28.11.2014 Views

National Press Corps Director: Sam Zeidman - Institute for Domestic ...

National Press Corps Director: Sam Zeidman - Institute for Domestic ...

National Press Corps Director: Sam Zeidman - Institute for Domestic ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

R u t g e r s Mo d e l C o n g r e s s 13<br />

the media was the “key factor in international relations.” 36<br />

For instance, the media had<br />

an uncanny ability to define situations and give legitimacy to an event or person to the<br />

general audience in such a fashion that if anything contrary to what was said by someone,<br />

it would not have been accepted by society. This process became known as the agendasetting<br />

function. 37 Another function that the mass media had control over was the fact<br />

that it could serve as a catalyst to accelerate or impede a nation’s <strong>for</strong>eign policy process<br />

and affairs. This is partly due to the fact that as time passed, society and the global<br />

environment become more and more complicated, with an increasing number of people<br />

wanting to know more about international politics, in turn making it easier <strong>for</strong> the media<br />

to influence the general audience through the increasing number of ‘opinion leaders’ and<br />

gatekeepers. 38<br />

Three Perspectives on Media Influence<br />

While many believe that the media always plays an integral role in public affairs,<br />

there are some that believe otherwise. Through all of the debate about the media and its<br />

influence in the <strong>for</strong>eign policy decision-making process, the result was the categorization<br />

of the different perspectives of media influence. The first category dealt with the fact that<br />

the media played a highly active role in influencing <strong>for</strong>eign policy decisions. In this<br />

category, the theory is that the media is viewed as having ‘the privilege of trying to find<br />

out all it can about what is going on” in the government, which, in reality, portrays the<br />

media as an all-powerful, authoritative body. 39 The second category dealt with the fact<br />

that the media took on the exact opposite of the first category, which was a passive voice<br />

in the arena of international relations and <strong>for</strong>eign policy and acted as, “no more than a<br />

pawn in the political game played by the powerful political authority in Washington” 40<br />

Supporters of this viewpoint believed that the media, at least structurally served as no<br />

more than an instrument in the actual implementation of <strong>for</strong>eign policies. This theory<br />

36 Malek, Abbas, “News Media and Foreign Relations,” Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1997, 5.<br />

37 Ibid 39<br />

38 “The Role of Mass Media in the U.S. Foreign Policy Making Process”<br />

39 Malek, Abbas, “News Media and Foreign Relations,” Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1997, 5.<br />

40 Ibid

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!