Rethinking Journalism in Territorial Name Disputes Through Multidirectional Memory and a Rights-Centred Approach

Abstract

Toponyms (territorial names) can mobilize people by shaping captivating nationalist narratives. They can thus be a source of controversial policies that could erode democratic values. Drawing on the study of the Macedonian Name Dispute (MND) over the past six years, the paper argues that journalism must rethink its coverage of these conflicts, as media often amplify domestic nationalist narratives and escalate tensions between nation-states, with measurable effects on bilateral relations and regional diplomacy. I focus here on public communication, as its practices have imposed a dogmatic view that shapes online communication, including social media content, especially in the case of the MND. Crucially, in symbolic name disputes over territories, the media do not merely mirror a pre‑existing national interest; they are active agents, since the dispute’s political reality is constructed and amplified through communication and cultural practices. In a globalized world, when the media uncritically rally behind national flags, they not only reinforce inequality and restrict people’s rights domestically but also harden interstate positions, complicate diplomacy, and undermine multilateral conflict‑resolution mechanisms. This essay argues for a normative approach to media coverage, focusing on facts, pluralism, and more inclusive perspectives in coverage of territorial name disputes. This normative approach draws on Rothberg’s notion of multidirectional memory to encourage reporting that recognizes overlapping memories and comparative claims rather than treating histories as exclusive competitions.