The realities of war: recognising and planning for the decisive role of media on the urban battlefield Charles Knight and Li Ji With a journalist’s perspective from Hugh Riminton EuroISME Occasional Paper No. 3 The Realities of War: Recognising and Planning for the Decisive Role of Media on the Urban Battlefield How does the Army bridge the philosophical gap between perceptions of bloodless precision and the reality of close combat? by Charles Knight PhD Li Ji PhD With a Journalist’s Perspective from Hugh Riminton Cover image: © Kudleka, ‘Don’t shoot.’ EuroISME gratefully acknowledges the generous permission of Jon Kudelka. The cartoon appeared first in The Australian of 18 November 2004. During the battle for Fallujah in 2004, a wounded Iraqi prisoner was filmed being shot by a US marine. This cartoon was in response to the ensuing attack on the cameraman for filming the event and was a comment on the level of control of the media in the Iraq war. The cartoon was drawn many years ago but it still has relevance today. Although control of the message is nearly impossible given the rise of social media and portable cameras, this won’t, of course, stop people trying. The Realities of War: Recognising and Planning for the Decisive Role of Media on the Urban Battlefield How does the Army bridge the philosophical gap between perceptions of bloodless precision and the reality of close combat? by: Charles Knight, PhD Li Ji, PhD With a Journalist’s Perspective from Hugh Riminton © EuroISME, 2021 EuroISME’s Occasional Papers series is its second line of publications, next to EuroISME’s book series. The submitted Occasional Papers are too short to merit a stand-alone volume, nor do they necessarily fit into one of EuroISME’s conference volumes. They are peer reviewed and can be published quickly when needed. They aim to discuss topical subjects on military ethics and they will be published on an open-access basis on EuroISME’s website. The Series Editorial Board consists of: Dr. Ted van Baarda (editor-in-chief; The Netherlands) Prof.Dr. Jovan Babić, University of Belgrade (Serbia) Prof.Dr. Bruno Coppieters, Free University Brussels (Belgium) Prof.Dr. Thomas R. Elssner, Office of the Military Bishopric of the German Armed Forces (Germany) Dr. Eric Germain, Ministry of Defence (France) Prof.Dr. Per Bauhn, Linnæus University (Sweden) Prof.Dr. Juha Mäkinen, National Defence University (Finland) Brig.Gen. (ret) Prof.Dr. Edwin R. Micewski, National Defence Academy (Austria) Dr. Patrick Mileham, Council of Military Education Committees of UK universities (United Kingdom) Enquiries: [email protected] www.euroisme.eu Abstract Future conflicts will increasingly occur in cities where destruc- tion of property and loss of life has always been greater and more concentrated than on other terrain. This greater cost will now be more visible because of extensive and decreasingly con- trollable media coverage, and the increased interest will combine with new sources of information flow that the military will be unable to control. Most media research shows that in wartime the domestic mainstream press tend to be broadly supportive of the military, but urban war is different. Unfamiliar and unex- pected events provide windows of opportunity where reporters have a ‘clean slate’, in the absence of any pre-existing narrative. Since contemporary audiences have little understanding of war generally, war among civilians and insurgents is incomprehensi- bly brutal, and because prior understandings of the likely costs are not pre-established among politicians or public, audiences make simplistic moral judgements. If the military fights in cities without establishing both media understanding of urban war and processes to influence the public narrative, the consequence may be problematic policy direction. This study uses a framing anal- ysis of newspaper reports of urban battles to examine the way media messaging might indirectly influence military urban oper- ations, especially by shaping popular and political demand for more aggressive or less aggressive actions than optimum military practice. The findings include recommendations for enhancing Army-Media processes, which feedback from journalists sug- gests are troubled. IX X Executive Summary Overview This project considers how media messaging might indirectly influence military urban operations, especially by shaping popular and political demand for more aggressive or less aggressive actions than optimum military practice. The research on which it is based investigates the way accounts in print media reporting of contemporary urban warfare are ‘framed’. The analysis is of Australian, US, British and Chinese print media accounts, from eight different newspapers reporting on six urban battles. The findings from the framing analysis are examined by a Delphi method group (further explained below) to identify environmental factors that might influence media framing or narratives, especially emotive reporting that might lead to unwarranted shifts in military policy. Challenges in the military-media relationship are highlighted and morphological analysis is applied to identify possible improvements. The research question posed for this study is: ‘How does media framing of urban combat influence elite, public and political opinion; what are the likely impacts on military policy and how should the military respond?’ Introduction The introduction to this report focuses on the growing press interest, probability and human cost of conflict in urban areas. Military operations there can prompt volatile public and political responses because of the visibility and emotive nature of casu- alty events. This is notwithstanding that domestic media tends to be broadly supportive of national military operations and that the supposed media ’CNN effect’ drives major policy change rarely and slowly. Two examples of events that dramatically XI shifted military policy are given to emphasise the need for prep- aration. The introduction also provides several key terms and explains the background to the research. Why the Media matters The first chapter argues the strategic importance of the media- military relationship in urban conflict. Drawing on the literature, initial discussion explores the historical and cultural basis of mutual distrust, covering military concerns with operational security, reputation and being unjustly judged in the context of the acute tactical problems of urban war. Issues examined include the paradox that since reputation has operational bene- fits, concealing military missteps might logically be a matter of operational security. These military perspectives are juxtaposed with media concerns about unjustifiable secrecy and its coercive enforcement, while the Australian military-media relationship is used to illustrate how contemporary political norms of govern- ment-controlled messaging are increasingly in tension with con- testability and democratic accountability. The exploration of a vexed government-military-media political relationship contin- ues with reference to historical tensions between militaries and the press as well as the ‘CNN effect’. US embrace of embedding of reporters is contrasted with a cautious Australian approach, followed by discussion of attitudes to risk and the need for con- structive engagement. Historical cases are used to illustrate the important role of critical reporting, how in the longer-term, armies often benefit from reforms and new capabilities it prompts. The chapter concludes by explaining the psychology of how media effects operate asymmetrically in contemporary urban warfare, wrapping up by revisiting the cautionary example of the Battle of Fallujah. XII What Shapes a Story – and What Makes it Matter? The second chapter draws further on the literature to describe the processes of media influence, examining theories of opinion forming, indexing, agenda-setting and framing as well as highlighting the crucial phenomenon of ‘event-driven news’ with its potential for shifting public and political opinion. An opening discussion introduces the concept of media biases in favour of the status quo and militaries, and how the press ‘manufacture consent’ for governments. Despite journalists being critical and committed to truth, reporting is ‘indexed’, meaning published discussion occurs within a ‘legitimate’ range established by social norms and defined by societal elites. Agenda setting, the determination of which events will or will not be reported, is explained as product of political interplay between media, elites and the public which is difficult to influence in a crisis. Similarly, the initial framing of any reported event, the ideas portrayed by words or images, is fundamental to how audiences will comprehend, emotionally respond and their related opinions will develop. The focus of the chapter is the idea of ‘activation’. This describes the effect of some kinds of events or interactions that draw public attention and set the conditions for shifts in political opinion. The phenomenon of ‘event driven news’ is where a dramatic and usually emotive event, disrupts established agendas and frames and can lead to impulsive political decision-making in response to public outrage. Either civilian or own troops casualties may trigger this. It appears that the volatility of media responses may be reduced by constructive engagement and activities that inform journalists of the broad methods, risks and possible failures of military operations and so ‘pre-frame’ narratives.