Maritime media’s Russia-Ukraine coverage lacks balance

Self-appointed maritime media critic Santosh Patil takes us and others to task over how we have covered this year’s war in eastern Europe.

It is often said that truth is the first casualty of war. This maxim holds good even in today’s digital age where information is literally available at your fingertips. In the times of social media where anyone with a mobile device can be a TV channel, it is even more vexing to see how truth can be subverted.

The key to understanding this is to know who gets to set the narrative. All the major media publications be it mainstream or maritime media are mostly western – including the news gathering agencies. Anything published by them gets widest coverage, they therefore have the means to deliver truth or untruth as they seem fit. This however places immense responsibility upon them to ensure what they publish is verified, lest they lose their credibility tag.

Throughout the human history, wars have always included the use of deceit, misinformation and propaganda to win. Nation states have always employed (sometimes deployed) media infrastructure to propagate their own narratives.

The world has seen many wars and conflicts in the last several decades. Use of misinformation and propaganda during the second world war is well documented and so was the role played by a well-known British broadcaster – an ‘independent’ media. The broadcaster, however preferred to call it ‘truth offensive’ or ‘fight against fascism’ in seeking to normalise misinformation.

Widespread media manipulation was on display during the 1990s Gulf War where a popular American broadcaster was used extensively. They simply broadcasted what was provided by the US military. There was no independent verification, nor was a counterview presented. Leading journalists even engaged in war mongering and wrote articles on the need for war and sometimes even justifying it as necessary for peace.

Western media has been manipulated by their governments – especially in times of war, yet prefers to self-certify themselves of credible, impartial news.

We have witnessed how truth was distorted to make a case for war by sexing up dossiers to suit a narrative. The brazen way in which this was done at the highest levels of government has no parallels in modern history. Furthermore, the perpetrators can go scot-free is damaging to the very idea of truth and justice. Media was too eager to help manufacture the consent and failed to verify, only to realise later that it was all made up. In the process lives of countless innocent people were lost.

This was once again witnessed during the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Leading western media publications resorted to toeing the line of their governments. An overwhelmingly large part of the coverage was critical of Russia. Condemnation of the aggressor is well understood and criticise you must; however, one could rarely see an alternate view or critique of NATO, whose actions precipitated into the current situation that Ukraine finds itself in. Therein lies the lack of balance.

From an Asian viewpoint it was quite amusing to note how the earlier conflicts attracted so little outrage when several nations were destroyed under the garb of ‘installing democracy’ or finding ‘WMDs’. No sanctions were needed, neither were nations ‘cancelled’ for attacking sovereign countries. The wars imposed by western nations over several decades have killed far too many innocents than what Russia has done in Ukraine. The moral high ground which the West likes to take is exposed and yet since the narrative is controlled by select western media you won’t see them admonishing their governments in the same tone and tenor which is reserved when the target is non-western.

While India and other nations were lambasted for buying Russian energy, Europe was projected as a victim despite having funded Russia for several decades and doing precious little to reduce its energy dependence. FT recently reported that during the conflict, Europe bought 42% more energy from Russia than the previous year. From which moral position can one then denounce other nations for buying energy?

Western media has been on a hyperbole with the Russia Ukraine coverage and maritime media is no different. Skewed maritime media coverage of the Ukraine Russian war was therefore not unpredictable. Few maritime publications were out to malign everyone even remotely associated with Russia.

Maritime publications which made statements like ‘Both China and India have welcomed Russian business, despite the protestations of Washington, London and Brussels’ falsely presuppose that the global hegemony lies within these ‘power centres’ and everyone else must simply follow their diktat. This is an archaic worldview even as the world rapidly moves towards a multipolar order.

Journalists made claims that company x and company y have exited Russia business and country z too has decided not to flag Russian vessels, without verifying facts. Even a cursory look at shipping’s well-known databases would have brought out factual positions. Several months later, as the conflict continues to rage, many western organisations continue to engage with Russian entities without attracting much criticism.

It appeared to be a campaign of assigning guilt through association for some entities, while glove handed treatment was provided to select western organisations who continued to work with Russian interests. A leading maritime publication also provided cover fire to some, stating it takes time to exit from the business while deriding non-western entities for the same. The volume, velocity and intensity of the critique was missing when the same ‘offence’ was committed by influential western entities. It is difficult to ascertain if emotions threw objectivity aside or commercial concerns forced a softer approach; either way unbiased journalism was in tatters.

Some Twitter-happy journalists displayed prejudiced opinions and what couldn’t be written on the publication was spilt on social media. The choice of language used on the micro blogging platform was also unbecoming of senior journalists. This begs the question if such maritime media personalities can be entrusted to provide independent coverage of the maritime sector.

People are not only the victims of this war. Truth and balanced coverage too were sacrificed at the altar of great powers. There is a pressing need for maritime media to therefore introspect and ensure neutrality in their coverage.