With the advancement of the internet in the field of personal connectivity, the fabrication of fake news took shape, especially those that have a political-military character. Like this, imperialism's quest to conquer new markets began to use fictional journalism, but with all the realistic guise for the production of ânewsâ that can benefit the central countries in their intention to dominate other peoples. This project, which today is treated as another military means of action, has been called âwar journalismâ.
âWar journalismâ has the tactic of showing long reports about the âtargetâ, alternating several comments on the subject in different programs and times at the first moment. A second phase is often used, where short, impactful news is used to remind the subject, now in a worse perspective, as if there was a worsening of the situation. In this sense, a version is created first I don't take from “post-truth” of events, through the insistent repetition of some âkey pointsâ (freedom, democracy, respect, with him, order, peace and etc.). Most of the time, disconnected and empty words and expressions regarding the subject listed, but that demonstrate that the âtargetâ insistently contradicts them.
When it comes to âwar journalismâ in geopolitics, imperialism uses it in the international context against some countries in particular, for different reasons and interests: Russia, China, Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba, Syria, Iran and Palestine are treated by the media conglomerate as enemies of peace and democracy, universally sacred concepts, but empty without proper historical contextualization. Ignoring this assumption, âWar Journalismâ, treats these countries daily as enemies of humanity and world peace from fake news.
By defining this group of countries as “enemies”, Washington (USA/NATO) and Brussels (EU) started to use their own language in journalistic articles concerning the same. For âwar journalismâ none of them have a government, but “regimes”, their heads of state are not presidents or ministers, are “dictators”, the elections that consecrate them are always questioned as being false or rigged. Their governments are constantly treated as violators of human rights, their economies are reported as decadent and their people are always seen as victims of âtyranniesâ. The curious thing is that the media that manufacture these news, most of the time they do not have correspondents in these countries and they report from distant or rival places, demonstrating blatant partiality in not allowing the state version of the accused to be released.
âWar journalismâ is the counterpart in the strategic area of ââinformation and counter-information of the military operative of the imperialist countries. Journalism for being war, operates for the purpose of capturing and destroying the truth, without the possibility of negotiation on the part of the adversary or the historical truth. In this sense, the âWashington Consensusâ has drawn up guidelines and roadmaps that the media conglomerates that are at your service must follow. This is how âWar Journalismâ was born., using all kinds of means; produces attacks from falsifications of the conjuncture and manipulation of reality, against everything that is not in the Western-capitalist pattern, that is, the dogmatic imposition of the âwhite, capitalist, liberal and Judeo-Christianâ. These are the basic points of culture that guide âwar journalismâ, outside this context becomes âtargetâ.
âWar journalismâ ignores public space, plural and contradictory, having as its slogan the defense of the private and the market, operates backed by the interests of big capital within the geopolitical sphere defined by Washington (USA/NATO) and Brussels (EU). as a strategy, only covers events and facts that can be described from the perspective of âmetatruthâ. This is, work on the selective choice of âinformationâ, obeys the feasibility of completely ignoring the reality principle, neutralizing the possibility of criticism. What is massively promulgated is a kind of âabsolute truthâ (metatruth), produced in the context of war. Each and every discourse outside of this axis is labeled the âotherâ, the âenemyâ or the âfalseâ.
Not allowing the contradictory and imposing its version of the facts, âwar journalismâ artificially produces a âtruthâ without empirical basis. These âtruthsâ fabricated by âwar journalismâ are produced in a staggered fashion., aiming at social penetration in a differentiated way, obeying the age and social class of individuals in the target country, which has its main public in the young sectors of the urban middle class. The effects to be achieved within society range from hysterical radicalism to lethargic indifference.. As radicalism reached, âwar journalismâ activates the mechanisms of news production that point to an immediate solution in its political field. Since indifference is the result, the tactic is to continue with the saturation news subliminally, producing the wear and tear and discredit of the âtargetâ.
The massification of âmeta-truthâ annuls the empiricism of journalism and starts to work with post-truth. Ceases in the context of information warfare, any possibility of investigative journalism. The reporter is transformed into an automaton that repeats the agenda given to him as a direct order.. Another aspect of âWar Journalismâ is the transformation of the journalist into an âomniscientâ being., since his discretion of the facts starts to dispense with the support of scientists, experts and even eyewitnesses of the facts. This journalist or reporter exercises typical opinionated journalism, following a pre-conceived roadmap, not by a journalistic core, but by an administrative/financial core.
The peculiar characteristic of âwar journalismâ is the militarization of journalistic writing., where matter is built from top to bottom, meeting the demands of imperialist sponsors and interests. This hierarchy does not allow space for the investigative transit of journalism, much less to the natural confrontation of the contradicted. The matter arrives ready (lined) for the journalist to insert in it a language suitable for the target audience. Always using catchphrases, mixed with strong images, colorful and multiple. The agenda of âwar journalismâ involves social dramas, discussed from a supposedly neutral field. The appealing and boastful tone is used to cause instant commotion and avoid contrary reflections..
âWar journalismâ was born to win hearts and minds, the central objective is the maintenance of the imperialist objectives of the countries that make up NATO, in order to maintain âpublic opinionâ (medium and urban sectors) caught in a process of alienation, consumerism and passivity, in addition to defeatism and constant disbelief in public affairs and collective organization. This domination also aims to conquer society through the imposition of standards based on psychological assumptions., produced by the âwar mediaâ, in order to remove the critical sense from the social field, political and economic, always betting on fatalism and catharsis.
War journalism manufactures the truth that will be told by the vanquished.
