From Headlines to Posts: Media’s Role in Diplomacy and Division
Abstract
The media has a major impact on public opinion, international relations, and the promotion of mutual understanding or hostility between countries. This article examines the effects of various media platforms on war and diplomacy, including print, electronic, and social media. In the context of the Russia-Ukraine war, the Palestine-Israel dispute and the India-Pakistan relationship, we specifically look at the hypocrisy of Western media. This study shows that negative and biased media coverage can fuel anxiety, fear and hatred, which in turn can have an impact on societal peace and mental health. I have also discussed how the media forgets its true purpose and is instead used as a weapon for lobbying and propaganda. Lastly, this study offer helpful suggestions for improving media use, advancing peace and raising global awareness.
Introduction
The media has a significant impact on international relations in this era of immediate communication. Diplomacy has changed due to the global communication environment, which includes social media, broadcast media and newspapers. To express foreign policy, rally support and interact with global audiences, governments are increasingly using the media. Often referred to as “media diplomacy,” this phenomenon represents the fusion of international relations, communication and journalism. But there is a darker side to the media as well. Sensationalism, biased narratives, echo chambers and disinformation can all contribute to miscommunication, animosity and war. The media landscape of today is extremely fractured, with social media posts and headlines having the power to influence public opinion, spark geopolitical conflicts, or thwart diplomatic initiatives.
The media is crucial in international relations because it shapes perceptions of other nations. By exchanging cultures, ideas and tales, it can foster connections across borders. However, by disseminating inaccurate information or unfavorable pictures, it can also incite conflict, mistrust and terror. Social media has made it possible for knowledge to reach a wider audience and spread much more quickly than in the past. This increases the media’s influence in foreign affairs and diplomacy. However, the constant stream of news can have an impact on people’s mental health, particularly during times of crisis or conflict. Stress, anxiety, or depression can result from viewing too much bad content. It’s critical to comprehend how the media affects not just our perceptions of other countries but also our mental health.
Literature Review
Agenda-setting (McCombs & Shaw, 1972) and framing theory (Entman, 1993) are two theories that support the impact of the media on diplomacy. These imply that while the media doesn’t dictate what individuals should think, it does dictate what they should think about and how. This dictates which international issues is the focus of public discourse and how they are viewed in terms of diplomacy. Scholars of public diplomacy such as Nye (2004) place emphasis on “soft power,” which is the idea that a state can influence others by attractiveness rather than force, mostly through media-communicated culture, values and policies. “Media diplomacy” is defined by Gilboa (2002) as the deliberate use of mass media to affect diplomatic results, while Melissen (2005) emphasises the increasing significance of non-state players in digital diplomacy.
Social media and the internet have transformed diplomacy, resulting in the emergence of “twiplomacy,” or digital diplomacy. Bjola and Holmes (2015) investigate how governments utilize Facebook, Instagram and Twitter to interact directly with international publics, explain policies and react to emergencies. Heads of state now tweet directly to audiences throughout the world and embassies host digital initiatives. For instance, social media is frequently where U.S. President Joe Biden posts his foreign policy statements first. There are risks associated with digital diplomacy. The informality and immediacy of social media can result in unanticipated controversies, information breaches and diplomatic blunders. For example, the Arab Spring (2011) showed how social media can both strengthen civil society and bring governments to the attention of the world.
The Propaganda Model by Herman and Chomsky (1988) describes how the media frequently promotes elite goals and uses prejudice to sway popular opinion. The digital age, where ignorance and distortion are widespread, amplifies this. Misinformation (false but not meant to cause harm), disinformation (false and destructive), and malinformation (true but spread maliciously) are the three categories into which divided information disorder (Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017).
The media has been crucial in constructing both domestic and international narratives around the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. In order to defend its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has mostly depended on state-run media, which propagate stories that show the war as an essential line of defense against Western aggression. At the same time, Ukraine has successfully mobilized international solidarity, shared accounts of civilian suffering and humanized the conflict through digital platforms like social media. EU DisinfoLab (2022) found hundreds of false narratives in Russian media, demonstrating the effectiveness of information warfare in contemporary wars.
In a comparable way, Western media have been frequently criticized for their biased coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, frequently presenting the facts in ways that support geopolitical alignments while failing to capture the complexity of the situation. Unlike these conflict-centered tales, South Korea has shown that media may be a tool for peace and diplomacy. South Korea has boosted diplomatic relations and broadened its cultural influence by promoting K-pop, Korean cinema and digital material internationally, reaching far beyond its traditional borders. This exercise in soft power demonstrates how media can both unite and divide countries by fostering a common culture and set of values.
Recent researches conducted have provided new light on the ways in which the media continues to influence public opinion and international affairs. Social media sites like Instagram, TikTok and Twitter were crucial in regulating narratives and disseminating real-time updates during the October 2023 Gaza-Israel confrontation. Al Jazeera, CNN and China’s Global Times all reported on the same events using different frames, according to a research comparing their coverage. Al Jazeera focused on Palestinian resistance, CNN used language that was centered on Israel and Global Times had a more neutral tone (Ibrar et al., 2025).
New difficulties have also emerged as a result of the growth of digital platforms. According to a 2024 report, social media algorithms produce echo chambers that strengthen users’ opinions and deepen polarisation, particularly during times of conflict (Anwer, 2024). The transmission of false information by these echo chambers was evident during the India-Pakistan conflict in 2025. On social media, deepfake movies and fake news propagated quickly, spreading fear and heightening tensions between the two nations.
Press freedom continues to suffer during international conflicts. In 2024, the Associated Press reported that independent media outlets such as Al Jazeera were either restricted or prevented from reporting freely in Gaza, and journalists were subject to restrictions and detentions (AP News, 2024). These acts, as well as the increasing impact of biased reporting and disinformation, demonstrate that the media in the modern day actively shapes the results of diplomacy and conflict rather than merely reflecting global events.
Discussion
One of the media’s advantages is its ability to promote peace, educate and connect people. To raise awareness of humanitarian issues, foster empathy, and establish collaboration, diplomats, non-governmental organizations and international organizations use the media. 74% of respondents in 30 countries stated that worldwide media influenced their opinion of other countries Pew Research (2023). The UK’s “GREAT Britain” campaign and the U.S. State Department’s “ShareAmerica” campaign are examples of public diplomacy projects that use the media to promote innovation, travel and national values. Al Jazeera became a global media influencer influencing Middle Eastern narratives as a result of Qatar’s funding in the network.
Combating online dangers like deepfakes, troll farms and fake news has become a key component of modern diplomacy. On Twitter, fake news spreads six times more quickly than real news, according to MIT Media Lab (2021). These falsehoods erode confidence, increase tensions between nations, and damage credibility. In order to circumvent conventional diplomatic channels, populist politicians have taken advantage of social media. Donald Trump the president of the United States, regularly used Twitter to challenge opponents, criticise allies and announce policy decisions. By removing the press and protocol filters, this approach sometimes referred to as “twiplomacy” modifies diplomatic conventions. In times of crisis, social media also helps governments react quickly. Global leaders used social media to improve cooperation and openness during the COVID-19 epidemic by disseminating information about lockdown procedures, health updates and financial assistance.
Social media sites such as Facebook, YouTube, and TikTok use algorithms that reward interaction and frequently promote divisive or emotionally charged content. This strengthens confirmation bias and creates echo chambers. Drama, music and film exports are all effective forms of soft power. Interest in the Korean language, travel and diplomatic relations have all expanded as a result of Korean media’s success abroad, particularly following the Oscar-winning movie Parasite and the television series Squid Game. In a similar vein, Hollywood’s and British media’s worldwide influence keeps bolstering Western soft power. Media-based cultural diplomacy can promote respect for one another and lessen misconceptions. To combat hate speech and xenophobia, UNESCO programs that foster intercultural conversation include public service announcements and documentaries should be encouraged.
There is a lack of accountability when there is no worldwide regulation of the media. Tension increased during the Israel-Gaza crisis in 2021 as a result of numerous sites publishing unconfirmed allegations. In conflict areas, ethical journalism requires sensitivity, neutrality and verification. Standardizing media ethics is the goal of programs like Reporters without Borders (RSF) and the Journalism Trust Initiative (JTI). Enforcement is still uneven, though. The way the media portrays global concerns influences public opinion, which in turn influences foreign policy. Leaders in democracies frequently adjust foreign policy to reflect public opinion, which is greatly impacted by media representations. According to a Gallup International survey from 2022, 62% of participants said that media coverage alone caused them to change their attitude towards a foreign nation. This demonstrates how the media not only informs but also influences the results of public diplomacy.
Pakistani media reported the India-Pakistan crisis of 2025 with remarkable composure and responsibility, avoiding sensationalism and concentrating on confirmed facts. Rumors were kept at bay by major media sites like Dawn and Geo News, which offered measured updates and frequently gave reporters access to government information (Roul, 2025). In contrast, a number of Indian news outlets reported unsubstantiated allegations, such as that Pakistan’s military leadership had been arrested, that Islamabad had been taken and that airstrikes had been launched on Karachi. Despite being eventually shown to be untrue, these stories were extensively shared on social media and television (The Washington Post, 2025a). In addition to inflaming nationalistic feelings within India, the spreading of such false information caused fear and anxiety among people in both nations as well as throughout the world. Experts in mental health have observed that exposure to false information about war exacerbates emotional distress, anxiety and tension, particularly when people are unable to distinguish between propaganda and the truth. This circumstance highlights how critical ethical journalism is to safeguarding both diplomatic ties and the mental health of the world’s population (Choudhary, 2025).
In the realm of diplomacy, the media is both a tool and a terrain. It has increased states’ capacity to handle international affairs, spread their values and connect with audiences around the world. Yet, it also presents unprecedented risks through misinformation, polarization, and algorithmic bias.
Recommendations
Here are some recommendations for improvement
- Programs for media literacy are essential in educating citizens to reject manipulation, recognize reliable sources and critically assess content.
- Platform Accountability, social media businesses need to decrease algorithmic bias, increase transparency in content management and quickly delete offensive content.
- Diplomatic media training, to avoid blunders and improve participation, governments should provide ambassadors and officials with digital communication training.
- Ethical Journalism, when covering delicate international topics, media organizations are especially required to follow international ethical norms.
- The development of a multilateral framework that involves media organizations, UNESCO and the UN is necessary to promote responsible media practices.
- Journalists should receive training on conflict reporting, media literacy and cultural sensitivity. Media outlets should have explicit criteria for reporting on conflicts, guaranteeing accuracy, balance and impartiality.
- Encouraging the public to critically assess information and spot biases and false information is important. Regulation of social media sites is necessary to stop the spread of hate speech, false information.
- Establish a media watchdog, create a media watchdog organization to monitor and report on biased or false reporting.
- Promote investigative journalism, encourage investigative journalism, focusing on in-depth reporting and analysis of complex issues.
- Develop a code of conduct for Pakistani media outlets, ensuring accuracy, balance and fairness in reporting.
- Foster collaborations collaborate with international media outlets, promoting cross-cultural understanding and cooperation.
- Support independent media, provide financial and institutional support to independent media outlets, promoting diverse perspectives and counterbalancing biased reporting.
The media has a significant impact on public opinion, the international environment and the resolution or intensification of conflicts. It can foster world collaboration, understanding and peace when used properly. However, the population may become fearful, divided and under stress as a result of biased reporting and unmanaged misinformation. As a result, ethical media practices are crucial for safeguarding the mental and emotional health of people everywhere as well as for diplomacy.
References
Bjola, C., & Holmes, M. (2015). Digital diplomacy: Theory and practice .
Chaudhury, A. D. (2025, May 17). How Gen Z dealt with bombardment of information, fake news during India-Pak border tensions after Pahalgam attack. Mathrubhumi.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
EU DisinfoLab. (2022).Disinformation in the context of Russia-Ukraine war.
Gallup International. (2022). Global opinion trends: Role of media in diplomacy.
Gilboa, E. (2002). Global communication and foreign policy. Journal of Communication, 52(4), 731–748.
Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media.
Manor, I. (2019). The digitalization of public diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan.
McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187.
Melissen, J. (2005). The new public diplomacy: Soft power in international relations. Palgrave Macmillan.
MIT Media Lab. (2021). The spread of true and false news online.
Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. PublicAffairs.
Pew Research Center. (2023). Global attitudes about the media.
Roul, A. (2025, June 7). Missiles, misinformation, and minds: Why India must build information warfare infrastructure. Society for the Study of Peace and Conflict.
Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making.