Media War and War Media in Sudan

Khaled Massa
Tunisian journalist and media personality, and former editor-in-chief of the Tunisian newspaper Al-Sabah, Assia Al-Atrous, once wrote what we consider a reference for examining the medias influence and its impact on societal changes. She chose "revolution" as the title of her book, "Media Revolution and Revolution Media," to illustrate the medias influence and impact on its surrounding environment. In this context, we can read the Sudanese scene from the perspective of the effects of "war" on media performance and its impact on the course of the war in Sudan.

War is the most influential emergency affecting Sudan, with its diverse components, and the media landscape was not entirely healthy before it. No sooner had the revolution and the transitional period begun than the October 25th decrees returned the media landscape to its critical state.

The state of war and the suspension of laws through emergency orders are the perfect recipe for violations targeting media personnel and institutions. The primary cost of the April War was the complete shutdown of media institutions and publishing houses. Those working in the profession were now on the list of defendants, each according to the geography the war had drawn, with spaces devoid of freedom of opinion and expression. Unless media outlets and pens were pointed in the same direction as the rifle, this was sufficient to issue death sentences, charges of treason, and arrests against journalists, who had no other options but to flee to locations where the risk to their lives was less severe, or to seek asylum and escape the war zone entirely. This was confirmed by statements issued by the Sudanese Journalists Syndicate and Reporters Without Borders.

During the war, the media was not required to evade the truth with a false sense of neutrality, because war is the situation that most requires an ethical stance, far removed from the "blackmail" imposed on the media by the war. The race to buy or influence public opinion became a justification for issuing judgments and challenging national positions for military gain on the ground.

In the Sudanese war, now entering its third year, the "truth" that was supposed to be presented on the screens of the press and media was exposed to live ammunition due to the alignment and polarization that deliberately divided the public scene into two parts, with blood between them. Consequently, it was not easy for journalists to disseminate to the Sudanese people a discourse of awareness and enlightenment that would counter the widespread and dominant extremist hate speech.

The media war that erupted did not hesitate to turn media platforms into relentless weapons stores, with no restraint to respect the sanctity of civilians, who have the right to receive journalistic content that addresses the violations affecting them and exposes the ugly face of war crimes as something abstract and far removed from the medias simplistic rhetoric, which is immersed in regurgitating pre-war bitterness and settling old political scores. Rifles, cannons, and aircraft would not have dared to shed Sudanese blood were it not for the medias support, bringing good news to readers and viewers whenever a violation occurred and the number of civilian casualties increased.

The term "social incubators" was born on social media platforms from the offspring of the preachers, becoming a precise coordinate system for attacking innocent people and harming everything that makes life and livelihood difficult for defenseless citizens, whether it be water, electricity, airports, fuel depots, hospitals, or private civilian facilities.

The absence of professional and ethical oversight has given free rein to the pens and tongues of the media to fish in the murky waters of war. Instead of serving as the fourth estate, confronting violations against civilians, they have begun to lead marketing and publicizing campaigns for these violations, reaping the fruits of those who escaped the bullets and artillery fire. Some media outlets have borrowed the sword of swift justice to cut off the head and hand of anyone who disagrees with their opinion or speaks the truth.

The provisions of the Western Faces Law would not have been able to stand on their own two feet, extending to criminals and innocents alike, were it not for the powerful media momentum behind it, devoid of professional values and ethical requirements. Similarly, the discourse of the 56 State would not have been possible without the media levers that created the term for uses that whitewash the violations and justify the crime, making it more effective than artillery and marches.

During the April War, the horrific civilian casualty figures and statistics reported by national and international organizations would not have reached the level where the Sudanese situation is described as the most horrific in the world had it not been for the cosmetic surgery used by writers to describe what happened as a mere inevitable side effect of war.

Because of the media war, there has been significant confusion in defining famine, which has been demonized and treated as a political project, treated as a weapon used by the enemy. Meanwhile, the world and the region around us are begging for the opening of crossings to allow humanitarian aid to reach the hungry and sick in displacement camps and those fleeing the hell of war.

Here, we cannot deny the Sudanese Armed Forces, their supporting forces, or the Rapid Support Forces their will to negotiate and find a political solution to the war in Sudan. This is evidenced by what happened collectively at the Jeddah Negotiations Forum and what happened in the Bahraini capital, Manama. This is also evident individually in the initiatives in Cairo, Geneva, and all neighboring countries. However, the demon of war media was present, both in general and in detail, to burn down all the ships of return to a solution that would save the Sudanese people from the flames of war.

Anyone aware of the developments in the press and media, and the technical tools available to create a media space free from the shackles of repressive media tools, will not necessarily adopt a method of managing media and journalistic affairs through decisions to restrict, expel, and suspend journalists, criminalize colleagues, and restrict anyone who approaches the truth. This is because history is replete with examples that confirm the ability of journalists and media professionals to develop their combative tools.

The readers astuteness did not escape the attention of the journalistic and media space, which is crowded with stale and flimsy content, and is focused on discussing issues that are at the bottom of the Sudanese priority list. These issues range from the gratuitous mass death of women, children, and the elderly; the rights of the displaced, refugees, the detainees, and those forcibly detained; women subjected to rape in war zones; prisoners and civilian victims of field courts; and the lack of even the most basic services. All of this is being carried out with careful planning by war media, to the point that even talk of negotiation has become a national humiliation that requires the removal of the national position.

One day, the bullets will stop, the cannons will calm down, and citizens will return to a land planted by the media war with the seeds of hatred and racism and its mines. Addressing the effects will take years for the Sudanese people to overcome.

We hope that the Sudanese media will play a strategic role that will protect it from the effects of the media war, provide a healing bandage for all the burns caused by the media war, and contribute to rebuilding meanings before structures.