The Military Manipulated The Media During The First Gulf War

Write an essay that offers a critical examination of the concept of the ‘guilty media’ thesis in respect of any war of your choice

Many historians have written about the use of propaganda over the centuries, but very few have written about how the effects of mass media has affected the American publics opinion of the government during times of war. Historians have written a lot about how mass media has increased over time, yet they have not made the correlation between the effective use of propaganda and public favor, or the ineffective use of propaganda and public distrust. The types of mass media articles that will be investigated will be articles on print media (magazines, pamphlets), posters,

The Vietnam War proved to governments all over the world that, in order to have a successful military campaign, some form of censorship needs to take place. The Washington Post has reported that due to the effects of the media in Vietnam, “every U.S. military engagement since… has featured attempts to control the media” (Hajela 2006, para. 13) which demonstrates how, since Vietnam, governments have been trying to avoid a similar reaction. Journalists who also reported in Vietnam recall interviewing generals with media handlers present in later conflicts, and mention, in relation to the censorship in Vietnam that, “[they] don't think that in our lifetimes we will ever see that kind of freedom again.” (Hajela 2006, para. 14) The Vietnam War not only made people aware of the need for censorship, but also the power the media holds, which was made clear in the changing attitudes of the media. This is made clear through public reactions and the timing of which they began to support withdrawals from Vietnam. The Department of Veterans’ Affairs, of the Australian government, highlights the power of the media, stating that, “opposition to the war, as the ALP had learnt to its cost in 1966, was not a vote winner… [however in] 1969… it was electorally popular to oppose the war,” (Australian Government Department of Veterans’ Affairs 2015, para. 2) This emphasises the power of the

Powerful words these scholars use such as ‘decisive’, suggest the true extent of the medias’ impact. In the end it was the public pressures the media itself created through its strongly emotive coverage that was a deciding factor in America’s continued involvement in Vietnam. The historic decision to demobilize to satisfy public opinion proved to be a significant aspect in why the United States lost the war in Vietnam.

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.

The mass media is responsible for providing the general public with information regarding current events and issues that are occurring in the world. In addition, journalists have the ability to influence and impact individuals’ ideologies about certain topics by the way they present the information, either in a positive or negative manner (Beckford 1994). On the other hand, scholarship strives to methodologically and critically study and analyze a phenomenon in order to present factually correct information. Furthermore, this paper will discuss the difference between journalism and scholarship, and will use the tragic incident that occurred at Waco as an example to illustrate each fields differences in discussing/reporting the events that unfolded.

During the period 1960 and 1964 television in America had become extremely familiar to the public. Not only were they able to now be involved in the Vietnam War, but see it on their TV screens at home for the first time ever. In the 1950’s, only 9% of American homes owned a television, however, this figure rose dramatically to 93% during the time of the war in 1966. With inadequate government controls, The American journalists in Vietnam were now able to record video footage and expose the American government of their lies. The government’s failure in maintaining censorship to the public just like they had managed to do in World War 1 had failed. The media was now able to publish uncensored pictures and videos

The United States of America has always had an invested interest in the Middle East: from a religious perspective to a financial one. America has always ensured that it will have an official war narrative for becoming involved with the Middle East. As the United States evolved, so did the war narratives. Nowadays, technology allows most people to have access to information in little to no time. Unfortunately, we often forget that there are many influences on the war narrative. For example, this nation’s past, the public’s expectations, and personal bias are just a few influencers of America’s narrative. America’s current war narrative is still influenced by the public perspective of the Vietnam War. Vietnam was the first time what happened during a war could be broadcasted at home. This played a huge part in the growth of the public’s anti-war sentiment. Thus, control of what the American public saw was necessary. During the Gulf War, the government made sure to account for this new form of narrative, and this caution has affected the media’s portrayal of the Middle East.

What 's your comparison between how the media broadcasts the war, and the difference and how a

Human beings are influenced by what they see, hear, or read on the news. Today we have several sources to receive news: newspapers, internet, and radio. However, with this information people come to question what is truly the truth. The Cable News Network (CNN) displays footage of current events happening all around the world. This well-known 24-hour news broadcasting system began to change its traditional pattern of news began to encapsulate the way media directs the foreign policy formulation. For the individuals behind the scenes, including policy makers and academics, the 1990’s was a time of media empowerment and growth. Piers Robinson thesis in the “CNN effect revisited” is the ways in which the media influences foreign policy formulation, socially and politically. In his argumentative essay, Robinson discusses the development of foreign policy since the “war on terror” and the “humanitarian war.” Additionally, Robinson discusses the ways media intervened with political decisions and how the media’s voice created military action. The media that has the privilege to voice opinions, can result in less freedom for the press

Did the media change the course of military operations or government decision-making in Vietnam? The War Within: America’s Battle Over Vietnam (1995), by Tom Wells, labelled the media as the “opinion makers.” They decided how to portray the war through news channels, magazines, radio and newspapers. The

The great divide at issue is the difference in views toward what was then the pending was against Iraq. Krugman compared U.S. TV news headlines that proclaimed, “Antiwar Rallies Delight Iraq” with a very different, much more positive portrayal on the other side of the Atlantic of a huge allies that took place throughout the world. The difference in reporting, as Krugman speculates, may relate to different perceptions internationally in the role of the media. The American perception may be that it is the job of the media to prepare the public for a coming war. The European media, apparently having a different agenda, are far more critical of U.S. foreign policy. Accordingly, opinion polls, even in Britain, show that citizens there ranked the United States as the most world’s dangerous nation. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the government at every level began to restrict the information available to the public, including the holding of suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Television news owners simply followed the owners and political advisors in the service of

In times of War, the media plays a crucial role both in reporting, monitoring and giving updates. During the Vietnam War of 1955-1975, the American press played crucial roles of reporting until it ended up shifting its tone under the influence of occurrence of some events like the Tet Offensive, the My Lai Massacre, the bombing of Cambodia and leaking of Pentagon papers resulting into lack of trust in the press (Knightly 1975). From the beginning of the war up to present times there have been undying debates over the role of media in the war. The have been various criticisms over the American News Media’s actions and influences on the outcome of the war. The debate is embedded on the particular political assumptions perceived across the

“A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth” – Joseph Goebbels, German Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. This is the exact words of Nazis most famous propagandist in using media as a mass weapon of propaganda and mind control. Could you imagine Germany in 1930s, without Television channel, without the Internet, without every mobile device in your palm, what channel of information will you get? Of course, newspapers, flies, images, celebrities were used as tools for propaganda purposes, designed to provoke a reaction, and ultimately, a form of control over their citizen. Nowadays, with all the advanced of technologies, information can reach everyone in every corner of the Earth, the message is delivered in the subtlest ways, without people’s conscious, has shaped everyone’s decision, or at least shape their behavior toward the decision that the orchestrator want the audience to perceive. With the booming of internet, information sharing seamlessly, we must ask ourselves, the role of media in conveying, shaping the society that we are living in. Let look at few examples of U.S propaganda machine, and later, the particular case of fish sauce in Viet Nam back in October 2016.

Since my research deals with a conflict situation in the context of international politics, those studies that have dealt with similar issues are the ones that are most relevant to me. One such study was conducted by Maslog, Seow and Hun and published in Asian Journal of communication. The researchers looked at the how newspapers in five Asian countries covered the Iraq war. The study concluded that newspapers from non-muslim countries emphasized War journalism frame, and generally supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq, while newspapers from muslim counries opposed the invasion and emphasized Peace journalism frame. Reseachers found that ‘religion and sourcing are two important factors shaping the framing of Asian news coverage on the Iraq war.’ (Maslog, Seow, Hun,