I'm very skeptical about things

The CNN effect has basically implied that if enough media attention is paid to a topic, foreign policy will eventually form itself to address that topic because of the media’s influence. This theory then begs the question: who formulates policy, the media or the government? Hanson says, “With instantaneous media overage, the media wants a government opinion before the government officials have had any time to formulate an official position…” and, “Pressure builds for an immediate response before more complete information about the event and its context can be acquired from an array of experts and advisers.” She calls this power the “soft” power of the media in that the media has the ability to shape peoples’ perspectives about a foreign policy situation, but not necessarily “set the agenda.”

            Particularly interesting in Hanson’s War and Peace in the Information Age is her attestation that the media have greater power in shaping “peace” operations where “’vital’ interests are not involved.” Media have more power in shaping this type of agenda because “…goals and the adversary are likely to be less clear-cut and the policy will be more difficult to explain.” On the contrary, when there is strict information about a foreign policy issue, such as Hafez pointed out during the aftermath of 9/11, the media largely depend on the government to be the primary source of information and are thus in charge of getting a population to “rally around the flag.” Hafez says, “Major American television companies reached agreements with the US government not to broadcast certain materials...” and later: “Even seemingly enlightened journalists did the image of Islam a disservice by mentioning it… rather than researching the complex political and social causes [of terrorism].” Hafez later documents that, even in England, journalists that were outspoken against the following wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were labeled as “traitors.”

            What this leads me to believe is that the CNN effect is actually a two way street. During times of legitimate international or even national crises, the media depends heavily on the government to provide to the media noteworthy stories. During “peace operations,” however, of which there are (in my opinion) very few actual “peace” operations, the government depends heavily on media to push its agenda by “striking deals” as was early mentioned. I don’t really believe America went into Somalia for “peace” purposes. We’re already friendly with Kenya, how else can we make oil pipes easier to get to from the region of Sudan? Establishing a military presence in Somalia sounds like a good start (and now we have South Sudan!)