An emerging warfare

In an era where wars are being fought not just in battlefields but also on digital platforms, a robust communication framework is essential to check the spread of misinformation

- CHAITANYA K PRASAD

In early times, the waving of a white flag in the middle of the war ground universally meant truce, a symbol of peace. This was further reinforced by communication depictions in movies and shows, where warfare often concluded with gestures of diplomacy or ceasefires. But today, the narrative of war is no longer solely shaped by the actions on the battlefield; it is driven by the media, social media, and public reactions. In many ways, war is facilitated by public outcry and media depictions, shaping geopolitical responses and influencing outcomes.

We are bombarded by images of destruction and weaponry, with media coverage offering near-instant updates from war zones. While this flow of information serves to inform the public, it also sparks immediate and emotional reactions. The nature of warfare has evolved from distant, delayed reports to a real-time experience, with people able to witness unfolding events from their homes or mobile devices. This leads us to a critical question: Is communication an enabler, fostering transparency, or does its overwhelming architecture create deadlock, confusion, and chaos?

In today's media ecosystem, there is no universal standard on how war should be presented to the public. The depiction of warfare, down to the smallest details, like the make and model of weapons used, floods screens with intensity, overwhelming the masses. This raises a key issue: Should there be a standard protocol or SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) dictating how warfare is reported and disseminated globally?