Agenda setting, or the influence of the media on what individuals see and therefore what they believe to be important (or the truth), has become more prevalent than ever in this age of information. With the addition of social media and thus many different accessible and constant streams of information, what we see is what defines our beliefs and directs our focus as a whole. A modern issue that directly showcases the effects of such agenda setting is the Ukraine-Russia Conflict, and the discrepancies we see between media sources of foreign nations and our own.
When one looks at a source like The New York Times, the second article on the main page is “Fire and Fear in South Ukraine,” a first-hand account from New York Times photographers and journalists who are following Ukrainian firefighters amidst the conflict. The article closely follows the destruction Russia has inflicted, interviewing victims and painting a devastating picture of the war’s effects through intense, emotionally stirring images. By having this article be one of the first things New York Times readers see, it keeps the conflict at the forefront of their minds and causes them to believe it holds more importance in their daily lives than it actually does – except in special circumstances, most people aren’t personally affected by the conflict and the only consequence they might face is slightly worsened economic conditions.
At the same time, TASS (one of the most popular Russian media outlets) has a vastly different look – the main page is full of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s triumphs and benefits that it is bringing to the Eurasian people, therefore setting the agenda that these benefits are the most important thing Russian citizens should be focused on. Only if one scrolls down far enough, or heads into the politics tab, is the Ukraine conflict even mentioned – even then, the perspective is pro-Russian one like the article “Russia to do everything to end the conflict in Ukraine as soon as possible, Putin assures Modi” or “Putin warns the West of ‘economic egoism’, offers real food aid to emerging economies” (in regards to the sanctions imposed on Russia amidst the conflict). There is of course no mention of the tragedy befalling Ukrainian civilians, and Russia is the one uncontestably in the right.
The agenda has been set on both sides – with the U.S., the focus is put on the suffering of the Ukrainians, with Russia, the focus is put on how great everything is and the evils of nations interfering in the conflict. The citizens of the respective countries are the ones subsequently being influenced to their respective beliefs, and unless they attempt to view sources outside of their own country (resulting in cognitive dissonance, which most will not willingly choose to do) what they perceive as the truth is what they are being fed by the media.
One can only wonder – if everyone from every nation saw factual, unbiased, and balanced amounts of news, would there still be this level of conflict today?
Sources:
Berehulak, Daniel, and Michael Schwirtz. “Fire and Fear in South Ukraine.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 16 Sept. 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/16/world/europe/mykolaiv-ukraine-firefighters-russia.html.
“Putin Warns West against ‘Economic Egoism’, Offers Real Food Aid to Emerging Economies.” TASS, https://tass.com/politics/1508589.
“Russia to Do Everything to End Conflict in Ukraine as Soon as Possible, Putin Assures Modi.” TASS, https://tass.com/russia/1508771.
This is an excellent example of agenda setting. You made a good point about how the media pushes out information, and the articles people tend to read are the first ones that pop up, leading the reader or viewer to believe it’s more important to them than it actually is. The topic of the media on both sides of the war and how the United States views it compared to how Russia views it works very well in explaining agenda setting because the media has created agendas in these two countries and created two sides with opposing viewpoints.