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, no date).
Narratives are essential to how we interpret images. An image; or even a verbal description of conflict; simply records an event. However, through narrative, it gains meaning. Narrative frames interpretation, shaping audience perception and emotional response. In media circulation, images and narrative are inseparable: photographs, headlines, and captions all steer understanding and evoke reaction (Sontag, 2003).
Over the past century, media circulation has transformed; from newspapers to televised broadcasts and, in the twenty-first century, to digital and social platforms; each shift altering how images and conflict narratives 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?
The question has implications for both designers and users. Designers must consider how platform design; traditional or digital; shapes media circulation and facilitates narrative formation, influencing user perception and behaviour. Users, meanwhile, need awareness of how media can be framed or manipulated to elicit specific cognitive or emotional responses.
This research will analyse a range of historical and contemporary conflicts, examining how images circulated through the media systems of their time and how these processes shaped image-based narratives. These findings will then be compared to generate insights addressing the central research question.
To understand how shifts from traditional to digital media have changed user engagement with narratives surrounding images of conflict and violence, it is first necessary to consider how such narratives were historically constructed and received.
This research will begin with the Second World War, a strong case for examining the relationship 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; print journalism and television; shaped public engagement. The focus will then shift to the digital era, examining the Russo–Ukraine War and the Gaza War, both of which demonstrate how online and social media now influence the formation and spread of conflict narratives.
The scope is intentionally limited to a Western context, primarily the United Kingdom and the United States, to maintain a consistent cultural frame and avoid variations arising from differing geopolitical or media systems.
Throughout the Second World War, the British Ministry of Information (MOI) produced propaganda campaigns aimed at sustaining morale and fostering unity on the home front. These campaigns relied heavily on illustrations rather than photography, as illustrations offered greater control and flexibility, allowing the MOI to tailor visual messages to each campaign’s goals while shielding civilians from harsher wartime realities that might weaken 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).