Page 79 - The CNN Effect in Action - How the News Media Pushed the West toward War ini Kosovo

1403975191ts04.qxd 19-2-07 05:07 PM Page 54
54
THE CNN EFFECT IN ACTION
content, direction, and parameters within which diplomacy functions.
But foreign policy is also dependent to some degree on diplomacy, as
information and insight from diplomats play an important role in for-
mulating policy. The following section reviews the relationships
between the CNN effect and diplomacy and the CNN effect and
foreign policy, respectively.
Diplomacy and the CNN Effect
Diplomacy dates back to the earliest interactions between ancient city-
states and empires, but it experienced its golden age from the end of
the Napoleonic Wars to the beginning of World War I. Throughout
most of this era, diplomacy was a rather secretive and autonomous
affair based on the refined skills of an elite that was trained to be
steady, meticulous, and cautious. The main goal of diplomacy is to
ensure smooth relations and diffuse potential conflict; indeed, the
term “diplomatic” has gained a wider currency for all attempts to
diffuse tense and difficult situations through skilful negotiation,
politeness, and tact. Hans J. Morgenthau and Henry Kissinger both
lamented the influence of modern communications on diplomacy,
believing that it contributed to the loss of its vitality. 39
In war, diplomacy has often been a separate sphere of interaction
free from the hostilities of the larger conflict. Under its romanticized
nineteenth-century “Concert of Europe” image, under skilled masters
such as Metternich, diplomats from warring states could be negotiat-
ing the finer points of a treaty over a beverage while their respective
soldiers slaughtered each other on the battlefield. In the context of
war, diplomacy is often the first tool in a line of options used to over-
come conflicting interests, whereas the actual fighting is the final or
default option when all attempts at diplomacy have failed.
At first consideration, the universe of instantaneous media seems to
have little in common with the world of diplomacy. After all, media
thrives on dispute and sensationalism, and its answers to viewers, given
its rather superficial nature, must be delivered rapidly and be easily
digestible. This approach is diametrically opposed to the traditional
diplomat’s world, which aims to minimize conflict and in which answers
are often complex and reached through laborious efforts. In the world
of rapid media transmission, audiences lack the patience for the research
and analysis so essential to diplomacy, and media production lacks the
luxury of time so necessary for the conduct of diplomacy. As a result,
seasoned diplomats view the media and its involvement in their domain
as a nuisance, at best, and as a basis for grave diplomatic errors, at worst.