Conflict communication: Then and now

Observer

02-07-2025

As the digital landscape develops, the confluence between social media and conflict becomes an integral part of the narrative. A myriad of stories, perceptions, fake information, and imagery can ignite or amplify tensions. Artificial intelligence and social media have the potential to polarise or create scenarios with real-world implications.
In times of war and conflict, government officials and influential figures address the public with messages in support of one side. Typically, it employs hostile narratives, propaganda, and disinformation for the convenient simplification of complex scenarios. This communication strategy is fertile ground for spreading deception and misinformation, but also for rallying support.
In the past, the mainstream media aligned with the countries' governments, and their policies to play the drums for 'saving the world' from dictators and armaments; now, however, there is a fragmented media landscape in which people rely on social media such as Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, and X (formerly Twitter) for information or to ally with peers who share similar ideologies.
Then-prime minister Tony Blair led the United Kingdom to war in Iraq in 2003 based on 'unquestionable intelligence' regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), and the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. The goals of the war for the United States were to free the Iraqi people, remove WMDs from the country, and stop Saddam Hussein from supporting terrorism.
The British newspapers on Fleet Street championed Tony Blair's 'journey' to Baghdad. Years later, the former prime minister apologised for the use of 'wrong intelligence' in the run-up to the war. The intelligence report was presented as fact, rather than information that may not be accurate. The media didn't play the drums as enthusiastically as it did pre-war. There are journalistic lessons yet to be learned.
Two decades later, the ghosts of the Iraq War still haunt the region. The 'mission accomplished' staged by the President of the United States, George W. Bush, has barely materialised. Media organisations have failed and continue to fail in addressing the numerous military interventions in the region. The trumpets are still blowing.
The mainstream media often offers one-sided, biased coverage. There are political barriers and ideological challenges; also, there is usually a gap in examining the political and historical context of the conflict.
In today's digital landscape, people increasingly turn away from mainstream media for information. A vast array of channels is available, each offering either accurate information or potentially harmful misinformation. While social platforms facilitate quicker and decentralised communication, they also contribute to societal division.
Social media is increasingly influencing conflict and contentious politics. The ongoing conflict between Israel and Gaza exemplifies how wars are now intertwined with social media. From images depicting military action to narratives crafted by various participants, the impact is significant.
Yet, while offering alternative narratives and perspectives, social platforms are filling the gaps and addressing the vacuums in mainstream media coverage. The negative side is that, at the core of war rhetoric, there is a chaotic, senseless, and unreliable flow of information.
Recent media studies suggest a staggering amount of artificial intelligence-generated misinformation online, as a result of the Israel-Iran war. According to a BBC article, the writers indicate that outdated clips and AI-generated content are being shared as real events, with X users turning to the platform's AI chatbot-Grok to establish the posts' veracity. In some cases, Grok asserted that the AI videos were authentic.
Social media news, especially about war, can mislead and give a false sense of understanding. The global political landscape and interest relations have become more complex. Even though social media merely offers snippets of selective information, it has added a new dimension to how conflict plays out both online and on the ground.