British Media and the Rwandan Genocide

Abstract

The horrendous events in Rwanda in 1994 changed the politics and policies governing international humanitarian aid even more so than the post–Cold War changes preceding it. During 1994, audiences around the developed world watched in horror as news reports poured in from journalists on the ground. The brutal murders of the Tutsi people were explained in gruesome detail. Yet the heinous murders and violence continued without United Nation intervention until after the worst of everything was over. The reality of Rwanda was inescapable. But editorials in countries like England remained relatively benign on the issue, failing to pressure governments into action. The apprehension from the United Nations and powerful governments like the United States and the United Kingdom meant that the genocide of the Tutsi continued: a genocide that may have been averted if intervention had happened sooner. But what exactly is the relationship between public policy, the media, and distant crises? In his book British Media and the Rwandan Genocide, John Nathaniel Clarke finds that the intermingling of the government and the media is not a unilateral and straightforward relationship. Rather it is a “dual movement” (p. 220) between the two entities, who influence each other over time.