War propaganda is not peculiar to Russia. A New York Times investigation into a deadly missile strike shows how Ukraine also dares to distort facts. Do we forget that too often?
Michiel Martin21 September 2023, 03:00
An investigation by The New York Times puts a recent rocket impact on a market in the Ukrainian city of Kostiantynivka on September 6 in a different light. The newspaper states that all evidence – satellite images, debris or witnesses on the ground – indicates that it was a misfired Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile. It cost the lives of at least sixteen civilians.
A few hours after the facts, President Zelensky spoke of a “terrorist attack” by Russia. There is little understanding in Ukraine that the balloon is now being punctured. Multiple official channels indicate that the investigation is ongoing, and that the current “speculation” in international media is “actively used for Russian propaganda” and “entails the growth of conspiracy theories.”
That response touches on an often-heard criticism: that Western media serve the Ukrainian agenda, or are ‘supposed’ to do so. Although the New York Times reporting indicates the opposite, Zelensky’s initial accusations were readily accepted by many international media. And yet Russian claims in reporting are often bathed in critical comments.
Tight script
It became clear at the beginning of the war that the propaganda factory was also working overtime in Ukraine. There were the heroic images of ‘the Ghost of Kyiv’, a fighter plane that shot down several enemies above the Luhansk region. Or the Ukrainian soldiers on Snake Island, who died a martyr’s death. On closer inspection, the plane was a clip from a flight simulation game, the soldiers on the island later turned out to be alive.
Professor Stijn Joye (UGent), specialized in international news, sees the explanation that reporting on conflicts is subject to an ‘us-them narrative’. “Ukraine leans towards the imaginary ‘us’ that people identify for themselves.”
“In addition, Russia has a long history of manipulating information,” Joye said. The size and operation of Russian propaganda channels are known, while Ukraine enters that communication front relatively unscripted and, moreover, as a victim.
This can – sometimes unconsciously – create a more positive view of the information that reaches us from Ukraine. Both news users and journalists are susceptible to this, says Joye, who has noticed a critical attitude in many Flemish newspapers throughout the conflict.
This is necessary, because information from Ukraine could of course just as easily have been directed. Journalists are eagerly led into conflict zones, but often have to stick to a strict script – for reasons of safety, but also for content.
A press pass includes the instruction to “inform the public and the world community about war crimes committed by the Russian Federation during its large-scale armed aggression against Ukraine,” NRC previously reported. In connection with this media policy, the European Center for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) received a number of reports of ‘disruptions of media freedom’.
“Ukraine also benefits from placing facts in a different context,” says Professor Sarah Van Leuven (UGent), director of the Center for Journalism Studies. “This can be done to give citizens courage, or to convince other countries of the need to continue supplying weapons.”
That became clear in November 2022. Two people were killed after a rocket hit in a Polish border village near the border with Ukraine. Zelensky seemed to seize that opportunity to gain more support from the West, until Polish President Duda stated that – even then – it was a matter of Ukrainian anti-aircraft defense. NATO boss Jens Stoltenberg followed that view.
Although both sides emphasized that the missile “unfortunately landed on Polish territory” and “the ultimate responsibility lies with Russia,” Zelensky remained mum. “There’s no way it’s a missile from us.” An attitude that was not exactly appreciated by his allies. In this story too, that stick-to-it attitude can “cause a loss of face during negotiations,” says Van Leuven.
‘The witness’
According to fact checker Rien Emmery (Knack/VRT), the fact that admitting does not seem to be an option has to do with a trade-off. “It looks bad to the outside world, but it is too good a story for the population.” In the meantime, the New York Times story is being debunked – or “debunked” – from a Ukrainian perspective, he notes.
Ultimately, the damage to Ukraine’s image also seems to be not too bad. Russia has set the bar very high in terms of manipulation. The regime spreads lies about acts that are far more heinous than an accidental missile strike. The propaganda film The Witness, sponsored by the Russian Ministries of Defense and Culture, labels, among other things, the mass murders in Butcha as a crime in Ukraine.
However, the fact that information from the Ukrainian camp is usually more reliable does not mean that it always is. And that we should therefore – there too – keep our fingers crossed.
This not only concerns official communication, Emmery emphasizes, but also military bloggers who have a wide reach on social media. “There are also Ukrainian profiles or sympathizers who I see constantly spreading fake videos. I often warn fellow journalists that they cannot be trusted as a news source.”
Also read
2023-09-21 01:00:46
#Ukraine #dares #distort #facts #West #forget
