THE ROLE OF NATIONAL MASS MEDIA IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

THE ROLE OF NATIONAL MASS MEDIA IN INTERNATIONAL

POLITICS

Introduction

Mass media is often likened to the sun, providing light that illuminates the world, or

conveying messages that penetrate into the hearts of mankind, to provide enlightenment. That

way the mass media seems to have a position outside of people's lives. Mass media is seen as

having advantages that cause it to be able to influence the minds of the audience, which in

turn will change the lives of the people society (Siregar, 2000:171).

This view is not necessarily an empirical conclusion, because it is too mixed with

expectations, this kind of belief is presumably what causes the authorities in various fascist or

communist countries to demand too much of the mass media, as well as being very repressive

when the mass media are deemed not in line with the will of the state authorities. The concept

of press or development journalism, and the principle of licensing that run by the

government, is a logical consequence of this view or a society that is so afraid of mass media

content that is considered to be damaging to citizens, that it wants the mass media to become

an extension of the preaching pulpit (Siregar, 2000: 171).

On the other hand, the independence and objectivity of the news (for example) is a

mecca for the media that is never straight, this misalignment is certainly caused by news

offerings that are in accordance with the ideological war and political economic interests of

the media. Meanwhile, the study of media content cannot be separated from the interpretative

framework containing the concept of the public sphere (space / public area) put forward by

Habermas, the media occupies a central position that functions to supply and disseminate

information needed for determining attitudes, and facilitate the formation of public opinion,

by placing itself as an independent forum where issues of public concern can be debated. In

the public sphere view, what is more important is intermedia objectivity, not just intramedia

objectivity. Intermedia objectivity is defined as the mass media's objective assessment and

construction of reality, especially the construction by journalists. Intramedia objectivity is

interpreted as the objectivity of the media from the influences of media owners, rulers, and

others. In essence, it is difficult to expect that every media in making news can be objective

and impartial (Sudibyo, 2001: viii).

If it is related to international politics, it can be said that the media and international

politics are two inseparable entities in modern life, both of which share a role in determining

the direction of changes in society. This relationship is influenced by the large role of mass

media in determining the degree of harmony in the international world, both in bilateral and

multilateral relations in the arena of international politics through political discourse

published to the public. For international politics, media activities play a role in reporting and

telling political events, then these events are conveyed to the public, and then the public or

the public will interpret the news texts presented in the media.

State policies and in- ternational world issues are presented by the mass media through

political news, so that they have a huge influence on citizens in various fields. This dynamic

makes the mass media through the content of the news that appears, has several elements to

be known, including elements of tension, conflicts of interest, dramatic aspects in every event

involving various policies and issues that arise. Such aspects are enough for the mass media

to make it a journalistic report. The political figures involved are those who are categorized

as important officials or people who play an important role in a country (Wahyuni, 2006: 11)

so that they are worthy of being news.

This relationship creates an international political system carried out by diplomatic

officials (including a country's foreign policy) with the mass media influencing each other,

this can be seen from several things marked in the form of a country's political policy, in

determining the pattern of mass media operations in that country, ranging from ownership,

content display, to supervision. The communication revolution carried out by the mass media

makes its positioning important, because the mass media is a bridge to convey messages that

can function power, while officials provide information to the press to be conveyed to the

public.

In the context of mutual influence, of course the mass media has a role in shaping

international society, even further, the mass media participates in making political changes at

the international level. For this reason, this study was made to present The role of mass media

at the level of international relations, especially the United States national mass media.

Discussion

Mass Media-International Politics Relationship

The media in this context is not only a source of political information, but also often a

trigger for political change. In general, the mass media has certain tendencies in covering

international political events. In this position, the mass media is then placed as the fourth

estate in the order of social and political life. The media functions as a controller as well as

social control for public interests.

According to Muhtadi's view (1999: 48), the mass media is one of the social forces that

carry out social control freely and responsibly, both towards society and towards other socio-

political forces. The effectiveness of its influence can be seen from historical facts, which

imply a significant change in political behavior as a result of mass media exposure. The

collapse of the New Order in United States and the victory of Barack Obama in the

presidential election in the United States are evidence of political change that cannot be

separated from the socio-political role played by the mass media.

Graber (1984: 222) states that there are at least four functions of the mass media for

states or international powers, namely: First, the mass media provides the latest information

about various political events that are developing in society and is used as one of the

considerations for the state in making its policies. Second, the mass media provides social

awareness space for the state to further read public opinion that develops in society. Third,

the mass media also provides It facilitates the state to be able to convey messages to political

power and the general public, both inside and outside the government. Fourth, mass media

provides opportunities for state administrators to maintain the continuity of their power in the

midst of their role.

According to Harsono Suwardi (2004: xv- xvi), there are many aspects of the media that

make it important in political life, first, its very broad range (cover- age) in disseminating

public information, which is able to cross regional boundaries (geographical), age groups,

gender, socio-economic-status (de- mographic), differences in understanding and orientation

(psychographic); that way a mediated political problem becomes a common concern in

various places and circles;

Second, the extraordinary ability to multiply messages (multiplier of massage); a

political event can be multiplied according to the number of printed newspapers, tabloids and

magazines and can also be repeated broadcast as needed. As a result, the multiplication has a

huge impact on the audience.

Third, each mass media can portray a political event according to its own views; its

editorial policy determines the appearance of the content of the political events that are given,

it is precisely because of this ability that it is much targeted by those who are in use and

conversely shunned by those who do not like it;

Fourth, of course, with its agenda-setting function, the media has a very wide (even

almost unlimited) opportunity to report on political events. In accordance with their

respective policies, each political event can be broadcast or not broadcast, which is clearly

not necessarily political news that becomes their agenda is also the public agenda;

Fifth, the coverage of political events by one media is usually related to other media to

form a chain information (media as a link in other chains). This adds its own strength to the

dissemination of political information and its impact on the public, with this aspect the

stronger the role of the media in shaping public opinion.

Another view states that, in modern countries, the relationship between the mass media

and the political system is highly dependent on political culture, including ideology and

political communication. Both the mass media and the political system are inseparable from

the interests and tendencies or alignments to a good value rooted in culture. This is in line

with Smythe's opinion, regarding the existence of a di- alectic relationship between the

practice of mass-media communication and socio-political construction in society (Wahyuni,

2000: 198).

The point is that there are actually two models of power relations with the state in the

media, namely, first, the domination model carried out in authoritarian countries, where the

media is used openly as a tool of instruction, memory and direct control.Second, the

pluralism model run by liberal democratic countries, where the mass media is freer to express

itself, because the state does not interfere too much in media affairs.

Such conditions make the role of the media in reporting political discourse can be seen

as a political messenger, as Hennessy (1975: 1) states that the mass media as a political

communication channel that contains news about diplomatic visits, as well as policies made,

making this a process of packaging messages that attract attention at the national and inter-

national levels. The mass media has its own power in influencing the political system, so the

relationship between the two is usually characterized by (Hamad, 2004: 7-8):

First, the shape and political policies of a country determine the pattern of mass media

operations in that country, from ownership, content display, to supervision. How dominant is

the political system (government) influences the media system, so this condition encourages

people to conclude that the prevailing media system in a country is a reflection of the

country's political system (regime);

Secondly, mass media is often a medium of political communication, especially for

rulers, the journalistic tradition began with the interest of kings in disseminating their royal

edicts, and in subsequent times, every power was always in contact with the mass media for

political purposes. In the modern political world, the media has even become a necessity, also

for various purposes. Every political force uses the mass media as much as possible to further

its political goals. In this second type of relationship, the mass media is not always

determined by the political system (regime), but depends on the distribution of power (power

sharing) that occurs in the country, in a country where every social group has the same

opportunity to access the media, then the mass media can become a political communication

channel to influence the political system (regime).

The relationship between the international political system (including a country's foreign

policy) and the mass media is mutual influence, that the mass media is a subsystem of the

political system that was born from a certain political history, but the mass media has its own

power in influencing the political system, so that the relationship between the two can be

characterized by several things, namely:

One, the shape and political policies of a country determine the pattern of mass media

operations in that country, from ownership, content display, to supervision. So dominant is

the political system influencing the media system, that this condition encourages people to

conclude that the mass media system prevailing in a country is a reflection of the country's

political system (regime) (Denis McQuails, 1996: 121-153). Two, the mass media is often a

medium of political communication, especially by the ruling, juristic tradition nalistic started

with the kings' interest in disseminating edicts of power. In the following period, every

political power used mass media as much as possible to launch its political activities.

This process can be seen in various ways, such as one; the role of the mass media treats

political life, including government activities and dynamics in its coverage. Two, the role of

the national mass media in the international arena is to cover the interaction of countries in

the international arena, for example American, European, Asian politics, in assessing

international democracy. The involvement of a country in various inter-national forums,

multilateral relations, and bilateral between one country and another, is able to provide

support, criticism, and even be neutral, such as the coverage of the New York Times, The

Jakarta Post, Kompas, Media United States and other mass media on diplomatic visits by

state officials visiting United States.

According to Jay Rosen, head of the journalism department at New York University,

there are several relations between the media and politics: One, the media can become a

public space for political interaction, influencing the formation of political communication

systems among the public, character building and political agendas take place openly. Two,

the media is not only a mirror of political life, but generates political reality, constructs

political re- ality as something that is complex and invites public re- spon enthusiasm.

Three, the media's construction of the reality of the political world will positively

strengthen the commitment to achieving ideal political goals of political parties or politicians

and sharp public control over the process. Unfortunately, Meyer's illustration of the

relationship between the media and politics is too idealized and suffers from many cultural

and structural constraints when implemented. While Bill Kovach says journalism and

democracy grow together, democracy will not exist without good political journalism, gossip,

rumors, journalism mixed with entertainment, or journalism that becomes political

propaganda will poison it (Masduki, 2004: 77).

On the other hand, Murdock and Gold- ing (1989:183-184) see three types of

relationship between communication and citizenship: One, people must have access to

information, advice and analysis that enables them to know their rights in other spaces and

enables them to achieve these rights effectively. Two, they must have access to the widest

possible range or scope of information, interpretation and debate on areas involving political

choice and they must be able to use communication facilities in an attempt to critique,

mobilize opposition and offer alternative courses of action. Three, they must be able to

recognize themselves and their aspirations in the various representations offered in the

important communications sector and be able to summarize the development of these

representations.

The next development is the strengthening of modern era political communication, that

in the perspective of democratic political communication, the mass media in its function as

political infrastructure acts as a medium of political communication. The performance of the

media as a medium of political communication clearly requires the standard quality of the

journalism group behind the mass media. Especially through political news written by this

group of journalists, it is hoped that a political education process will occur for the

community, so that they are ready to welcome the aspired democracy. In essence, the mass

media in the political communication of a democratic country must ensure the realization of a

diversity of opinions on issues of public interest. From the perspective of democratic political

communication, we will see the opportunities and obstacles for the United States media to

realize itself as part of the political infrastructure (Wahyuni, 2000: 201).

The description above shows the relationship between mass media and inter-national

political communication, namely: One, that the mass media was born from the womb of

national politics, so it is natural that the representation of the mass media is related to the

existence of the country where the mass media was born, for example the birth of various

media that reflect the place of birth such as: New York Times, Washing-ton Post, Media

United States, and more extreme was born the term "Press Pancasila" in United States, so that

in the international arena that the mass media is a representation of the state that fights for the

national interests of the country, so that in diplomatic relations or news of diplomatic visits it

is natural that the mass media provide support or criticism of the assessment of whether the

diplomatic visit is beneficial or detrimental to the national interests of a particular country.

Two, the role of the mass media is usually to report on events that occur in international inter-

action, can provide support, provide criticism and even be neutral, such as the coverage of the

New York Times, The Jakarta Post, Kompas, Media United States and other mass media on

President Obama's diplomatic visit to United States.

The Role of Mass Media in International Political Communication Practices

Mass Media as Political Actors

The public knows political behavior from various mass media, it can even be said that

the public relies heavily on the mass media in obtaining information on political events that

occur at the national and inter-national levels. The public's dependence on information from

the mass media is the most appropriate target for governments/states in the international

world to disseminate public policies and issues politics that influence social and political

changes in society.

Political events such as diplomatic visits always attract the attention of the mass media

as material for coverage, this is usually due to several factors, namely: First, today politics is

in the age of mediation, namely the mass media, so it is almost impossible for political life to

be separated from the mass media, in fact political actors always try to attract the attention of

journalists so that their political activities get coverage from the media, for example the

United States human rights policy during the Clinton presidency which caused the mass

media to also aggressively report on human rights issues in United States (Cipto, 2003: 131).

Second, political events in the form of the behavior and statements of political actors usually

always have news value, for example President Clinton's statement about human rights

violations in East Timor which was covered by almost all mass media in America.

According to McNair (1995: 2-15) that politics in the age of mediation when associated

with the function of the media and mass media in political communication can be

transmitting political messages from parties outside themselves, as well as being senders of

political messages constructed by the press. Political actors are used by the mass media to

convey their political messages to the audience, while the mass media as actors in the

political era of mediation have the task of producing political messages based on a certain

coverage (Hamad, 2005). This means that it can provide achievements and benefits from both

sides, namely from the side of the mass media and state officials, including diplomatic

officials.

According to New York University Journalism Department Head Jay Rosen in the

political journalism tradition, the media is a player, an active subject in the public sphere, not

just a medium or tool controlled by the media outside the media managers (Rosen, 2004). As

a player, it certainly functions as an agent of change at the international level by using its own

means, namely through the publication of political news that becomes its political agenda. A

mass media that is pro-government will certainly report political news that benefits the ruling

government and vice versa.

According to Wirajuda (2003), the dynamics of international relations will be influenced

by a number of general and specific issues and various government and non-government

actors, one of which is the mass media. Nunung Prajarto's view (2003:4) in the context of

international relations, news about a country's foreign policy should be aimed at foreign

consumption (external public relations), which aims to form a positive image of United

States abroad. The more appropriate burden bearers are foreign mass media or United States

mass media with foreign languages. The language used in this mass media is important, in the

ontological level, language as a tool to know everything that exists, including politics. It is

increasingly realized that language is a product of the times, a commu- lation of cultural

expression or a 'representative' of power. Mass media is a means of disseminating news and

information to a wide audience, both locally, nationally and internationally.

This is in line with the function of mass media as broadcast institutions concerned with

the dissemination of information and business as well as efforts to influence international

public opinion (Shoelhi, 2009). By utilizing advances in telecommunications technology that

have developed rapidly, all nations in the world can be united under the globalization agenda.

Meanwhile, mass media in other countries/foreign countries whose domestic reach is not

so relevant, of course, do not pay much attention. However, the mass media in certain

countries (US, Japan, UK, Malaysia) that have an inter-national reach such as CNN, VOA,

BBC, Time, Herald Tribune, inevitably need to be studied and considered for their opinions

and reviews by the United States government. This is because the influence of mass media

that has an international reach (not only domestic / national) has an influence on the

formation of public opinion among governments and communities in various countries in the

world. The mass media can support or even criticize a country's political policies related to

diplomatic visits. The mass media is one of the actors in the dynamics of international

relations, and United States position in international relations is greatly influenced by this

(Prajarto, 2003: 1).

If we refer to the understanding that the mass media is an actor of political change, of

course this can be examined from the media ideology which is clearly stated in various media

agendas. The color of the mass media's political agenda is largely determined by the internal

interests of the media, which furthermore the information reported is also inseparable from

these interests.

Even more obviously, there are mass media that position themselves as the opiate side of

the government whose news provides counter-criticism to various government policies.

Based on the content of the news, political events that are considered important become the

media agenda to be conveyed to the audience (Rivers-Jenson, 2004: 38, Tankard, 2009: 388).

Because the mass media is placed as one of the important forces in society, in ensuring the

checks and balances of various powers, the role of the mass media must be able to produce

valid reports based on data and facts that occur in the field.

The mass media as an actor in socio-political life, also participates in creating changes

social and political change (agent of change) that occurs through the news that is published.

As an agent of change, the mass media uses its own method, namely through the publication

of political news that becomes its political agenda. A mass media that is pro-government will

certainly report political news that benefits the ruling government and vice versa.

Referring to Nimmo's view (2004: 236) that the amount of political news provided by

the mass media is a process related to the relationship between the authorities and the

media.Presentation to the kha- fe in the form of a sequence of policy choices and achieved in

the news content regarding; which should be presented first; how much space and time is

provided for each; where to place each news (page in the newspaper). As a political actor, of

course the role of the mass media has its own realm, namely the political news presented is

inseparable from media interests (media political agenda).

Furthermore, the political agenda of the media implies agenda setting (the order of

priority for international political events that are considered important) and also implies the

existence of media events.Media event is an event or activity that has a specific purpose for

media publicity. It can also include any event that is covered by the mass media or organized

especially for the media agenda.

In Hermin Indah Wahyuni's view (2006:5), that events as media events at least have a

value base that is carried out regarding the value of the selected news. If this is linked to the

genesis of the media that operates on business principles, then the reporting of diplomatic

visits on aspects related to facts has the potential to be commercialized.Therefore, it is not

strange that media coverage not only has a positive impact, but also a negative impact on

society.

The mass media will see international relations events that are important and

newsworthy, usually known as media events. The practice of media events is related to the

tendency of studies on the news production process, the first approach is often referred to as

the selectiv- ity of news. In essence, the news production process is a process of selecting

news from the real reality to be selected by the warawan and then formed into a news story.

While the second approach is the creations of news approach, in this perspective the event is

not selected but created by journalists. This means that news is the end result of the whole

process by sorting and determining certain events or themes (Fishman, 1980: 13-14), and

then the creation is published to the public.

Media event is the way the mass media organizes its news in such a way. This means

that the media event is a "packaging model" of mass media politics, so that the audience can

judge that the news is considered an important and hot issue, or an event regarding an issue

that is considered important by the editorial staff of a mass media.The news by the editorial

staff describes the importance of the news, for example, it is made the main news, headlines,

and repeated (A.Muis, 2000: v). This means that media events are interesting events

(journalistic point of view) that become the media's so- rotan to be used as a media agenda, in

which case the event is planned or spontaneous.

Coverage of international events as interesting events, is a form of participation and the

role of mass media in the implementation of United States foreign relations with other

countries and helping international issues. This means that the mass media is an integral part

of international diplomacy (public diplomacy). For example, to ease in- ternational tensions,

resolve conflicts by reporting the hopes of one country with another (Wirawan, 2008: 11).

For the mass media in United States, the position of the media in covering diplomatic

visits must be based on United States foreign policy. For example, the content of the media

must inevitably reflect that United States policy is free and active.The media can investigate

the relationship between public opinion and the foreign affairs of a country.This is related to

the attitude of the media which can be seen in every news published. The point is that the

mass media plays a big role in international relations, including in terms of guarding

international issues and where these issues are directed by the media.

The point is that in the perspective of international communication, the mass media are

the most intense communicators in disseminating information, promoting international facts

and issues and shaping public opinion. Prajarto's (2003:4) view on this matter is that the most

appropriate bearers of the burden of international communication are foreign mass media or

United States mass media in foreign languages. However, it does not rule out the role of

national mass media.

The role of mass media in the international arena is strongly influenced by the mode of

public diplomacy, which is generally understood as an effort to influence the international

public (other countries) in order to achieve the national interests of a country. This kind of

effort is made to form a communication network as a forum for promoting foreign policy. By

coordination by the government and interested parties in it such as religious leaders, parties,

mass media and many more. However, when interpreting mass media broadly, that mass

media as an institution that shows the existence of mass communication in an international

communication system, has a way and function of its role and benefits in translating

cooperative relations between countries, both developing and developed.

Media Diplomacy

In line with the above view that in public diplomacy, the government is not the only

actor in diplomacy, but there are nine actors in public diplomacy, such as non-governmental

organizations, communities, professionals, business and capital owners, media, researchers,

academics, activists, and religious circles. The nine actors conduct international

communication in their own way. For example, the mass media conducts diplomacy with

various coverage. The number of actors involved in public diplomacy implies the

accommodating of information from various actors in order to bridge the diplomacy

mechanisms of government to government, people to government, people to people, non-

government to non-government, and people and non-government to gov- ernment.

Diplomacy is an international communication between countries involved in diplomatic

activities, which is formulated in the exchange of requests and concessions between

negotiating actors. However, with the function of mass media as an actor of diplomacy, all

international issues that develop are determined by the extent of information coverage and

media coverage. Diplomacy aims to achieve national interests, skills in diplomacy are a key

requirement as a means of reaching agreements, compromises, and problem solving where

government objectives conflict (Djelantik, 2008: 4).

Mass media activities in international communication or international politics have a

strategic function because they can unite all public diplomacy actors through the functions

performed by the mass media. The unification of actors means that the mass media

accommodates the views of these actors. For example, diplomatic visits discuss the economic

agenda. Of course, ideally the mass media should report the views of economic actors, such

as academics, capital owners, entrepreneurs, and others.

Rianto (2008:67) states that the media has changed the general characteristics of

diplomacy and international politics due to the globalization of the media.In line with the

demands, the role of the media in international relations has made journalists in covering

events, collecting and selecting facts, reconstructing, and representing reality require a fast

and concise time, dense in reporting the content of the news display to be published. Dov

Shinar (2000:83) says that the mass media's ability to spread diplomatic and political

messages has made it one of the most important propaganda instruments. Related to the news

of diplomatic visits, the mass media does not just cover the news, but the mass media must

have an attitude in covering and giving space and time to the public to recognize that the

issues of diplomatic visits are important to be published.

According to Hariyadi Wirawan (2008: 11), the mass media plays an important role in

helping international problems, so that the mass media is also an integral part of international

diplo- mation. For example, the role of the media in easing international tensions, in the

context of United States, the media must play an important role in advancing the interests of

the United States nation and state in the international arena in accordance with its mission

"Million friends, Zero Enemy" (a million friends without enemies). The media as one of the

elements in civil society has a role to play. At the forefront of reducing tensions or

misunderstandings that arise due to issues of tension between countries.

As poli-sci expert Paul Kennedy has noted, mass media actors shape and change people's

mindsets. A simple example is the amount of sympathy and support from the international

community and the massive rescue efforts of tsunami victims in Aceh in December 2004.The

spontaneous and rapid response of various actors, governments, non-governmental

organizations (NGOs); individuals, cannot be separated from the role of the media as

diplomatic actors.The substance is that the mass media has enormous influence power in

terms of controlling the direction of societal change, especially in the political framework.

The political behavior of the mass media is something that determines the direction of

people's political behavior, either supporting or opposing behavior (Muhtadi, 2008: 51).

According to McCombs (1985:119), changes in a society's attitudes are generally

influenced by the existence of new information that is considered relevant to conventional

demands, when and where the new information is received.Mass media thus has an important

influence in the process of shaping people's political thinking and behavior.

This makes the mass media have a major role in international relations, in the broad

sense of its role as a catalyst and diplomatic broker (Puji Rianto, 2008: 68). As a diplomatic

broker, the media carries out and sometimes initiates international mediation in an event

where the distinction is often blurred as a reporter or as a diplomat.

The most dramatic impact was achieved by the CBS station which managed to conduct

separate telephone interviews, while broadcasting the two interviews together, giving the

impression that a live interview was being conducted between the two leaders with Cronkite

as the interviewer. This is a new dimension of the role of the media in international politics

today, which can be said to be a mediator, so that at that level the media bridges what may

also be full of distortions and political diplomacy between political officials.

Mass media can sometimes facilitate meetings for political leaders. For example, Anwar

Sadat's agreement to visit Jerusalem came about after NBC reporter Walter Cronkite brought

the two leaders of Israel and Syria, Anwar Sadat and Manachem Begin, together for a

satellite television interview. The role of mass media has been recognized as one of the key

success factors of contemporary diplo- mation. Lord Palmer-ston's famous statement that

opinions are stronger than armies is increasingly relevant in this context, as is Napoleon

Bonaparte's statement that "a pen is more dangerous than a thousand bayonets". These two

statements hold much truth, especially in relation to the role of mass media in the reform era

(Djelantik, 2008:70).

This makes the media play a major role in diplomatic relations and even international

relations. Bambang Cipto gave an example of American mass media playing an important

role in developing public opinion about human rights violations in East Timor.The New York

Times ran an editorial entitled "The Tiananmen in East Timor", which then caused the

political temperature of the United States to heat up.

The results of Bambang Cip- to's dissertation (2003: 246-247) "American Pressure on

United States: A Study of Clinton's Foreign Policy Toward United States" assessed that the

American mass media (The New York Times) covered the news in accordance with American

policy on human rights violations in East Timor. The New York Times supported America's

critical stance towards United States by reporting on the inhumane acts committed by the

United States police and army against the Christian East Timorese.As The New York Times

wrote, "religious differences are one of the causes of strained relations between United States

and the East Timorese, while the majority of United Statess are Muslim, the majority of

Timorese are Christian".Referring to the results of this research, mass media can support or

even criticize a country's political policies.

The Media Understanding Gap: Problems of Political Co-munication by the Media

Communication practices in international politics often lead to gaps, such as the case of

the movie Fitna and the controversy over the publication of cartoons that severely

dehumanized the Prophet Muhammad. Many people have been victimized during the wave of

riots and violence that occurred due to the publication of these cartoons.These gaps have led

to the weakening of international relations or politics. So in international politics, the

development of media globalization and international journals need to exchange perspectives

in their reporting, the meaning of freedom and human rights in the mass media.

This case became an international concern because it made almost all Muslim countries

and Muslims angry. This case is not a form of freedom of expression for journalists/mass

media. Freedom of expression is essentially a political, social and economic imperative, but it

is not an unlimited freedom.

The emergence of this gap requires regulation through various collaborations between

countries in organizing mass media (especially in equalizing perceptions of press freedom).

One of the collaborations carried out by United States with the Government of the Kingdom

of Norway with the support of the Government of New Zealand, organized the 3rd Global

Inter-Media Dialogue in Bali. United States and Norway both see that this global inter-media

dialog is very important, considering that currently media around the world are facing various

challenges, both in terms of news controversies and gaps in understanding freedom. The

agenda of the 3rd Global Inter-Media Dialogue includes: changes in media landscape that are

largely the result of advances in information and communication technology; coverage of

minority groups; and hard-hitting truths such as poverty, the war on terror, and global climate

change.

Conclusion

Media and international politics are two inseparable entities in modern life, both of

which share a role in determining the direction of changes in society. This relationship is

influenced by the major role of the mass media in determining the degree of international

harmony, both in bilateral and multilateral relations. For international politics, media

activities play a role in reporting and stating political events, then these events are conveyed

to the public, and then the public or the public will interpret the news texts presented in the

media.

The mass media is not only a source of political in- formation, but also often a trigger

for political change. In general, the mass media have certain tendencies in covering

international political events. In this position, the mass media is then placed as the fourth

estate in the order of social and political life.

In fact, in the tradition of political journalism, the media is a player, an active subject in

the public sphere, not just a medium or tool controlled by parties outside the media manager

(Rosen, 2004). As a player, it certainly functions as an agent of change at the international

level by using its own means, namely through the publication of political news that becomes

its political agenda.

In a more concrete form, the media has a major role in international political

communication. Its active involvement has given birth to the term "media diplo- macy". Mass

media as a channel in carrying out a country's diplomatic mission towards other countries. As

"media diplomacy", the mass media not only covers diplomatic events, but the mass media

must act as a ne- gociator. Related to media diplomacy, the media is one of the actors in the

dynamics of international relations, and United States position in international relations is

strongly influenced by these mass media actors.