Reflections on media war coverage: Dissonance, dilemmas, and the need for improvement

Abstract

Media preference of war has been diagnosed as resulting from correlations of media psychology, culture, and interests with war. Such correlations encourage personal, professional and institutional dissonance, and provoke dilemmas of coverage adequacy; selectivity of narratives and contexts; manipulation, and narrow ranges of discourse and focus. Efforts to curb these difficulties might succeed, with research and applied efforts aimed at updating the media culture of war coverage; helping identify media controls; encouraging gradual and cumulative reporting; employing "thick coverage" and "thick training"; promoting the cooperation of established media with newer types of journalism; assisting journalists in resolving war coverage dilemmas; promoting ongoing field monitoring and empirical research; helping post-war establishment of appropriate media structures, regulatory frameworks, and program production