西方媒体可信度在下降
2023-01-09 09:25阅读：
对主导全球媒体空间的西方媒体的信任度下降，是去年的一个明显趋势。在报道国际事务时，大型新闻集团已变成西方政府、机构和企业的强大盟友，因而背叛了独立的“第四权”（媒体）使命。
西方评论员似乎越来越倾向于维护西方利益，无法超越根深蒂固的意识形态立场，促进与非西方受众的建设性对话。他们如今在捍卫站不住脚的事——力图维持西方对全球大多数人的霸权。随着后者寻求建立更公平的后西方世界秩序，主流媒体已成为西方公开抵制这种努力的一种工具。因此，日后回首2022年，我们或许可以说：“这是一个转折点，主流媒体最终失去了许多非西方读者的信任。”
往好了说，西方媒体目前的做法是无知的，对商业不利。往坏了说，它是分裂性的，令全球不和谐和紧张加剧。现在是它更认真对待自己责任的时候了。
关于有偏见的报道，有三个明显的例子。首先是不停地“攻击中国”，这在美国和欧洲更常见。读者几乎没有一天不读到妖魔化中国的新闻报道。最近是批评中国政府过快地放宽新冠疫情防控。没错：同样是这些媒体曾呼吁中国取消“不人道的”疫情防控政策，还称赞中国抗议者勇敢对抗；现在，它们又在制造新的说法，即中国还没有为开放做好准备。
其次，关于卡塔尔世界杯的报道充满了隐晦的殖民主义思想，甚至是种族主义。许多西方媒体评论员自以为站在道德高地，谴责卡塔尔的劳工权利标准和对性少数群体问题的立场，甚至在揭幕赛前就呼吁抵制。
如果媒体曾以这些标准要求举办体育赛事的美国和欧洲，那么对卡塔尔作为东道主的反对或许会更让全球观众信服。虚伪的是，从来没有这种情况。在西方媒体的报道中，欧洲没有侵犯人权的行为，美国也与在世界各地策划和直接参与的导致数十万人死亡的冲突无关。他们将在下届世界杯上沉默。因为下届世界杯将在美国、加拿大和墨西哥举办。全球观众不会因为主办国在外
国犯下的战争罪行、对外国劳工的剥削、对黑人的种族主义和对原住民的压迫而听到抵制的呼吁。
此外，围绕俄乌冲突的种种报道暴露了西方媒体的自以为是和偏见。它们不仅对普京的批评陷入半狂热的状态，还对战争背后的复杂诱因——包括北约的扩张主义行为——睁一只眼闭一只眼。西方媒体也采取了片面的对抗性方法来解决危机，以至于“北溪”天然气管道被炸尽管可能是一个由西方大国实施的重大恐怖主义行为，却未得到充分报道，并且已被遗忘。
这三个例子清楚地表明，西方媒体忽视非西方世界日益敏锐和挑剔的受众，仍然固守“西方最好”这一叙事。如果这种分裂行为继续下去，不仅会在外交事务和新闻报道方面失去非西方世界的追随者，还会停滞不前。它拒绝承认许多具有高质量报道和分析的非西方出版物正在发展，其传统读者群现在有更多选择。西方媒体在各自国内都在失去信任：只有34%的英国人表示相信所读的新闻，而38%的美国人对新闻“完全不信任”。西方媒体早该摆脱居高临下的心态和意识形态的束缚，回归“第四权”的首要目标。
Western media must reflect on year of shameful bias in
China, Qatar, Ukraine war coverage
-Western media’s biased reporting has failed to account for
increasingly perceptive and critical audience in non-Western
world
-Diversity of opinions, self-reflection and shaping public
discourse in a responsible manner among ways for Western media to
improve standing and stay relevant
Chandran Nair
A trend that became clear last year is the decline in trust towards
Western media, which dominates the global media space.
The largest news conglomerates have morphed into a powerful ally of
Western governments, institutions and businesses when covering
international affairs, and in the process have betrayed the calling
of the independent fourth estate.
Western commentators appear increasingly captive to preserving
Western interests and are unable to move beyond entrenched
ideological positions to facilitate constructive dialogue with
their non-Western audiences. They have become defenders of the
indefensible – the fight to maintain hegemony of the West over the
global majority. As the latter seek to build a fairer post-Western
world order, mainstream media has become a tool used by the West to
openly resist these efforts.
As such, 2022 may well be the year we look back on and say: “This
was the tipping point when mainstream media finally lost
credibility with much of its non-Western readership.”
At best, Western media’s current approach is ignorant and bad for
business. At worst, it is divisive, contributing to rising global
discord and tensions. It is high time it took its responsibility
more seriously.
Biased reporting
There are three clear instances. First is relentless “China
bashing”, a move commonly employed in the United States and Europe.
It is rare to go one day without reading a headline demonising
China. The latest is to criticise the Chinese government for
relaxing its Covid-19 restrictions too quickly.
That’s right: the same media monoliths which called for China to
abolish its “inhumane” lockdown policies and praised Chinese
protesters for their bravery in fighting the authorities are now
spinning a new narrative – that China isn’t ready to open just
yet.
Second, the reporting on the Qatar World Cup was ripe with thinly
veiled colonial thinking, even racism. Many Western media
commentators assumed the moral high ground and condemned Qatar for
its standard of labour rights, its stand on LGBTQ issues and even
called for a boycott before the first game.
Gone was the focus on unity, positivity and multiculturalism that
international sporting events provide. Instead, Qatar’s decisions
to uphold its own customs and beliefs were the focus of rampant
criticism, while countries like Morocco were mocked for their
success at the tournament, with a Danish channel comparing players
to monkeys, and the BBC’s Gary Lineker being unhappy that Lionel
Messi wore an Arab robe when claiming the World Cup trophy.
The objections to Qatar’s role as host would have been more
convincing to a global audience if these same standards were
applied to the US and Europe during sporting events.
Hypocritically, they never are. In Western media, Europe is not
defined by its human rights transgressions, nor is the US
characterised by the conflicts it has orchestrated and been
directly involved in across the world, resulting in the deaths of
hundreds of thousands.
They will fall silent at the next World Cup, which will be hosted
in the US, Canada and Mexico. A global audience will not hear calls
for boycotts because of war crimes committed in foreign nations,
exploitation of foreign labour, racism against black people and the
repression of indigenous peoples.
Third, the narratives surrounding the Russia-Ukraine conflict have
revealed the Western media’s superiority complex and biased
reporting. While Moscow’s actions should be condemned, the Western
media has been semi-rabid in its critique of Vladimir Putin, yet
semi-blind to the complexities of the triggers behind the war,
including examining Nato’s expansionist approach and the Ukraine
government’s less-than-savoury actions.
At the onset of the war, racist commentary was abound with
comparisons drawn between conflict in “civilised” Ukraine and
“uncivilised” countries like Myanmar, Syria, or Yemen (all of which
have dropped out of coverage in Western media).
Western media organisations have also adopted a one-sided
confrontational approach to solving the crisis to such an extent
that the bombing of the Nord Stream gas pipeline has been
under-reported and already forgotten, despite being a major act of
terrorism potentially perpetrated by a Western power.
These three examples have made it clear that the Western media
monolith has failed to account for an increasingly perceptive and
critical audience in the non-Western world, and remains tied to the
narrative that the West is Best.
If its divisive trajectory continues, Western media will not only
lose its following in the non-Western world on foreign affairs and
news reporting, it will also stagnate. It refuses to acknowledge
that many new non-Western publications with high-quality reporting
and analyses are growing, and their traditional reader base now has
more options. Western media is even losing trust at home: just 34
per cent of Britons say they trust the news they read, while 38 per
cent of Americans have “no trust at all” in the news.
Diversity and taking responsibility
So how can Western media organisations improve their standing?
Three suggestions come to mind.
First, they should focus on offering diversity of opinions and
thinking. Media establishments in the West rarely allow for
opinions that are not aligned with their own, even from experts
native to the very regions they pontificate about.
Western media firms should recognise that they are increasingly
being constrained by ideological shackles that fly in the face of
their proudly proclaimed “free press”. The fourth estate claims to
speak truth to power, yet Western media often appears as a
mouthpiece for the same dogmas that are used to justify the West’s
self-declared position of authority over others.
Diversity of opinions will help create more vibrant, balanced and
engaging discussions for readers across the world. If they want to
grow and stay relevant, media boards need to stop seeing their
average reader as a white person from the West who simply wants to
be reassured that the West is superior and will continue to lead
the world.
Next, they can be more self-reflective when reporting on others.
This is a moral responsibility. By understanding how others
perceive the West, commentators will be better able to opine on
foreign issues in a way that is relatable to both Western and
non-Western audiences. This means relying less on parachute
journalism via foreign correspondents, or, worse, rewarding people
for being vindictively critical of events and people in non-Western
nations.
Critique is essential, but without being constructive it can
quickly cause damage. An Asian business or government has no way to
correct the harm done by poorly analysed Western commentaries
prejudicial to their interests. Any attempt to do so is seen as an
attack on the free press, while the Western journalist is
transformed into a freedom fighter for the cause of the
oppressed.
Lastly, when discussing the global media, there are a very small
number of organisations: media consolidation and the decimation of
smaller and local media outlets mean that more and more of the
press is dominated by a few giant outlets, most of which are
Western. Thus, Western media should confront the reality and moral
dilemma of balancing the need to inform and to maximise profits
without causing harm.
The 24-hour news cycle, along with the drive to be the first to
break the news, has led to sensationalist reporting. The media has
an obligation to not only pander to the demands of the public but
to shape public discourse in a responsible manner.
Western media still has the potential to rebuild legitimacy and
credibility with its non-Western audience to maintain a healthy
readership, and can forge a better understanding between various
regions of the world. It is past due for Western media to shake off
condescension and ideological shackles and return to its primary
objective as the fourth estate.
