government. 

E A S T 

Citizen journalism and online activism are increasing significantly on Youtube. This video, titled "Syrian War what you're not being told", was created on a channel called "StormCloudsGathering". Compared to CBS's interview with Al-Assad to highlight the Syrian Crisis, this video was created by individuals who are strongly protesting the U.S. government's intentions and propaganda through online disobedience. Without interviewing anyone, they collect various interview clips of U.S. government officials on their statements regarding the conflicting reasons for America's past wars in the Middle East. These interview clips seem off-the-record and were not broadcast in regular American news stations. 

In the video, this American general is discussing the conflicts of interest and the incomprehensible reasons the U.S. went to war with Iraq.

The narrator also states his objective in this video clearly. There is no attempt for balance, but an attempt to "uncover" the American government's propaganda and abuse around the Syrian crisis. The narrator acts as the reporter, doing a round up of past conflicts leading up to the Syrian conflict. He also included pictures of anonymous American soldiers who are torn about their military involvement because they disagree with the reasons of U.S. involvement in the Syrian crisis. The video includes a series of war photos that involve war victims, torture, etc. that are too graphic to be seen on mainstream news media. 

It is clear that this video was made to debunk what "StormCloudsGathering" believes to be myths and lies about the Syrian war. It has a clear tone of activism and protest. For instance, in the end of the video, the narrator challenges us to revolutionize against the U.S. government and take back power from their hands. Through engaging the online public sphere with a topic that is newsworthy, this activist group is able to provoke critical thinking in individuals who may likely not question the information received from mainstream news. For a view so opposed to the U.S. government, it takes courageous citizen journalism to present such a stance. He uses war images and unfiltered information and interviews not released by mainstream media to the public in order to form his activistic argument. Through an anti-war discourse, StormGloudsGathering challenges its viewers to reconsider what we believe and know about the Syrian Crisis. 

From watching the Youtube video, I realized how vilified the Middle East is in the mainstream Western media. I realize also, how similar and one-sided the discourse that journalists follow in telling stories of war. The language and dialogue used in portraying conflicts in the mainstream media are in favour of the American government. Although the Eastern governments have also produced oppressive propaganda, it is important to consider the two different truths. It allows us, as an audience, to not only see a bigger picture, but to hold those who are most powerful accountable for their actions, and to always be critical over their intentions. We may never know the whole truth about wars and why they are started, but it is important not to thoughtlessly place all our trust on the message we are given. The comparison of the two journalistic sources affirms our need to rely on citizen journalism as much as we rely on mainstream media, to get the fullest scope of a story, and to decide for ourselves, how we ought to perceive the message.