SECRETARY-GENERAL'S STATEMENT AT WORLD CONGRESS OF BUSINESS COUNCIL FOR UNITED NATIONS
Press Release
SG/SM/5988
SECRETARY-GENERAL'S STATEMENT AT WORLD CONGRESS OF BUSINESS COUNCIL FOR UNITED NATIONS
19960523 Following is the text of Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali's statement delivered today at the fourth annual World Congress of the Business Council for the United Nations:It gives me great pleasure to be with you today at the fourth annual World Congress of the Business Council for the United Nations. I would like to say a very personal thank you to President Brookfield and all his staff, for your excellent work in promoting ever closer relations between the United Nations and the United States business community.
I am delighted that so many representatives from business and industry have chosen to participate in this year's event, sponsored by the Chubb Group and the Economist.
The theme of your conference, the impact of media and telecommunications, is never very far away from my mind. Modern developments in telecommunications technology have had a profound impact on our understanding of world events.
We now live in an age of instant access, and instant news reporting. Today, the dream of instant information at the touch of a button has become a reality. If we are to go further, and create a truly global information society, this will require a concerted effort from all of us.
I welcome the inevitability of technological change. In doing so however, I would like to sound a word of caution. Developments in information technology have already had a profound effect at the individual, as well as the governmental level. For the most part, these changes have been positive. I am not someone who believes it is possible or even desirable to turn back the clock. However, it is also right that we take stock, and consider the impact of these changes on all our lives.
At the individual level, the impact of the new technologies can be measured in a number of ways. The Internet provides new educational opportunities for lifelong learning. Satellite television offers a
bewildering array of consumer choice. These technologies can be a useful tool in empowering the individual.
Equally however, enthusiasm for the "empowerment" argument needs to be put into some sort of perspective. Even in highly developed countries, there is a limit to the number of people who will be able to take advantage of the new technologies. The spread of home computer ownership for example is likely to diminish. In the developing world, visions of a computer owning, computer literate population continue to be of marginal relevance.
At the governmental level, media coverage can have a profound impact on the conduct of international relations. The role of television in highlighting the significance of particular events or issues is a constant factor in world diplomacy. This is to be welcomed.
In Somalia and Bosnia, the world watched in horror as the full magnitude of these conflicts was flashed daily onto our TV screens. In Somalia, it would be fair to say that the foreign policy of the United Nations was influenced by the gruesome TV pictures from Mogadishu.
Information drives international relations, but some information is more equal than others. Media selectivity means that viewers do not always receive a balance of opinion, or a complete and balanced picture of world events.
I am not suggesting that broadcasters devote coverage to every issue, or to every shade of opinion. There are only 24 hours in the day. It is self- evident however that a media agenda exists. Selective news reporting, which seeks to entertain as well as inform can have a detrimental effect on diplomacy.
Today, governments have to respond instantly to events. Today, governments, particularly those in democratic countries, cannot afford to ignore the impact of TV coverage on public opinion.
The United Nations is not immune from these pressures. We sit at the centre of an enormous media operation. It is no real surprise to me that media attention often focuses on the United Nations peace-keeping activities. These make good headlines. It is equally true that selective reporting of United Nations activities can lead to a distorted view of our role. At best, the general public receives an incomplete picture of United Nations humanitarian and development programmes.
The information revolution poses many challenges to the United Nations. One of the challenges is to ensure that resources and energies are not diverted away from areas where the media spotlight has not fallen. Another is to work closely with the media, not only to educate the public, but to
- 3 - Press Release SG/SM/5988 23 May 1996
influence international decision-making. In both these areas, the United Nations faces the challenge of overcoming media selectivity.
Selectivity has always been a feature of the media's agenda setting role. It is something that all world leaders and the United Nations have to live with. In modern diplomacy, the demands of a technological media present new problems and pressures. Not the least of these is the demand for instant response and instant comment.
The best diplomacy is not that conducted by the sound-bite, or the hastily arranged media conference. Diplomacy is, or should be, a patient business. The impact of live reports reaching governments instantly is to risk pushing the diplomatic process in entirely the opposite direction.
Officials often have to respond to stories which lack perspective, or which in some cases may even be inaccurate. Even when the reports are completely correct, the outcome may be better if officials and diplomats have time for reflection and analysis.
This is essentially a question of balance. The advances that have been made in global communications and new information technologies provide opportunities undreamt of a generation ago. Equally, it is right that we begin to address the implications of these developments for the conduct of international relations.
Put simply, we have to recognize that the needs of diplomacy, and the demands of a modern media may from time to time prove incompatible.
I am very grateful for the opportunity to address this conference, and would be happy to answer some of your questions.
* *** *