Thanks to the Retired Officers Association... Absence is also information

Thanks to the Retired Officers Association for choosing, at a time when narrative advances ahead of events and their interpretations reach people before the facts are fully established, a subject that admits no delay: “The Importance of Media and Strategic Security.” The gratitude was not due to the title alone; at the headquarters of the Socialists Association, the seminar raised the ceiling of freedom without lowering the responsibility of speech, allowing speakers and interveners to disagree without turning disagreement into hostility. Amid serious proposals and questions that no one had anticipated, complaints about a lack of information predominated, while I was preoccupied with the information that had not entered the hall. The demand was legitimate: we need information to know what happened, who said it, and how to respond. But the repetition of the meaning of “response” revealed a deeper gap: Why does our conception of media begin only after others speak? Why do we seek defensive information that answers questions framed by others, rather than building proactive information that creates the question, its framework, and its timing? A behavioral study published by Christopher Kelly and Tali Sharot in Nature Communications in 2021 explains part of this: people seek information for its practical value, its emotional impact, and its ability to reduce ambiguity. Hence, they are more drawn to war news, statements, and evolving decisions than to stable scientific information; breaking news gives them a quick sense that they have regained some control over an event they did not create. However, media strategy must not follow public appetite alone; its function is not only to satisfy what people want to know now, but to build what they will need to understand tomorrow. Every project seeking acceptance, mobilization, or legitimation begins in minds before it begins on the ground. A product is preceded by a marketing campaign, a decision by preparation that explains its necessity, and war by narratives, vocabulary, images, promoters, and information released according to a schedule. Legitimate projects differ from illegitimate ones in their honesty and ethics, but they share the recognition that an action that surprises minds may face resistance that an action preceded by understanding-building does not. The agenda-setting theory by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw has proven that media not only convey issues but also contribute to determining what the public considers worthy of attention. Moreover, modern strategic communication literature identifies proactive communication as a key tool for countering informational threats, and “prebunking” experiences confirm that familiarizing the public with manipulation techniques before they encounter them increases their resilience. The awareness that information precedes action is not a product of modern theories; in the two authentic hadith collections, it is narrated from Ka’b bin Malik (may Allah be pleased with him): “The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) did not intend a battle without diverting attention to another.” This is not a license for general deception, but evidence that information, in the context of war, has a purpose, timing, and audience, and that its management precedes movement rather than follows it. What we lack, then, is not a faster statement, but a strategy that begins with foresight: What is likely to happen? What understanding do we want to build before it happens? It then defines the purpose, reads the audiences, crafts the narrative, distributes messages temporally, and selects its tools and promoters before monitoring, measuring, and correcting the impact. No single message suits the citizen, the supporter, the opponent, the friend, the adversary, the neutral observer, and the affected person who has not yet formed a position. Soft power is not built by the volume of speech, but by the state’s ability to address each audience in a way they understand, through those they trust, and at a time when the message is capable of creating an impact. Hence, we need stars on news channels, because the public connects with the face, voice, and style of interpretation before connecting with the abstract institution. But the star is not the strategy; it is its face.

Behind him must lie a courtyard unseen on screen: one that anticipates, investigates, verifies, crafts messages, and measures accuracy, impact, and correction rates, so that charisma does not become a substitute for knowledge. He who confines himself to mastering the reply may win the round, yet he remains fighting on terrain shaped by narratives authored by others. The most perilous missing piece is not the news that failed to reach us, but the message that should have reached others before they asked for it. Before it slips away… if we speak only after others have spoken, we are not shaping opinion; we are merely choosing how to respond.