KING: In understanding world events, we must first understand individual stories

There is more media than ever in the world, and we can be linked to more places than ever as information travels across the globe. In many ways, we are more informed of distant places and events than any other time in history. But even still, the same story can be presented totally differently in every corner of the globe — a shocking development in the United States can be viewed as normal in Cuba, while never being mentioned in Russia.

Whether a country has a free press, a heavily censored media or something in between, its news is doubtlessly different from the world’s other nations. This month, Russia heightened its military involvement in Syria by launching a series of airstrikes in the embattled country. In the United States, we read generally critical news regarding this information. NBC’s coverage said, “The Russian intervention is already threatening to push the Syrian conflict into further chaos”.

But in China, the event was portrayed differently. China Daily reported, “Russian officials said the increasing military supplies aim at combating terrorism in accordance with international law … analysts say the Russian build-up will also increase chances of a political solution and will end the U.S. unilateral sway in the region.”

Those portrayals of the same event tell an entirely different story, but they’re nothing compared to Russia’s state-sponsored outlet RT and its different spin: “Damascus is opposed to the U.S. having troops on its soil, thus the U.S. is committing aggression and international crimes against Syria.”

The American and Russian coverage managed to tell completely opposing stories. If U.S. coverage had said, “a car was stolen,” Chinese media might have said “a car was justly reclaimed.” Russian coverage might report “a three-legged dog was run over by a car.”

How news is portrayed hugely impacts the average person’s opinion of an event. An American might be horrified and want to crack down on crime, while readers in China might celebrate a well-deserved victory. Still, those in Russia might think that drivers are irresponsible, and that we need leash laws.

We’ve got to be careful to scrutinize the raw events behind what we read. Differences in media portrayal can easily pit distant peoples against each other. U.S. coverage of Chinese-American rivalry in the South China Sea from the Financial Times stated, “The U.S. Navy says the mission, which it insists was a ‘freedom of navigation operation,’ was not designed to challenge China’s land claims in the South China Sea.”

But in China, U.S. warships sailing into contested waters were “slightly” more controversial. According to China Daily, “The U.S. military’s bold provocation will not only damage U.S.-Sino relations, but also could result in the risk of conflicts in the waters if it persists.”

Earlier this year, Cuba and the United States took steps towards lessening their Cold War tensions that have persisted for over 50 years. One of the most notorious rivalries in the western hemisphere may be softening, as Cuba and the United States lessened travel restrictions and formally re-opened diplomatic relations. Still, many key issues divide the two countries. In Cuba, the story was covered with an emphasis on the blockade that still remains. According to Gramma, a Cuban publication, “Cuba has for two decades consistently received the support of the international community, with only two or three countries in the General Assembly voting against its resolution.”

In the United States, we saw Cuban officials blamed for not taking enough steps to normalize relations.

“In some areas where U.S. officials have given a green light, it hasn’t been matched by their counterparts in Cuba,” NPR reported.

It is easy to see how a Cuban and an American could have starkly different opinions of their countries’ relations based on their respective news. Stories are powerful, and how they are told defines our perception of world events. The moral of a story isn’t the same if the characters seem different and key points are selectively omitted.

So what can we do in the face of such starkly different accounts of the same events? The only way to put ourselves in varied perspectives is to read varied stories. If we have access to news from China, India or Venezuela, we can read their respective coverage. To understand a foreign perspective, we need to understand their stories.