What do you think?
Rate this book
Kill the Messenger: The Media's Role in the Fate of the World
This wide-ranging, insightful book will make readers keenly aware of the media's power, while underscoring the role that we all play in fostering a media climate that cultivates a greater sense of humanity, cooperation, and fulfillment of human potential. What role do the media have in creating the conditions for atrocities such as occurred in Rwanda? Conversely, can the media be used to preserve democracy and safeguard the human rights of all citizens in a diverse society? How will the media, now global in scope, affect the fate of the planet itself? The author explores these intriguing questions and more in this in-depth examination of the media's power to either help or harm. She begins by documenting how the media were used to spread a contagion of hate in three deadly Rwanda, Nazi Germany, and the former Yugoslavia. She then turns to areas of the world where the media acted constructively-by aiding the peace process in Northern Ireland, rebuilding democracy in Chile, bridging ethnic divides in South Africa, improving the lot of women in Senegal, and boosting transparency and democratization in Mexico and Taiwan. Finally, she explains how the media interact with psychological and cultural forces to impact perceptions, fears, peer-pressure, "groupthink," and the creation of heroes and villains.
- GenresNonfiction
389 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2011
5 people are currently reading
197 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
May 1, 2025
My son once had a school assignment to research the arguments for and against creationism. This was a highly rated public school system. The assignment was not an exercise in logic or rhetoric; this was a biology assignment. REALLY? Armoudian rightly upbraids the media for framing false debates as if they were legitimate — all in the name of balanced reporting. The case she cites to illustrate her point is media coverage of climate change research. Her examination begins with James Hansen's testimony before the Senate Natural Resources Committee in 1988. It traces efforts by the fossil fuel industry, mimicking the strategies used by the tobacco lobby. Key objectives included seeding doubt with catchphrases implying all the evidence was not yet in. Vast sums of money were spent establishing P.R. mouthpieces fronting as neutral research gathering public policy organs (e.g. The Advancement of Sound Science Center; the George C. Marshall Institute). “From 1988 through 2002, mainstream newspapers including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, and The Wall Street Journal regularly 'balanced' industry's aggressive contrarians with circumspect scientists as if industry's advocacy was equally credible to verified, established science.” (Location 5105)
Climate change is only one of the many cases Armoudian examines in order to point out the power of the media to effect both beneficial and harmful results. The harmful results are overwhelming, making this a difficult book to read. Chapters include genocide in Rwanda, anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany, genocide in Bosnia, the overthrow of the Allende government in Chile, political violence and repression in Mexico and in Taiwan. Prominent in her narrative is a familiar pattern of government seizure of media outlets, permitting monopoly ownership, censorship, bribery and violent coercion. She also examines the process of media shifts toward conflict resolution in the cases of Northern Ireland and the anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa. Here, she highlights the influence of world opinion. The process of reversal from harmful to beneficial, however, can be frustratingly slow. Female genital cutting (FGC) was the normative practice in Senegal, upheld by tradition even after widespread publication of the health risks (many permanent), and elevated mortality rate, to say nothing of the pain and psychological trauma inflicted. The NGO Tostan's educational program's first success was in 1997 when a single village repudiated the practice. Even after the government banned FGC, it was still surreptitiously widespread. After media coverage of village after village debating and renouncing the practice, a tipping point was reached ten years later. By 2009 over 4000 of some 5000 communities in Senegal had abandoned the practice.
Armoudian's substantive arguments are made in the final part of this lengthy book (Chapter 12 - “The Sounds of Silence: Groups, Societies, and Media's Role). She ties together conclusions from the cases she has presented. Even outside of authoritarian jurisdictions and active conflict zones, numerous problems confront journalistic objectivity. First, there is the profit motive. An unpopular stance, rather than changing public opinion, can trigger declines in readership, viewership, and ad revenue. Second, there is careerism. Ownership and editorial policies can lead to self-censorship. Media can choose to ignore or marginalize a story. Armoudian cautions: “Silencing always has a cost, usually perpetuating a status quo and limiting a society's knowledge and development....By robbing audiences of important knowledge and ideas that might otherwise prompt action, silencing ties the public's hands; it often prevents progress and ensures that the status quo continues.” (Location 5502)
The most radical of her ideas calls into question the whole definition of objective reporting. She suggests that journalism should be governed by humanitarian goals. Journalists should think of themselves as instruments to uplift and benefit humanity. She admits this viewpoint is idealistic. “Most professional journalists reject sucha role, believing that their job is simply to report facts accurately and objectively.” (Location 5644) However, her inquiry points out that whether consciously or unconsciously, all journalists operate within a framework. It is all too easy to drift from the stance of unbiased to a spiral of silence. Under the cover of unbiased reporting and the pressure of time and money, it is all too easy to drift from unbiased reporting to a mere repetition of press releases from the usual centers of power.
This book is aimed primarily at media practitioners. Armoudian relies mainly on secondary sources and the text is heavily footnoted with bibliographic references. It is written in the passive voice of an academic. The historical framework she has chosen for her study would have been easier to follow with some chronological tables. Nevertheless, her thoughts are relevant to the media consumer. She acknowledges the effect of the internet in expanding content but warns about the perils of over-simplification, rumor, and manipulative lies. She sounds an increasingly important alarm over the subconscious power of appeals to authority, the appearance of false consensus, stereotyping, emotional appeals, and repetition. They are the same tools honed so successfully by the advertising industry. They are effective because they exploit flaws in human reasoning: our inclination toward simplistic narratives; the reflexive impatience to get to “the bottom line”; confirmation bias; the influence of groupthink; and the permanence over time of emotional conditioning.
Messaging is a two-way street. We must insist on accurate inquisitive reporting. We must insist on accountability. Armoudian cites individual journalists who made a difference, not just the publications or organizations they worked for. She also points out the hazards these journalists faced, citing statistics on the number of journalists who were killed while pursuing their stories. She mentions the contribution of alternative media sources: independent documentaries, non-profits with a mission of quality journalism and deep analysis, and institutions such as public radio. She herself has utilized information from sources such as Propublica, Projectcensored.org, and alternet.org. Unfortunately, these sources are buried in her footnotes section without further elaboration regarding their platforms. She also asks that we demand better professional training of and ethical oversight over media practitioners. Armoudian recognizes she is asking questions more than providing answers. I read this book a few years ago and it had little impact on me. In today's political context, however, I find the issues Armoudian raises to be urgent.
NOTES:
http://insider.thomsonreuters.co.nz/2... Describes a lecture by the author. Click on the link https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/assets/hum...
to hear her 15 minute radio interview
Interview with the author broadcast on Sept. 15, 2011 https://davidpakman.com/interviews/ma...
Climate change is only one of the many cases Armoudian examines in order to point out the power of the media to effect both beneficial and harmful results. The harmful results are overwhelming, making this a difficult book to read. Chapters include genocide in Rwanda, anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany, genocide in Bosnia, the overthrow of the Allende government in Chile, political violence and repression in Mexico and in Taiwan. Prominent in her narrative is a familiar pattern of government seizure of media outlets, permitting monopoly ownership, censorship, bribery and violent coercion. She also examines the process of media shifts toward conflict resolution in the cases of Northern Ireland and the anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa. Here, she highlights the influence of world opinion. The process of reversal from harmful to beneficial, however, can be frustratingly slow. Female genital cutting (FGC) was the normative practice in Senegal, upheld by tradition even after widespread publication of the health risks (many permanent), and elevated mortality rate, to say nothing of the pain and psychological trauma inflicted. The NGO Tostan's educational program's first success was in 1997 when a single village repudiated the practice. Even after the government banned FGC, it was still surreptitiously widespread. After media coverage of village after village debating and renouncing the practice, a tipping point was reached ten years later. By 2009 over 4000 of some 5000 communities in Senegal had abandoned the practice.
Armoudian's substantive arguments are made in the final part of this lengthy book (Chapter 12 - “The Sounds of Silence: Groups, Societies, and Media's Role). She ties together conclusions from the cases she has presented. Even outside of authoritarian jurisdictions and active conflict zones, numerous problems confront journalistic objectivity. First, there is the profit motive. An unpopular stance, rather than changing public opinion, can trigger declines in readership, viewership, and ad revenue. Second, there is careerism. Ownership and editorial policies can lead to self-censorship. Media can choose to ignore or marginalize a story. Armoudian cautions: “Silencing always has a cost, usually perpetuating a status quo and limiting a society's knowledge and development....By robbing audiences of important knowledge and ideas that might otherwise prompt action, silencing ties the public's hands; it often prevents progress and ensures that the status quo continues.” (Location 5502)
The most radical of her ideas calls into question the whole definition of objective reporting. She suggests that journalism should be governed by humanitarian goals. Journalists should think of themselves as instruments to uplift and benefit humanity. She admits this viewpoint is idealistic. “Most professional journalists reject sucha role, believing that their job is simply to report facts accurately and objectively.” (Location 5644) However, her inquiry points out that whether consciously or unconsciously, all journalists operate within a framework. It is all too easy to drift from the stance of unbiased to a spiral of silence. Under the cover of unbiased reporting and the pressure of time and money, it is all too easy to drift from unbiased reporting to a mere repetition of press releases from the usual centers of power.
This book is aimed primarily at media practitioners. Armoudian relies mainly on secondary sources and the text is heavily footnoted with bibliographic references. It is written in the passive voice of an academic. The historical framework she has chosen for her study would have been easier to follow with some chronological tables. Nevertheless, her thoughts are relevant to the media consumer. She acknowledges the effect of the internet in expanding content but warns about the perils of over-simplification, rumor, and manipulative lies. She sounds an increasingly important alarm over the subconscious power of appeals to authority, the appearance of false consensus, stereotyping, emotional appeals, and repetition. They are the same tools honed so successfully by the advertising industry. They are effective because they exploit flaws in human reasoning: our inclination toward simplistic narratives; the reflexive impatience to get to “the bottom line”; confirmation bias; the influence of groupthink; and the permanence over time of emotional conditioning.
Messaging is a two-way street. We must insist on accurate inquisitive reporting. We must insist on accountability. Armoudian cites individual journalists who made a difference, not just the publications or organizations they worked for. She also points out the hazards these journalists faced, citing statistics on the number of journalists who were killed while pursuing their stories. She mentions the contribution of alternative media sources: independent documentaries, non-profits with a mission of quality journalism and deep analysis, and institutions such as public radio. She herself has utilized information from sources such as Propublica, Projectcensored.org, and alternet.org. Unfortunately, these sources are buried in her footnotes section without further elaboration regarding their platforms. She also asks that we demand better professional training of and ethical oversight over media practitioners. Armoudian recognizes she is asking questions more than providing answers. I read this book a few years ago and it had little impact on me. In today's political context, however, I find the issues Armoudian raises to be urgent.
NOTES:
http://insider.thomsonreuters.co.nz/2... Describes a lecture by the author. Click on the link https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/assets/hum...
to hear her 15 minute radio interview
Interview with the author broadcast on Sept. 15, 2011 https://davidpakman.com/interviews/ma...
May 10, 2012
This book changed my life in so many ways. I cried as I learned people's struggles all over the world and felt both despair and hopeful as I learned how important people's fundamental understandings are about politics and "the other". The world's fate is embedded in this. And the role media play in helping us to understand--or misunderstand-- is so very important. It took me roughly a year to finish writing it but I think I'm a better person from the process. I hope you will let me know your thoughts.
April 6, 2017
Mass Media, Genocide, and the Fate of the World
The emergence of mass society was one of the defining characteristics of the 20th Century. Enabled by population growth, industrialization, urbanization, rising rates of literacy, and advances in transportation and communications, mass society became a reality for growing numbers of people in more and more far-flung regions of the planet as the century unfolded. In turn, mass society facilitated the growth of Communism, Fascism, and other varieties of authoritarianism. Among the less extreme effects of this new phenomenon in human affairs were the advent of “public opinion,” the globalization of fashion, and the rapid development of important new industries such as advertising, public relations, and broadcast journalism. The “mass communications” we have taken for granted for so many years now were, properly speaking, an artifact of the 20th Century.
In Kill the Messenger, political scientist and radio broadcaster Maria Armoudian ably examines the central role of mass media in human affairs over the course of the century. Through brief case studies of events in Nazi Germany, Rwanda, and the former states of Yugoslavia, she explores the influential — and perhaps essential — function of the media as an enabler of genocide. Armoudian shows how authoritarian regimes in South Africa, Chile, Taiwan, and Burundi made similar efforts to harness the media to help promote the murder, torture, and imprisonment of their own citizens but with much more mixed results. In South Africa, for example, she reveals how new attitudes in the news media helped bring about a largely peaceful conclusion to the era of apartheid. However, Kill the Messenger is about mass media’s place in society, not just its relationship with governments. Armoudian’s examination of public opinion about climate change demonstrates the huge impact of relatively minor investments in media by Exxon Mobil, the Koch Brothers, and other naysayers.
Armoudian puts to work the linguistic concept of “framing” throughout the book, showing, for example, how climate change deniers managed to persuade the mass media to present the issue as open to debate. This frame (“debate”) has dominated coverage not just on Fox News but on most other television and radio networks as well. Similarly, frames (“blaming” and “heroes-versus-villains”) dominated news coverage in countries where genocide became generally accepted.
Kill the Messenger is an important book because it squeezes between two covers a collection of observations and insights about many of the seminal events of the 20th Century, rendering the history of mass society understandable through the lens of mass media. However, it remains to be seen how much longer Armoudian’s analysis will help illuminate events in the future. The emergence of new communications technologies revolving about the Internet may have thrown a monkey wrench into the phenomenon of mass media. It’s far too early to tell.
This fascinating book would have benefitted from a better publisher than Prometheus Books. The text is rife with glaring typos that even a cursory proofreading would have caught. The cover art is uninviting, an unfortunate sign that Prometheus Books either doesn’t know or doesn’t care how to market a book of this significance.
(From www.malwarwickonbooks.com)
The emergence of mass society was one of the defining characteristics of the 20th Century. Enabled by population growth, industrialization, urbanization, rising rates of literacy, and advances in transportation and communications, mass society became a reality for growing numbers of people in more and more far-flung regions of the planet as the century unfolded. In turn, mass society facilitated the growth of Communism, Fascism, and other varieties of authoritarianism. Among the less extreme effects of this new phenomenon in human affairs were the advent of “public opinion,” the globalization of fashion, and the rapid development of important new industries such as advertising, public relations, and broadcast journalism. The “mass communications” we have taken for granted for so many years now were, properly speaking, an artifact of the 20th Century.
In Kill the Messenger, political scientist and radio broadcaster Maria Armoudian ably examines the central role of mass media in human affairs over the course of the century. Through brief case studies of events in Nazi Germany, Rwanda, and the former states of Yugoslavia, she explores the influential — and perhaps essential — function of the media as an enabler of genocide. Armoudian shows how authoritarian regimes in South Africa, Chile, Taiwan, and Burundi made similar efforts to harness the media to help promote the murder, torture, and imprisonment of their own citizens but with much more mixed results. In South Africa, for example, she reveals how new attitudes in the news media helped bring about a largely peaceful conclusion to the era of apartheid. However, Kill the Messenger is about mass media’s place in society, not just its relationship with governments. Armoudian’s examination of public opinion about climate change demonstrates the huge impact of relatively minor investments in media by Exxon Mobil, the Koch Brothers, and other naysayers.
Armoudian puts to work the linguistic concept of “framing” throughout the book, showing, for example, how climate change deniers managed to persuade the mass media to present the issue as open to debate. This frame (“debate”) has dominated coverage not just on Fox News but on most other television and radio networks as well. Similarly, frames (“blaming” and “heroes-versus-villains”) dominated news coverage in countries where genocide became generally accepted.
Kill the Messenger is an important book because it squeezes between two covers a collection of observations and insights about many of the seminal events of the 20th Century, rendering the history of mass society understandable through the lens of mass media. However, it remains to be seen how much longer Armoudian’s analysis will help illuminate events in the future. The emergence of new communications technologies revolving about the Internet may have thrown a monkey wrench into the phenomenon of mass media. It’s far too early to tell.
This fascinating book would have benefitted from a better publisher than Prometheus Books. The text is rife with glaring typos that even a cursory proofreading would have caught. The cover art is uninviting, an unfortunate sign that Prometheus Books either doesn’t know or doesn’t care how to market a book of this significance.
(From www.malwarwickonbooks.com)
December 1, 2015
Ever since the concept of media was invented, it has served humanity well and has also been a tool for inciting and justifying our worst examples of social injustice. For a thorough insight into both the good and the bad, I highly recommend “Kill the Messenger: The Media’s Role in the Fate of the world” by Maria Armoudian.
On the negative side, as governments and those who plot to take over governments begin their media onslaught, it is horrifying to see how easily entire populations are persuaded to hate specific groups of people to the extent that they either stand by as those victims are destroyed, or participate willingly in their destruction. Armoudian’s research meticulously reveals how this occurred in numerous ways around the world including in Nazi Germany; Pinochet’s Chile; against the Tutsis in Rwanda; and the Armenians in Turkey (a hundred years later the Turkish government hires U.S. pr firms to successfully manipulate our politicians to not use the word “genocide” after their armies slaughtered a million and a half Armenians twenty-five years before Hitler began to implement his Final Solution).
Closer to home, the author shares how the oil industry followed the lead of the tobacco industry, protecting their financial interests by using fake media to convince real media to sow seeds of doubt about the existence and relevance of climate change. Thanks to the same methods, using media to disseminate lies and half truths, 14% of the American public truly believes that our President is the anti-Christ.
Armoudian also presents the positive power of journalism as a means for awakening the public to confront oppression, share new ideas and, as in the efforts of those who worked to end the 4,000 year old practice of female genital mutilation, awaken groups of people to reconsider and take action against cultural traditions that cause harm to them and their children. A particularly compelling chapter describes how a world wide media campaign that included music from some of the world’s greatest entertainers helped bring about a peaceful end to apartheid in South Africa. Less well known here in the West but equally valid is Armoudian’s reporting about Rwanda’s neighbor, Burundi, in which a positive media campaign thwarted the efforts of aggressors to embark on another genocide.
There are many more examples of tragedy and redemption, including Mexico, Taiwan and Bosnia; many of the examples of the atrocities are difficult to read as they reveal how specifically people are moved and manipulated into committing great violence upon their neighbors. Armoudian’s artful blending of journalism’s valor and strength, and the ways it has been corrupted with gruesome consequences provides the reader with a comprehensive understanding of how media has shaped history and continues, with the modern tools of social media, to affect our lives through its influence upon elections, governments and people. As Armoudian writes in her preface, now, more than ever, it is vital to create, empower and support responsible media that educate, explain, and elevate, and to discard those approaches that merely blame, deprecate and divide.”
On the negative side, as governments and those who plot to take over governments begin their media onslaught, it is horrifying to see how easily entire populations are persuaded to hate specific groups of people to the extent that they either stand by as those victims are destroyed, or participate willingly in their destruction. Armoudian’s research meticulously reveals how this occurred in numerous ways around the world including in Nazi Germany; Pinochet’s Chile; against the Tutsis in Rwanda; and the Armenians in Turkey (a hundred years later the Turkish government hires U.S. pr firms to successfully manipulate our politicians to not use the word “genocide” after their armies slaughtered a million and a half Armenians twenty-five years before Hitler began to implement his Final Solution).
Closer to home, the author shares how the oil industry followed the lead of the tobacco industry, protecting their financial interests by using fake media to convince real media to sow seeds of doubt about the existence and relevance of climate change. Thanks to the same methods, using media to disseminate lies and half truths, 14% of the American public truly believes that our President is the anti-Christ.
Armoudian also presents the positive power of journalism as a means for awakening the public to confront oppression, share new ideas and, as in the efforts of those who worked to end the 4,000 year old practice of female genital mutilation, awaken groups of people to reconsider and take action against cultural traditions that cause harm to them and their children. A particularly compelling chapter describes how a world wide media campaign that included music from some of the world’s greatest entertainers helped bring about a peaceful end to apartheid in South Africa. Less well known here in the West but equally valid is Armoudian’s reporting about Rwanda’s neighbor, Burundi, in which a positive media campaign thwarted the efforts of aggressors to embark on another genocide.
There are many more examples of tragedy and redemption, including Mexico, Taiwan and Bosnia; many of the examples of the atrocities are difficult to read as they reveal how specifically people are moved and manipulated into committing great violence upon their neighbors. Armoudian’s artful blending of journalism’s valor and strength, and the ways it has been corrupted with gruesome consequences provides the reader with a comprehensive understanding of how media has shaped history and continues, with the modern tools of social media, to affect our lives through its influence upon elections, governments and people. As Armoudian writes in her preface, now, more than ever, it is vital to create, empower and support responsible media that educate, explain, and elevate, and to discard those approaches that merely blame, deprecate and divide.”
November 26, 2012
Brilliant, makes me long for the days when the news wasn't about making money.
October 7, 2024
Read this book for university dissertation, but what a extremely sad book😭
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews