These three examples have made it clear that the Western media monolith has failed to account for an increasingly perceptive and critical audience in the non-Western world, and remains tied to the narrative that the West is Best.
If its divisive trajectory continues, Western media will not only lose its following in the non-Western world on foreign affairs and news reporting, it will also stagnate. It refuses to acknowledge that many new non-Western publications with high-quality reporting and analyses are growing, and their traditional reader base now has more options. Western media is even losing trust at home: just 34 per cent of Britons say they trust the news they read, while 38 per cent of Americans have “no trust at all” in the news.
Diversity and taking responsibility
So how can Western media organisations improve their standing? Three suggestions come to mind.
First, they should focus on offering diversity of opinions and thinking. Media establishments in the West rarely allow for opinions that are not aligned with their own, even from experts native to the very regions they pontificate about. Western media firms should recognise that they are increasingly being constrained by ideological shackles that fly in the face of their proudly proclaimed “free press”. The fourth estate claims to speak truth to power, yet Western media often appears as a mouthpiece for the same dogmas that are used to justify the West’s self-declared position of authority over others.
Diversity of opinions will help create more vibrant, balanced and engaging discussions for readers across the world. If they want to grow and stay relevant, media boards need to stop seeing their average reader as a white person from the West who simply wants to be reassured that the West is superior and will continue to lead the world.
Next, they can be more self-reflective when reporting on others. This is a moral responsibility. By understanding how others perceive the West, commentators will be better able to opine on foreign issues in a way that is relatable to both Western and non-Western audiences. This means relying less on parachute journalism via foreign correspondents, or, worse, rewarding people for being vindictively critical of events and people in non-Western nations.
Critique is essential, but without being constructive it can quickly cause damage. An Asian business or government has no way to correct the harm done by poorly analysed Western commentaries prejudicial to their interests. Any attempt to do so is seen as an attack on the free press, while the Western journalist is transformed into a freedom fighter for the cause of the oppressed.
Lastly, when discussing the global media, there are a very small number of organisations: media consolidation and the decimation of smaller and local media outlets mean that more and more of the press is dominated by a few giant outlets, most of which are Western. Thus, Western media should confront the reality and moral dilemma of balancing the need to inform and to maximise profits without causing harm.
The 24-hour news cycle, along with the drive to be the first to break the news, has led to sensationalist reporting. The media has an obligation to not only pander to the demands of the public but to shape public discourse in a responsible manner.
Western media still has the potential to rebuild legitimacy and credibility with its non-Western audience to maintain a healthy readership, and can forge a better understanding between various regions of the world. It is past due for Western media to shake off condescension and ideological shackles and return to its primary objective as the fourth estate.
--
Chandran Nair is the founder of the Global Institute for Tomorrow and ExCom member of the Club of Rome. He is also the author of Dismantling Global White Privilege: Equity for a Post-Western World.