Pete’s blog

Continuing from last week’s (or yesterday’s) mail, South Africa’s constitution does not allow propaganda for war in its freedom of expression clause. You might wonder what would happen in a war situation - would the government be able to broadcast moral boosting propaganda? Well, free of expression is one of the so called ‘derogable’ rights, ie it is a right that can be limited in times of emergency. So in the event of war, government can declare a state of emergency and start with the war propaganda.

The problem is before the war, or in everyday reporting and journalism - the thing that is war journalism. What is war journalism? Probably the best way of answering this, is by working through the process. You want to start a war against the Australians, how would you convince the rest of the population to join?
First you make the enemy easy to identify (using existing stereotypes is ideal), in this case anyone who says “G’day” or has an Ozzie accent. Note as the campaign progresses the definition could widen (though crowd dynamics, and mass hysteria) to include anyone who wears corks in their hat or is called Bruce.
Then you polarise the groups of people into us and them. “Either you are an Aussie or you are a South African. If you are not a South Africa, or you like the Aussies, then you must be an Aussie. Either you are for us or against us.”
Next you ridicule the enemy and present them as inferior to yourselves.
“Aussie are just a bunch of farmers, they are all ex-convicts. Aussies are so stupid they have to call everyone Bruce. Aussie beer is watery and tasteless.”
Then you begin to dehumanise them. “Aussies eat poor cute Kangaroos.
Aussies shag sheep. Apparently the Aussies worship a Wallaby god. Aussies killed all the aborigines. I heard about this Aussie that killed his own children. I heard about this Aussie who ate children.”
Rumour and natural paranoia are you friends at this point. People will start coming up with their own outrageous stories and as the stories become worse, fear, paranoia and hysteria will drive the process faster - polarisation and dehumanisation will happen on their own. The enemy will be an evil entity that is not to be trusted - all Aussies will become part of this entity.
At the same time, you start championing your own people, portraying them as the good fighting a tide of evil. “South Africa is the greatest nation.
Look at how we overcame apartheid. Look at how sophisticated we are compared to those Aussies - we eat beef and pork and springbok, instead of lamb and kangaroo. Look at how we triumphed in the Tri-nations.”
Once this is complete, all you need to do is say “Let our great nation liberate the Aussies from their evil and backwards ways.” or in more extreme cases “Let us rid the world of this evil scourge that plagues Southern hemisphere. Let us kill the evil Aussies in the name of peace and justice.”
Violà, one times instant war.

Ok, how much of that sounds familiar to you? Quite a bit hopefully.
America and George Bush at the moment are a textbook example of war journalism. Except Bush has also taken it to the next level - his enemy is not clearly defined. The evil terrorist is the most effective enemy - unseen, unidentifiable and could strike anyone, anywhere, at any moment…
All Bush needs to do is say “terrorists” and point to the hole where the Twin Towers were, and everyone knows exactly what he is talking about.

War journalism is very difficult to stop or control. It is very easy for even well-meaning newspapers to fall into the trap. In order to make articles short, understandable and readable for the average man, a lot of simplification takes place - stereotyping, polarisation, us and them…
Also sensational articles tend to sell better - stories about how good and nice other people are don’t make the front page, stories about how bad and evil they are do. There is also often a bit of one-upmanship and national pride in newspapers - how much better we are than the Aussies. War journalism can happen slowly and insidiously, or it can happen quickly through the opinions of a few influential people.

So if there is war journalism, surely there must be peace journalism. What exactly is that and why don’t we see enough of it? But will save that for next week.