For many decades, the media has served as a primary tool for managing wars and conflicts, whether as a means of rallying and recruiting troops and boosting the spirit of heroism and motivation in the soldiers and people of a country, or as a means of psychological warfare and distorting facts to weaken the morale of the soldiers and people of the enemy country.

The importance of the role played by the media has increased significantly with the spread of digital media and social media platforms, becoming the most crucial tool in what is known as fifth-generation warfare.

Naturally, the Russian-Ukrainian war was no exception to this development. Instead, it was a vivid embodiment of how the media can be exploited and employed as a primary tool for managing war and conflict between the Russian side and the Western side (supporting Ukraine). The latter, i.e., the Western media, treated the war as a political opportunity that could be employed to incite against Russia.

In this context, numerous Western newspapers, websites, and television stations published interviews, analyses, and opinion articles by many writers, mostly focusing on distorting Russia's image, questioning its foreign policies, and the reasons and motives for its war on Ukraine. Massive media networks like CNN, Fox News, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and others seemed to be leading an organized campaign to undermine Russia and fuel global public opinion against it, beyond the specific goal of pushing it to stop the war in Ukraine or even expressing sympathy for Ukraine and its people in the face of what they describe as the Russian aggression they are subjected to. This can be understood in light of US policy in particular, and Western policy in general, which aims to weaken Russia's international standing and remove it from the competition for leadership in the current and future international system, especially after it has shown challenges to Washington and the West in more than one influential global scene.

Despite the claims of adherence to standards of integrity, objectivity, and impartiality by Western media, its coverage of this war has shown a clear bias in dealing with its events. Everything that has been and is being broadcast around the clock goes in one direction, which is the opinion that attacks Russia and holds it responsible for mobilizing global public opinion against it.

This media has also been characterized by selectivity in publishing what serves the agenda of its operators, and excluding any opinions that attempt to present the matter from the Russian perspective in terms of the causes, motives, and justifications for this war, for which the West certainly bears part of the responsibility for igniting it through not seriously addressing Russia's concerns about NATO's expansion eastward.

The West did not stop there, but worked to silence Russian media outlets by banning channels expressing Moscow's point of view, such as "Russia Today" and "Sputnik." Moreover, major American technology companies that manage social media platforms like "Google," "Facebook," and others have prevented state-funded Russian media outlets from using their advertising technology to generate revenue on their websites and applications, while these companies have allowed the publication of unreliable content broadcast by some Ukrainian and Western media outlets.

This includes fake videos, films, and reports about the panic experienced by civilians when alarm sirens are sounded or exposure to images of captured Russian soldiers or destroyed Russian vehicles, all later proven to be fake and unreal, to achieve the goal of this media campaign.

In contrast, Russian media plays the same role, portraying the raging war in Ukraine as a "special military operation" rather than a war.

The West is accused and held responsible for this Russian operation, which Russian media describes as necessary to stop the expansion of "NATO" eastward and reduce the security threat to the alliance, and to show aspects of Russian superiority in the war.

Both Western and Russian media have shown the nature of the role that media can play in managing political conflicts between countries and that it can be a destructive weapon for mental image if the state does not have a public relations network with media circles around the world.

This war has once again confirmed the fact that the media has become an effective weapon that can be employed to tip the scales of power and has become one of the most important tools for new clashes between countries, far beyond its traditional role as a means of disseminating news or highlighting a humanitarian or security issue only, as the war revealed the absence of credibility in favor of sensationalism and excitement.

In wars and conflicts, most media outlets, even those sometimes described as "neutral," do not adhere to objectivity and fall into the trap of "media lies," which is often intentional, as media management is "politicized," and there is no better evidence of this than the way Western and Russian media have dealt with it.

They often relied on "anonymous" sources to publish many of their reports, disregarding the rules and principles of media work, which always favors the truth over any other considerations.

The media has become one of the most important tools for managing wars and political disputes between countries in the age of crises and a threat to their national security. Therefore, it is essential for media operators to pay attention to this fact through foreign media and build specialized teams that can address the outside world, communicate with international public opinion, and influence it.