The Russia-Ukraine War has been ongoing since Russian forces invaded Ukraine on February 24th, 2021. This invasion escalated the tensions that have been growing between the two countries since 1991. Previous conflicts had included vote-rigging allegations in 2004 and the annexation of Ukrainian Crimea in 2014. However, the current military operation was described by Putin as freeing Ukraine from the Kyiv regime. Putin’s remarks suggest that Russia is moving to overthrow the current Ukrainian government.
The media plays an enormous role in representing this war to the public. Since both sides must appear to be winning in order to continue fighting, spreading advantageous information through news outlets is an easy way to rouse widespread approval. A leading authority on international strategic affairs suggests that “both sides are propagating their own selective facts and myths, while censoring counterclaims.”
Russian media is sanitizing the situation: it is not using the words ‘invasion’ or ‘war’ to describe the problem. There have also been reports of Russian disinformation and propaganda campaigns. Additionally, Russian media focuses on Ukrainian retaliation and its purchase of weapons rather than Russian war crimes. The opposite is happening in much of Western news reporting: the angle on the war is profoundly negative towards Russia. This is logically consistent with most Western political alliances — the media tends to reflect the opinions of the country it exists in. Information from human rights organisations also supports an adverse position towards Russia. However, Western media’s stance is not only unfavourable to Russia; it dismisses the idea of Russia as a capable country.
Media misrepresentation of Russia is not new. The country has been caught in varying degrees of political discourse over the late 20th and 21st centuries. For example, news coverage on Russia branded Putin as a “pariah” even before the Russia-Ukraine War. Unclear data made it difficult to understand social, military, or political developments in 2018. Furthermore, some analysts have described the conflation of Soviet practices with modern Russian governmental approaches. Accurately predicting the behaviour and progress of Russia has become even more complicated due to increasing levels of polarization in the news.
Western media outlets, especially American media outlets, have chosen this approach because of the tense diplomatic relationships between the United States and Russia. It is apparent that the juxtaposition of the two countries is a powerful image: “American-led ‘free world’ relative to that of the ‘oppressive’ Russia” provides news stories with a clear enemy. The Russian invasion of Ukraine should have cemented the fear of Russia’s alleged Soviet-style autocracy. However, though news articles do sensationalize Russia, they do so in an interesting way. Instead of portraying Russia as frightening because it is a powerful rational superpower, Russia is frightening because it is incapable and unreasonable. This continuous lack of objectivity in news is concerning and distinctly resembles propaganda. It can especially be seen in recent depictions of international attacks attributed to Russia.
These attacks are construed as accidents by Western media. On Wednesday, November 15th, 2022, a missile struck Poland, killing two people in the town of Przewodów. Though the missile is now considered to have come from Ukraine, the initial reports indicated it was Russian. News sources writing about the incident were quick to warn against “escalation through mistake or miscalculation” and implied that the strike “appeared to be an accident”. On Tuesday, March 14th, 2023, a Russian fighter jet and a U.S. military drone crashed, consequently destroying the drone. The same approach followed: The Russian jet was “out of control, and tried to pull away… [it was] amateur hour” reported PBS where the pilot was also called “an idiot”. In other words, situations that could be understood as aggressive are instead classified as accidents by the West.
Moreover, Western media takes a similar attitude when reporting on Russian attacks within Ukraine where news sources characterize Russian forces as petty and inept. Soldiers are described as “destroying…[what] they cannot capture” and characterized by their “dismal performance.” Putin has been given the monikers “Mad Vlad” and “Paranoid Putin”. Disengagement from attacks is termed “embarrassing” when attributed to Russia and a “military necessity” when attributed to Ukraine. In addition to depicting Russia as desperate and blundering, Western media does not portray the country as a rational political actor.
This approach serves two purposes. Firstly, it undermines Russia as an institution. The media creates the impression that Putin’s government and army are filled with people who are simultaneously “unsafe and unprofessional.” Secondly, it prevents any act that could be construed as an attack outside of Ukraine from escalating into an international war. The consensus among Western experts is that Russia would not use nuclear weapons unless it felt an existential threat — a threat likely to come from a NATO country or the U.S.A. Therefore, events like the missile strike in Poland and the drone crash over the Black Sea need to be treated carefully. The label ‘accident’ allows a time buffer for the involved countries to decide how to proceed.
Western news outlets — which often get their figures and quotes from U.S. military officials — have turned from fearing Russia’s ‘neo-Soviet rationale’, to fearing Putin’s ‘insanity’ and the inexperience of his soldiers. This form of condemnation gives the impression of Russian incompetence, but this is not necessarily true. Russia is capable of stationing tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, is using “scorched earth” tactics in warfare, and has occupied much of the coastline of Ukraine. Before the current war, Russia was seen as a dangerous opponent due to a narrative depicting it as a powerful totalitarian state. This has changed. Presenting Russia as irrational and incapable in Western media is undermining the damage it has accomplished. Furthermore, it provides an overly optimistic view of Ukraine’s position — which echoes a pattern of lying about the actual conditions of wars, including those in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Edited by Ruqayya Farrah and Kimberly Nicholson
Ewa Bożerocka is an undergraduate student at McGill University, pursuing a B.A. Honours in Political Science, with a major in International Development. She is a staff writer for Catalyst.