History of War Coverage Essay

The four stages of the Thirty Years' War, which was fought mostly in the Holy Roman Empire (modern Germany), involved nearly all of the major powers of Europe, and was a war that used religion as a cover-up for politics. The war caused the demise of the Holy Roman Empire, and the rise of France as the new power in Europe. During the war new technologies also were used. The Thirty Year's War was ended by the peace of Westphalia in 1648.

World War II World War II was a pivotal event of the 20th century and a defining

Throughout history, and still today, Americans have looked to popular media outlets to stay up to date on the current issues our nation is involved in. Many Americans take the news reported at face value instead of digging deeper than the headlines to do a little of their own research. A clear majority of those Americans believe if they read it in the newspaper or see it on social media, it must be true. However, the media is notorious for manipulating the facts in order to advance the American government’s agenda. A manipulating media circuit is nothing new. An example of this is the USS Greer incident. Multiple media reports helped advanced President Roosevelt’s desire to engage in war by publishing inaccurate reports from the September 4, 1942 incident.

Throughout history we have seen how the government can censor the media during a time of war, in despite of the first amendment. We are entitled to our voices and opinions and by censoring what the media and citizens feel, not allowing them to express their concerns or ideas or concepts is an atrocity. The government decides if we enter a war not the citizens. Are we are never allowed to speak out against a war? Does this mean we are unpatriotic or unamerican? During the Civil War, the military often kept reporters off the battlefields. Years later, the U.S. entered the First World War and took control of all radio communications and censored all photographs. Congress then passed the Espionage and

There were many underlying causes of the Great War, one of the primary reasons was the creation of alliances between countries. Another reason, which was helped by the alliances, was the fact that Serbia killed the Austria-Hungary archduke, causing the two of them to go to war. Altogether many people in the world were excited to go to war, wanting to prove how strong their country is and thinking it would be a quick war.

In 1812, The U.S. declared war on Great Britain. However, was this war really a necessary war? I believe this war was not necessary for three reasons. The first reason the war was not necessary was because the British did not want war with the U.S.. The British were already in a war with France and this wasn't a fair war for them.The second reason the war of 1812 wasn't justifiable was because the British were even willing to stop interfering with American Wars so the war wouldnt start. They sent a message to America saying they would stop interfering with American shipping, but sadly it arrived after the declaration of war. One of the reasons America declared war was because of the BRitish impressment of American ships and sailors.The third

So what did the people have to rely on for coverage of the war? They relied on Hollywood to tell of WWII’s heroic stories. The movie industry had taken over this generation as we became less of an intellectual and relied more on visual effects and entertainment for information. In the movies, viewers were lead on to believe that most wars scenes were about killing the evil bad guy and reigning in patriotic glory. While the “bad guys” got blown into oblivion, American soldiers rarely died, got injured, even bled for that matter. But not only did the movies warp how American’s viewed war, but the media had a twisted input on it as well. “But the news wasn’t manipulated only by censors. John Steinbeck, a tough minded writier who exposed human misery during the Depression, admitted that as a war reporter he deliberately slanted his stories to omit anything that might shock civilians. He didn’t report on the rotten conditions suffered by the infantry… (Adams 9). Eisenhower even said that “public opinion wins wars” (Adams 10). The news was altering the truth, and reporting it back to their loyal audiences all across America. Magazines like the Reader’s Digest boomed in the 1930’s with short and sweet stories that offered optimistic views towards the war (Adams 11).

In the early 20th century, the assasination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serbian, catapulted European powers into a string of events that led them to a World War. This war, known as the Great War, was caused by allied countries being sucked in one by one, and eventually, the United States had to make a decision: to join the war or to remain nuetral. Due to specific circumstances, such as the Zimmerman note and the sinking of US merchant ships, the United States government decided to enter the war on the side of the Triple Entente. This, however, stirred up controversy among the people of the United States, as some were pro-war and some were anti-war. The government, urging for the war, made arguments towards it through glorifying its political

The United States government has historically used propaganda to entice, encourage, and even shame a person into enlisting in to the uniformed services and/or supporting the war effort. The effective use of propaganda does not only affect the American public’s opinion of a war and its leaders, but also affects their commitment to the war effort. Ineffective use (or lack of) of propaganda can lead to resentment and undermine public trust in its leaders and their ability to lead the nation. This essay will show how the use of media has either supported or hindered the effective use of governmental propaganda in influencing the American public during times of war and why is it sometimes not important to know what is the “whole truth.” The areas that will be covered will be the propaganda used during the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World War I-II, the Cold War/Vietnam, and also it’s affect on public opinion.

The military and U.S. government have the ultimate say in what is broadcasted. For Operation Iraqi Freedom, the military came up with new press rules that addressed previous criticisms that it did not allow journalists contact with fighting troops in combat situations. The Pentagon now allowed reporters to travel with U.S. military units as long as they followed a strict set of rules. These rules basically meant that the military could censor and monitor all outgoing broadcasts and reports from the war. If any of the rules were broken, the reporter would be immediately sent out of contact with the military. This makes it very hard to believe the broadcasts coming from the conflict, yet the American public accepted them as the truth which is exactly how the government had designed.

In the article “’In Case the Raid is Unsuccessful…’ Selling Dieppe to Canadians,” Timothy Balzer argues that press coverage following the event was skewed. The raid was not successful but was portrayed to the Canadian public as opposite. Balzer contends that censorship regulations were placed to control what information could be shared of the event. Three days prior to the raid, the ‘Combined Report’ was proposed by members of involved organizations. It outlined specific policies to suggest the raid be viewed as a required test, valuable lesson and a successful expenditure if failure occurred. Balzer states that reporters and Canadian public became critical of the events at Dieppe after learning of rising casualty numbers. New coverage

Censorship of war information in the United States between the mid twentieth and early twenty-first centuries has changed drastically. The role, methods and freedom of the media fundamentally changed between World War II and the first Iraq War in the early 2000’s. During World War II, citizens´ options for obtaining information, in general, and especially about the war, was extremely limited. All of these options were heavily controlled and censored accordingly at the Federal government’s discretion. In contrast to this, by the time of the first Iraq War, citizens had many more ways to get information and investigate the status of the war effort. The

Also, the general public of neutral nations must be supplied with the arguments of victory and of a just cause, followed by a cautious relay of every success, great or small, and by brilliant descriptions of the spirit that animates the troops. The neutral countries and individuals, especially when weak and “necessarily somewhat at the mercy of the side that eventually proves victorious, is naturally disposed to sit on the fence and lean towards the side that he imagines to be winning.” (Doob, 34) Finally allied, friendly

Nowadays journalists have the responsibility to report facts as accurately, objectively, and disinterestedly as is humanly possible. ‘’The, honest, self-disciplined, well-trained reporter seeks to be a propagandist for nothing but the truth’’ (Casey, 1944b).

Thousands of our nation's men and women were fighting for their country, yet the media limited the amount of information that they chose to pass on to the public. Each day the media is faced with the choice of making decisions of what news to pass on, when that news could make a significant difference in someone's life, or in the fate of our nation.