Apart from that, there is no doubt that attachment journalism is very persuasive, but it is criticized for focusing only on human interest stories, consequently paying less attention to the bigger picture. Karoline von Oppen (2009, p. 10) argues “that paradoxically attachment journalism has made us all spectators of an alien war, meaning we may absolve all responsibility for its origins and representations” because these human interest stories they only serve to function as a desensitizing apparatus, until the public accepts that the only solution is the military solution (von Oppen 2009) or known as “humanitarian intervention.” And as mentioned above, such examples from the past have clearly shown how a major news network would manipulate news to win over audiences. But in Martin Bell's defense, this was due to the 1991 Gulf War, when the focus was mainly on armaments and military strategies, so he had to shift the focus of the mainstream media towards a more humane approach. For an example of how these human-interest stories about desensitize, a former BBC Africa correspondent, George Alagiah, reported on famines, especially in the small town of Tonji. In his first news report, he was sure to include images of what the famine looks like so that the public would identify and recognize it, and for the second, he included interviews with prominent figures, which he believed were more insightful. But the answer he got was that people only remembered the first news story. Alagiah believes that human rights are an absolute truth and asks for the public to understand, "but he is aware that this is not at all what his audience seems to be doing, instead of adopting a rigorous ethical stance, his audience and his listeners instead. .. ... half of the paper ... a frenzy, but "if both sides had paid more attention to the issues of the conflict, their accounts would have been more accurate" (Lynch 2007, p. 9). Hanitzsch often finds himself at odds with the notion of peace journalism. Galtung accuses traditional views of journalism of distorting reality, but paradoxically, here too, peace journalism shifts the focus of its reporting from the bigger picture to a definitive problem (Hanitzsch 2005). Hanitzsch argues that the chain of events created by a pacifist journalist could actively be opposed Ambon, because if they had not done so, the report could have aroused emotions in support or violent groups, consequently endangering the newspapers themselves (Hanitzsch 2005).