Recently, millions of viewers saw a video posted by the White House showcasing U.S. military actions against Iran. This clip astonishingly combined real strikes with elements from the video game Call of Duty, including "kill streak" animations that highlight effectiveness and achievements. This is pointed out by Daniel Baldino, a senior lecturer in political science and international relations at the University of Notre Dame, Australia.
In recent years, governments have increasingly turned to the visual language of video games and internet memes to cover military conflicts. This not only diminishes the significance of violence but also makes it harder for us to empathize with the victims, reducing our emotional response to suffering.
This approach shapes our perception of violence and subtly determines whose deaths are even considered tragedies.
War as Memes and Viral Content
U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth perceived the strikes as part of a larger campaign called "Operation Epic Fury," which reduces the distance between the military elite and combat enthusiasts.
The video published by the White House is just one of many similar initiatives. Social media is flooded with videos of military actions that turn into gaming clips or memes with thrilling music accompanying drone strikes and explosions. One of the Department of Homeland Security's videos about immigration raids used music from Pokémon.
However, the elements that make content viral also distort reality, hiding important details. It is often unclear who the targets of the attacks were, whether civilians were harmed, or if the strike was justified. Answers to these questions are rarely found in short videos.
The visual language of war is never neutral. It shapes our emotions and expectations. A serious problem arises when governments deliberately use gaming language to present real military operations without considering the consequences of these actions.
The meme culture exacerbates the situation. Irony and humor create distance from grief. When violence is turned into a joke or a montage, it becomes difficult to grasp the emotional reality of what is happening.
Conflicts continue, but their consequences are no longer perceived as sharply.
From CNN to Call of Duty
The term "CNN effect" describes how television coverage of conflicts from Vietnam to Somalia was based on the principle of proximity. Footage of suffering brought distant wars into our homes and exerted moral pressure on authorities.
Although it was imperfect, the main idea was that "seeing" evokes "feeling," and "feeling" creates responsibility. The camera lingered on faces, correspondents pronounced the names of the dead, and viewers were given time to reflect on what they saw.
This model began to break down even before the advent of social media. The Gulf War of 1991 brought a new aesthetic: precision strikes filmed from above, where targets appeared as abstract figures on screens with a greenish tint.
Human casualties disappeared from the frame, giving way to the seductive promise of technological precision: "smart" bombs and "pinpoint" strikes. American critic Susan Sontag noted that this trains viewers to see military technology rather than the consequences of war.
The Unbearable
Philosopher Judith Butler considered the "ability to mourn" as a state in which some lives become worthy of grief. Not all deaths are perceived equally. The influence of culture and politics makes some lives less significant.
The visual grammar used in White House materials represents people as game characters. And such characters, by definition, evoke no pity. They become targets whose deaths should be noted.
On February 28, more than 160 girls, most of whom were under 12, were killed in an American airstrike on an elementary school in Shadjarah-Tayebeh in Minab. These tragic events were not reflected in White House materials.
Under pressure, President Trump suggested that Iran might have attacked the school itself with a Tomahawk missile, adding, "I just don't know enough about it. Whatever the report shows, I'm ready to accept it."
Meanwhile, Hegseth closed the Pentagon's mission to protect civilians and fired military lawyers responsible for ensuring compliance with international law during operations, calling them "a hindrance."
Democratic oversight of warfare depends not only on information but also on moral response: the ability to recognize the importance of what is happening.
What Can Be Done?
Memes will continue to spread, and governments will fight for attention in an overcrowded digital space.
However, it is important to realize what is at stake. The problem is not only the lack of context in viral videos (though it exists) but also that the visual language used in them hinders the emotional responses necessary for serious public discussion.
Wes J. Bryant, a former targeting specialist in the U.S. Special Forces, expressed his view:
We are abandoning the rules and norms that we tried to establish as a global community since World War II. There is no accountability.
Viewers can learn to pause. Not only to ask what happened but also to understand what emotions the format of presentation blocks and to whom they relate. This question is the beginning of recognizing responsibility.
War should not be perceived as a series of bright moments. It should be seen as loss, uncertainty, grief, and destruction. Restoring such understanding is not just a matter of media literacy; it is a moral issue.
The article "Deadly Strike or Call of Duty Video? How the U.S. Government Tries to Turn the War with Iran into Memes" was published on the K-News website.
