Conflict and violence have long held a prominent place in media circulation. Newspaper publishers and politicians William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer are often credited with popularising the phrase “if it bleeds, it leads,” reflecting their use of sensational and graphic reporting to dramatise the Spanish–American War (1898) (Miller, 2021). The technological and logistical limitations of 1890s media circulation enabled Hearst and Pulitzer to craft a narrative centred on the atrocities allegedly committed by Spanish forces in Cuba. Widely regarded as the first “media war,” this conflict demonstrated the power of imagery and sensationalism to engage audiences and provoke a public demand for U.S. intervention (Office of the Historian, no date).
Even prior to the development of modern media, conflict narratives were depicted through other forms of representation. Alfred, Lord Tennyson’s poem The Charge of the Light Brigade (1854), for example, offered readers a stirring narrative of heroic tragedy, set against the backdrop of a disastrous military manoeuvre during the Crimean War (Britannica, 2025).
Narratives are fundamental to how we understand images. An image; or even a verbal description of conflict; on its own merely documents an event. When contextualised, however, it acquires meaning through the narrative that surrounds it. This narrative shapes interpretation, influencing how audiences perceive and emotionally respond to what they see. In media circulation, images and narratives are inseparable: every photograph, headline, or caption serves to guide understanding and evoke reaction (Sontag, 2003).
Over the past century, the mechanisms of media circulation have changed dramatically. What was once confined to newspapers evolved into televised broadcasts and, in the twenty-first century, expanded into digital and social media platforms, with each shift transforming how images and narrative surrounding conflict are shared, interpreted, and experienced (Sociology Institute, 2023).
Thus, this research seeks to explore the question: How have shifts from traditional to digital media circulation changed how users engage with and react to narratives surrounding images of conflict and violence?
This issue carries important implications for both designers and users. For designers, it is essential to consider how the platforms they create; whether traditional or digital; shape the circulation of media and enable the formation of narratives around images, as these narratives can profoundly influence user perception and behaviour. Likewise, users must recognise how the media they engage with on these platforms can be framed or manipulated to elicit specific emotional or cognitive responses, highlighting the need for critical awareness in media consumption.
This research will begin by examining a range of historical and contemporary conflicts, analysing how images were circulated through the media platforms of their respective periods and how these processes contributed to the formation of image-based narratives. Once this spectrum of conflicts has been explored, the findings will be compared and contrasted to generate insights that address the central research question.
To discover how shifts from traditional to digital media circulation have changed how users engage with and react to narratives surrounding images of conflict and violence, it is first necessary to consider how such narratives have historically been constructed and received.
This research will begin with an examination of the Second World War, as it presents a rich and dynamic case for exploring the interplay between media and public perception. It will then move through the Vietnam War and the Iraq War to analyse how traditional forms of media circulation; such as print journalism and television; shaped public engagement. The focus will subsequently shift to the digital age, with an analysis of the Russo–Ukraine War and the Gaza War, both of which exemplify the influence of online and social media on the formation and dissemination of conflict narratives.
The scope of this research is intentionally framed within a Western context, primarily that of the United Kingdom and the United States. Maintaining this consistent cultural perspective allows for clearer comparative insights and minimises deviations that might otherwise arise from differing geopolitical or media frameworks.
Throughout the Second World War, the British government’s Ministry of Information was responsible for producing propaganda campaigns designed to sustain morale and foster unity on the home front. These campaigns relied heavily on illustrated and graphic works rather than photography, as illustrations offered greater flexibility and control over the imagery presented to the public. This approach allowed the Ministry to tailor visual messages precisely to each campaign’s objectives while shielding civilians from the harsher realities of war that could have undermined morale (National Archives, no date).
By focusing on civilians rather than the armed forces, the Ministry’s propaganda promoted collective identity and emphasised the role of ordinary citizens in supporting the war effort. Such messages encouraged a sense of shared responsibility and agency, motivating the public to contribute through practical action (Howells, 2019). As Hutchinson (2014) suggests, media coverage of war can create feelings of solidarity that inspire collective support; the Ministry of Information (MOI) built upon this principle by crafting narratives that were aimed at the public taking action. In doing so, the MOI enabled the public to feel that their actions and support truly mattered to the war effort, fostering a narrative of unity and collectiveness (Howells, 2019).
Beyond direct government propaganda, media coverage of the war was primarily consumed through print sources such as newspapers and magazines (Ministry of Information, 1947). Although the British government did not formally intend to restrict press freedom during the Second World War, it nevertheless exercised considerable influence over what the press could publish. This was achieved through the distribution of official press releases, guidance notes, and official photographs provided by the MOI (Irving, 2014).
As a result, newspapers were often unable to publish detailed accounts of events due to security concerns, leading both their articles and accompanying images to focus on the broader actions and movements of the Allied forces rather than specific incidents (Taylor, 1991). This tendency was further reinforced by nationwide paper rationing, which limited the number of pages and amount of content newspapers could print in each issue (Matthews, 2016).