Media Roles in Conflict and Conflict Resolution: A Comparison between Television Moderators and Conventional Mediators
This study examined the notion that the moderators of public affairs television programs act in ways that are very similar to conventional third parties who intervene in conflict with the aim of resolving it. The aim of this study was to define and analyze the methods and third-party roles of public affairs television moderators in protracted social conflict, and to compare these media ‘interventions’ to the behavioral roles of conventional third-party intervenors. The research addressed three main questions: (a) the extent to which television public affairs moderators perform third-party roles, (b) how these media roles differ from those of conventional third-party intervenors, and (c) what the effect of media third-party intervention is on the parties, and the resolution process.
These questions were operationalized with a study that was based on the work of the ABC-TV program, Nightline. The regular moderator, Ted Koppel, brought conflicting parties within South Africa and Israel/Palestine together on television in 1985 and 1988 respectively, during week-long broadcasts from each country. Nightline's regular interviewing format as well as the program's larger ‘town meeting’ design for discussion, which included studio audiences, formed the basis of a comparative case analysis comparing the roles, actions, and interventions of television anchors and producers, to that of the roles and functions of conventional conflict intervenors.
A taxonomy of media moderator roles was generated from a content analysis of the ten broadcast texts that formed the basis of Nightline’s two weeks of broadcasting from the two countries. The media moderator’s roles and tactics were then compared to two other sources of data on the role and impact of public affairs programming in social conflicts: interviews with the participants on these programs, and an analysis of subsequent newspaper articles. This resulted in a more comprehensive taxonomy of media moderator third-party roles in protracted social conflicts.
This classification of media moderator roles was then compared to existing taxonomies of mediator roles, strategies, tactics, and techniques. It was clear that media moderators perform a series of third-party roles that are similar to the communication/ facilitation work of conventional mediators. While not becoming ‘mediators’ in the true sense of the word, media moderators also demonstrated some substantive/directive strategies that are comparable to the roles of conventional third parties.
More importantly, the programs had unintended consequences. Nightline’s involvement in South Africa and Israel provided much-needed forums of communication between the parties. The broadcasts also legitimized the process of negotiation, as well as empowered the out-parties -- factors that have implications for social conflict, the process of conflict resolution, and the study of informal conflict intervention.