In an increasingly interconnected world, international media is an enormous influence on how nations, cultures, and even wars are perceived by the world. BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, RT, CGTN, and other outlets, do not merely carry the news, but establish the narratives that shape the representation of how societies, conflicts, and global relations are explained.
To the rest of the world, these broadcasting services are the main, or sometimes the sole, gateway to intricate and distant events. They are the ones who decide which narratives become prevalent. Which crises are worth continuing to report on, and how are the respective actors represented?
Media outlets decide which global crises receive attention, shaping public opinion and policy worldwide.
This manipulation of not only awareness but also of what emotion and what thought frameworks audiences can utilize to understand international affairs can take place through the tone of the reporting, the visuals that are selected, or even the expert commentary itself that is chosen to lead the reporting. What stories they choose to tell, how they tell them, and which voices they amplify has a direct impact on empathy, policy, and public opinion worldwide.
This influence is not limited to news reports only. It also affects documentaries, talk shows, online articles, social media posts, and other types of storytelling. These formats can either add more depth or strengthen existing biases. Media does not just show what is happening in the world; it also shapes and changes how we see reality. That is why it is important to understand how international media creates its stories. This helps us better understand the political and social impact of the information we receive.
A variety of editorial filters are used in newsrooms to determine what makes the global agenda. Such filters tend to focus on the presence of conflict, elite relevance and importance, nearness to Western interests and attractive visuals. As a result, human tragedies such as war in Ukraine hit the headlines, whereas similar dramatic crises, such as in South Sudan or the Democratic Republic of Congo, remain mostly unseen and thus unlikely to attract funds and contributions.
A 2024 investigation by The Guardian revealed that international coverage of Africa is so limited and negatively skewed that it contributes to an estimated $3.2 billion in extra interest payments on sovereign bonds annually. This disparity does not only influence the way people perceive things. It also has the effects on investment decisions, foreign assistance, and significance of a country on international platform. Donors, investors, and international organizations often make decisions based on how the media presents an issue. This shows that media decisions can have effects far beyond what is shown on TV or in articles.
This disparity echoes the agenda-setting theory introduced by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw in 1972, which argues that while the media may not dictate what people think, it does shape what they think about. The first level of this theory “issue salience” shows how repetition and prominence shape what people see as important. The Ukraine conflict became a global priority not because of its strategic importance alone, but also because of its constant media coverage. At the same time, decades of violence in regions such as Tigray or eastern Congo can hardly be noticed on international radar, resulting in the modest reaction and decades of humanitarian asset neglect.
Disproportionate coverage reinforces stereotypes, such as linking Islam with terrorism and portraying Africa negatively.
The media has become a battleground for influence, where international broadcasters shape how people see not only events but whole ideologies. When Voice of America shut down in March 2025, it marked a step back for U.S. soft power, while China and Russia were busy growing their media presence. In today’s world of digital diplomacy and online influence, controlling the narrative is becoming just as important as having military or economic power.
To illustrate, when it comes to the Western media, Islamist militant attacks are much more likely to be reported than other violence caused by non-Muslims. One study found that attacks involving Muslim perpetrators received 449% more media attention than those involving non-Muslims, reinforcing the association between Islam and terrorism. Such disproportionate coverage reproduces negative stereotypes and also leads to the development of xenophobia and anti-Muslim attitudes. Similarly, Africa has been presented in reports focusing on crisis, corruption, and failure without much highlighting on its richness, diversity, innovation, and resilience. Negative events take the appreciation away from the many positive developments that include technological advancement, improvement in education, or establishing democratic institutions.
Inequality is also evident in the language that describes refugees. The narrative that media use to cover Ukrainians fleeing war is usually on their civilized and European identity, whereas Syrian or sub-Saharan African refugees are usually seen more as posing a security risk or burden. Such in Such racialized discourse creates unequal responses of the international community, further cementing cultures that are already unequal. It does not only show lack of conscious bias but it is actively involved in the political and humanitarian environment and shapes the decisions regarding policymaking and the implementation of aid or resettlement programs.
The media coverage of crises is not credited only with the provision of information; it appeals to the audience emotionally. Personal loss involving children and families, as opposed to reports of deaths and numbers, has a greater capacity in evoking empathy in the individual. This is called the “identifiable victim effect.” Depending on the frequency and the way they are displayed, emotional images and personal stories usually induce people either to act or, in other circumstances, feel hopeless to a state of despair.
When the conflict in Ukraine began, photographs of mothers bearing babies through the snowy checkpoint immediately won sympathy and global solidarity. To the contrary, similar difficulties in place like Yemen or Ethiopia typically don’t get very much continuing attention or aid. This contrast in the visual depiction of suffering is a major factor in determining which causes to donate government money to and public decisions in fundraising activities.
Emotional storytelling drives compassion but can lead to fatigue and unequal responses to crises.
Research by the Wilson Center and others has shown that emotional storytelling plays a major role in driving international compassion. However, this compassion is not always shared equally. Refugees from the Global South often face what is called “compassion fatigue.” Audiences become less responsive, especially when the media keeps showing the same images of suffering over and over. Instead of inspiring help, this can make people feel numb and less willing to take action. In extreme cases, overexposure to trauma can lead to apathy, skepticism, or even hostility toward those in need.
International media also works as a tool of soft power. Western media such as CNN, BBC tend to relay liberal democratic ideals and contribute to conveying messages that advance the foreign policy agenda. The “CNN effect” refers to how live media coverage can push governments to take action, especially in times of humanitarian crisis. Public opinion by virtue of media attention can be such a strong force that it compels leaders to act in spite of their strategic interests.
Conversely, government-owned media such as the Russia RT and the Chinese CGTN offer contrary opinions. These networks shape their news to expose what they see as Western hypocrisy, ignore their own countries’ problems, and promote different ideas about global politics. RT, for example, often gives a platform to Western critics and controversial voices to question the credibility of NATO-aligned countries. CGTN presents China’s development approach and foreign policy as practical and non-interfering, which appeals to countries and people who are cautious of Western power and influence.
The media has become a battleground for influence, where international broadcasters shape how people see not only events but whole ideologies. When Voice of America shut down in March 2025, it marked a step back for U.S. soft power, while China and Russia were busy growing their media presence. In today’s world of digital diplomacy and online influence, controlling the narrative is becoming just as important as having military or economic power.
Media plays an important role in connecting the world, but its control over information comes with responsibility. When big media outlets focus more on certain crises, use stereotypes about cultures, or choose when to show sympathy, they help create a global story that can give a false picture of reality and strengthen inequality. This selective focus can spread ignorance, create divisions, and reduce trust in journalism.
Media serves as a tool of soft power, with competing narratives from Western and state-owned broadcasters shaping global ideologies.
Making international media fairer and more even won’t happen on its own it requires something. Newsrooms should make space for stories from regions and voices that are often ignored, especially those from the Global South. Reporters should be careful not to use words or images that reinforce harmful stereotypes about race or culture. Simultaneously, individuals like us should be more critical consumers of the news we take in and keep in mind that all the stories we read or watch are products of someone’s decisions. Media literacy can assist us to inquire more insightful questions, interrogate sided narratives, and look for alternative arguments.
The agenda-setting theory shows that global attention doesn’t happen by accident, it is carefully shaped. Awareness of this fact allows media professionals and audiences to strive to construct a more sensible, humane and just image of the world. The problem is not only whether more voices are included in the telling of the story, but it is also the way in which people are listening, responding and making decisions based on what they hear.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
