From haunting images of shattered buildings to grim tallies of military and civilian casualties, and heart-wrenching stories of human suffering, the news media thrust the stark realities of foreign conflicts into the consciousness of American audiences. But does this flood of coverage truly sway public opinion on the United States’ role in these crises? Does it shape how Americans feel about deploying military forces, engaging in diplomacy, or providing economic aid to nations in turmoil? The answers hold profound implications for the nation’s foreign policy and global influence.
A new paper from researchers at the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania examines these questions and finds that media coverage of civilian casualties increases public support for U.S. involvement in conflicts by evoking empathy for the victims – but only when those victims are from allied countries. The paper, “How civilian casualty information shapes support for US involvement in an ally country’s war effort,” by Alon P. Kraitzman, a postdoctoral fellow at APPC, Tom W. Etienne, a doctoral student at the University of Pennsylvania, and Dolores Albarracín, the Amy Gutmann Penn Integrates Knowledge University Professor and director of APPC’s Communication Science division, was published in Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, a Nature journal.
Will you offer us a hand? Every gift, regardless of size, fuels our future.
Your critical contribution enables us to maintain our independence from shareholders or wealthy owners, allowing us to keep up reporting without bias. It means we can continue to make Jewish Business News available to everyone.
You can support us for as little as $1 via PayPal at [email protected].
Thank you.
The researchers conducted a comprehensive analysis, combining a longitudinal study of a large national survey with four controlled experiments, to investigate how media coverage of civilian casualties influences public opinion on the ongoing Ukraine-Russia war and hypothetical international conflicts. According to the authors, the survey revealed that heightened awareness of civilian casualties in Ukraine was “positively associated with a democratic justification for the war.”
The experiments delved deeper, manipulating information to examine various factors shaping public support. These included the role of empathy, the differing impacts of civilian versus military casualty reports, and how these dynamics extend to conflicts beyond Ukraine.
The findings highlight empathy for civilian suffering as a pivotal driver of support for U.S. involvement in a conflict. However, the studies also revealed a critical caveat: information about civilian casualties does not sway public support when the suffering occurs in a nation that is not a U.S. ally.
Previous research has shown that coverage of U.S. military casualties can turn the American public against a military undertaking, and coverage of foreign civilian casualties can lead to calls for ending a U.S. military venture. This paper, says Kraitzman, “shows that coverage of casualties does not necessarily lower support for U.S. involvement. There is a more nuanced dynamic at play. Portrayals of civilian casualties can rally public support for U.S. action to protect civilians abroad.”
“These findings,” says Albarracín, “are important for media outlets and policymakers as they navigate the complex choices in how to portray and engage with international conflicts. They also teach us about the psychological forces that shape policy support in the context of war.”
