International Political Communication

By international political communication, we refer to the use of national states if communication to influence the politically relevant behavior of people in other national states, we therefore include the propaganda and information activities of most government agencies, especially the state and defense departments and certain aspects of diplomatic communication excluding the activities of the press associations and bodies which are interested principally in international education and in religious missionary activities.

Communication, refers to the transfer of meaning whether by written, spoken, pictorial symbols or by various types of action; international political communication is thus a summery term which includes many of the activities  subsumed under the terms ‘negotiation’ ‘propaganda’ ‘political warfare’ and ‘psychological warfare’. One opinion suggests that efforts to systematize different studies of international political communication have been unsuccessful to date (Boot, 1991, Pg. 6).

Crime and terrorism on the surface appear to be political issues that entail threat to public security, but crime is an intense personal experience, a more immediate danger providing a connection between societal affairs and every day life that is very dramatic while terrorism is a distant and remote threat. It is a prototypical issue that is highly mediated, which is limited to the public who are not aware of its existence. For the purpose of framing a hypothesis, differences between the two relative obtrusiveness of crime and terrorism have important implications.

Terrorism is associated with poorly understood disputes in distant locations and with conflicting ideas and attributions and responsiveness for its cause is expected to be highly responsive framing. As a result media influences on these attributions are expected to be more powerful for terrorism than crime. Public relations Image of certain nations, however right or wrong they might be, are seen to be formed through a fundamentally very complex communication process that involves varied information sources.

This process however, starts with one’s experience in very early life in school in children’s books, fairytales and other leisure literature, the theater and so on and may even include accounts by relatives, acquaintances. Radio and television transmission of international programs, news papers and magazines, cultural exchange programs, sports, books news services are the strongest image shapes since the various communication sources are responsible for the image or images of another nation or nations in all strata of population (Mongkol, 2003, pg. 3).

Public opinion is perceived as an ill – defined, immeasurable, and fluid phenomenon, being seen as a social process tied to certain objects, temporal circumstances or persons who normally come about when many people or persons take the same view of a given issue and they are aware of this sameness of view. This knowledge that others think like one does oneself is created in most cases by public statement that includes the mass media. The media The media coverage of the events of 9/11in the United States and their aftermath showed up more than ever before the difference in perspectives between the West and Asia.

The Middle Eastern media responses to the 9/11 and its aftermath in the war on terrorism are not incorrect, but also does not stress sufficiently that interactions in the Medias cape are truly global. The media coverage of the events of 9/11 in United States and their aftermath has shown us more than ever before some of the differences in perspectives between the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Arguments in political theory about the existence of open, critical debate in liberal societies in the West have to be re-examined, just like arguments about the impossibility of such debates in the rest of the world.

A fascinating illustration of this is offered by Western responses to Al-Jazeera, a satellite channel broadcast in Arabic from Qatar with a viewing audience estimated at 35 million where the leadership of Qatar does not want to interfere with the channel, which is thus free of censorship, but because of its presence in Afghanistan during the war, and even more that it was given the videotape on which Osama bin Laden clarified his political vision, Al-Jazeera gained worldwide prominence.

The  US media houses were pressurized by the government 'in the national interest' not to broadcast  Bin Laden's videotape and Qatar's ruler Shaikh Hamad Khalifa al-Thani, told reporters during a visit to Washington that he had been advised by his hosts to have the channel toned down.

And focusing the   use of the media as an instrument of warfare both in the Gulf war and in war on terror, forces us to analyze the construction of public opinion in electronic warfare, and to clarify the role of secrecy not only in terrorist operations, but also in the public sphere itself (Appadurai, pgs. 4-7). Arguments about an emergent transnational transparent public sphere have to take into account that states are still very powerful in their attempts to control information and secret intelligence and that this is no different in the West than it is in Asia.

Moreover, while the West seems largely unified in its media coverage and public debate or lack thereof, there are important differences in the Middle East and Asia. Then modern assumptions a bout the public sphere have become less useful. A growing numbers of people in the world are drastically transformed by new economic regimes and this elicits new religious responses all over the globe, enabled by the new technologies of communication.

The development of the present global media regime as a play in two acts, the first is the Cold war and the failed attempts of UNESCO and the non-aligned movement to create a new information order in which news presentations would take different perspectives into account instead of only the Western viewpoint and secondly, the act of  the new world order after the Gulf war and the collapse of the Berlin Wall, in which the old divisions of the First, Second and war on Terror are replaced by that of the West and the Rest, or North and South but this time the opposition comes from both the right and the left, united in their opposition against globalization, although on very different grounds. The digital age obviously brings something new to play in these familiar battles about the unequal flow of information, but the authors are cautious in their assessment of it in light of their discussion of war on terror controversies about media, markets, and regulation (Anderson, pgs. 197-205).