'Ethical Considerations on the Muslim World\r'

'In the post-9/11 climate, the the Statesn large number atomic number 18 bombarded with affectional images and voice communication in the media to the point of reaching simply fake conclusions about(predicate) members of the Moslem world creating questions of an ethical preconceived mood in the United States media mainstream. This ethical assault on the emotions of the the Statesn good deal and the turn up indoctrination of hatred toward people in the Middle East and Moslems living in the United States is an achievement that benefits politicians by instilling the emotions of idolatry and hate.The images that are impersonateed selectively, although in no behavior thoroughly, as they relate to the so-called struggle on Terror show events that create affright that a trend may be occurring, when in fact, the images depict quarantined incidents that can non be tied into genius limited trend. As well, the wording that is utilise in various media outlets, namely the w ord â€Å"terror” and â€Å"terrorist” instills fear and brings about emotions to American viewers that are vulnerable to what they reassure and hear.As well, much of what is missing from the media in terms of the lives of reasonable Muslim people lone(prenominal) causes to further the prepossess that all Muslims must be terrorists, because when Muslims are show in the word of honor, it is for violent acts. This, of course, is an emotive fallacy. This type of aro utilise appeal to fear has been studied by numerous academics and point to a propaganda model of what is presented to the people. â€Å"Propaganda does try to influence a mass audience to accept a conclusion based on premises that are popularly and widely accepted, and it does typically work by exciting the emotions and enthusiasms of the crowd” (Walton, 102).Certainly then, when emotions and enthusiasms are utilized by the media in portraying countries and peoples in a interdict light and as enemies of the United States, this enthusiasm of an America united against a common competitor seems to serve just as well as demonizing these stated enemies. However, when the term â€Å"War on Terror” is used this is so unspecific that it also hinders reasoning by connecting people that belong to the Muslim religion in one group, alternatively of accurately portraying the members of the Muslim community as mostly quietful with only a fringe element in question.The mean effect of this by unscrupulous politicians is to instill so much fear and hate as to flip compassion for the majority of Muslims in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. another(prenominal) part of the propaganda model is to make sure that a country or a group of people are depicted as immoral and for this idea to be widely accepted. â€Å"Constant reference to a ‘war on terror’ did accomplish one major objective: It stimulated the emergence of a culture of fear. Fear obscures reason, intensifie s emotions and makes it easier for demagogic politicians to mobilize the macrocosm” (Glassner, xii).So it seems that the reaction of the majority of people on America was to be initially immobilized by fear later 9/11 and they then were easily manipulated into mobilizing for politicians with an agenda. It becomes unembellished that genuinely and present dangers and social problems are deemed not interesting enough to make it to mainstream media, so instead the heroic stories of soldiers along with the horrific and largely isolated attacks by Muslim extremists are shown.It has also been argued that the front of political analysts and other experts in a orbit are used to inform the people of the real dangers in the world, when in fact, it appears that these experts are chosen selectively and politically in order to boost telecasting receiver ratings. It also appears that television is a much much dangerous mode for the American citizen due to the very(prenominal) few s ources of ownership in the media. This media monopoly, therefore, virtually suppresses the balance voices of Americans who realize that the media serves as a weapon of propaganda.Again television news is the most troublesome. â€Å"Studies conducted… have shown that people who are heavy television viewers, including viewers of television news shows, believe their communities are much to a greater extent dangerous than do light television viewers” (Postman& angstrom; Powers, 23). Certainly then, the media does instill fear as seek has shown and it is the most dangerous of people that are portrayed, because this is more(prenominal) entertaining than showing Muslims living in peace or wanting peace.The news then, does not machinate people by using logical means, what is used is an appeal to emotion. This appeal to emotion equals viewers resulting to the emotive fallacy of coming to the conclusion that Muslims and countries with the majority of it’s peoples as Mus lims are inherently dangerous. Of course, there is energy ethical about this presentation not on the part of media conglomerates or the politicians, who use propaganda as a tool to serve themselves politically.The fear now is that this â€Å"War on Terror” will never deliver due to the media spin on the dangers of terrorism and the ensuing jump to the illogical conclusions that this group and these peoples are dangerous. In conclusion, the emotive fallacy of coming to a popularly held belief that is held by the American people that Muslims and Muslim countries are dangerous is perpetuated by the media. Research has indicated that this is cypher less than propaganda and an unethical disinformation campaign. As well, other explore has pointed out that television viewers are more likely to fall into this illogical thinking.Then if it is not fear that creates tensions and hatred toward this group it is the mobilization of citizens under a common goal, to defeat a declared ene my in a most-confusing war. References Glassner, Barry. (1999). The Culture of Fear: why Americans are Scared of the Wrong Things. New York, NY: canonic Books. Postman, Neil & Powers, Steve. (1992). How to Watch TV News. New York, NY: Penguin Books Walton, Douglas. (2007). Media pipeline: Dialectic, Persuasion, and Rhetoric. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University P\r\n'