Gentle waves: Wars, disasters and distorting public opinion

Dr. Yasir Mahgoub Elhussein

Perhaps the catastrophe of the earthquake that struck large areas in Turkey and Syria seemed to be more severe in terms of loss of life and property than the catastrophe of the war in Ukraine, which has been going on for a whole year. In a blink of an eye, the earthquake killed about 21,000 people and destroyed hundreds of thousands of residential buildings and public institutions, while tens of millions became homeless. Even the World Health Organization warned that another humanitarian catastrophe may occur unless survivors get shelter, food, water, and medicine quickly. . Earthquakes and floods are natural phenomena, but wars are purely human mistakes.

And the upside-down picture in today’s world is that public opinion is mobilized locally and internationally to mobilize material and human resources as fuel for this absurd war, while such disasters do not attract public opinion mobilization except for the extent of conserving water and preserving public relations. And, while Turkey enjoys a stable political system and a strong economy, Syria and its people are suffering from a catastrophe beyond human capacity.

Turkey had transcended the effects of a similar earthquake that hit the northwest of the country in 1999, which resulted in 17,000 deaths. This earthquake is considered one of the most devastating natural disasters of this century.

The media and decision-making centers in a part of the world exert a set of pressures and judgments on the masses to direct the power of public opinion towards a specific destination, to pass through the masses, and then an energy that is effective in the processes of political change is formed as a result. Public opinion is a powerful force in people’s daily lives.

It builds and destroys fame, supports public service bodies, makes and repeals laws, promotes or denies social traditions and moral principles, and lifts or discourages morale. It is not surprising that it is described as the greatest force known to mankind throughout its long history, and that it represents the one will of the human community. It also represents the moral strength with which the common goals of each group are achieved. If this moral force turned into a material force in certain circumstances, it became like a flood, sweeping everything before it and caring about nothing. The fact that public opinion is a collective product facilitates the coordination of action, which does not have to be based on consensus, i.e. public opinion is always inclined to take a decision even though it is not unanimous. Public opinion has many characteristics that make decision-making centers and the media in their orbit aware; it is a changing phenomenon, as people usually do not remain the same. One of these characteristics is justification, as the individual may tend to justify a certain behavior with logical reasons that the mind accepts, although its real reasons are emotional. The characteristic of compensation is evident when the state has a slim chance of progress, and it resorts, through the elite or leadership, to compensate for this deficiency by highlighting other qualities such as history. Israel is trying to impersonate the United States of America and considers itself its advanced base in the Arab region.

So there is no such thing as a permanent fixed public opinion because one of the conditions of public opinion is that it be the result of a dynamic movement, otherwise it turns into a dogma, a value, or a habit. Public opinion, which has been characterized by non-continuity, should not be confused with customs and traditions that are permanent and stable. According to philosophers and political scientists, customs are social norms that have been established over time and have gained respect and reverence for public opinion. There is a difference between tradition, customs, and opinion; assuming that some people are used to eating meat every day, this is not a trend because it is not a trend towards a problem, but if it is imposed and meat disappears from the market or its price rises, that is, there is a problem, then public opinion appears, and when the problem is solved, public opinion disappears.

A person can honestly hold two very different, or sometimes contradictory, views on the same subject, depending on whether he or she is a member of a social group or personally. But opposing views live in the same individual only through the pressure of the diverse social groups to which he belongs. Most people are keen, above all, to “get along” with others, and rarely dare to disturb their dominant harmony by putting forward an idea that contradicts the prevailing general idea.

The American journalist Walter Lippmann (1899) says in his book: Public Opinion, that every opinion is based on what he called the “cast mold” and that means that people’s minds are as if they pour into molds, these minds only produce the same public opinions cast in them. This is like the preconceived belief that the morning is dewy, that the virgin girl is shy, that a priest is a holy man, or that every Englishman lacks a sense of humor. These provisions remain in force at all times without scrutiny or examination.

Public opinion is formed through five stages, the first of which is the awareness of the problem, and the media has an important role at this stage in arousing interest in the problem. The second stage is known as the exploratory discussion phase and the multiplicity of opinions, where different points of view appear in the perception of the problem and its solutions. The third stage is called the conflict stage, where the conflict begins – within the processes of discussion – with individuals and ends with existing social forces, becoming a factional or class struggle. The fourth stage is known as the stage of crystallization and focus, where the conflict process leads to clarity of dimensions and concepts so that points of view begin to converge and converge. The fifth stage is known as the stage of satisfaction, agreement, and termination, with the exclusion of extremist views and reaching compromises on some points, so that there becomes an opinion that gains the consent and acceptance of the majority.