The War on Terrorism and the US Propaganda Machine
Totalitarian regimes control their people by bludgeoning and incarcerating them. Critics of Western societies claim that democratic governments maintain approval for their actions through the "manufacture of consent", a cryptic and insidious form of propaganda.
"How?", you ask skeptically. By framing the debate, the theory says. By setting up a debate between two opposing acceptable views--one slightly left of government policy, and the other slightly right--the media can marginalize the radicals and legitimize the party line. Thus the debate surrounding the war in Vietnam was a debate of the hawks ("If we keep fighting we can win") vs. the doves ("It's too
…show more content…
In US news, a couple of simple statistics were buried deep in articles, but virtually no one realized that if the trucks didn't get in before winter hit (which is a lot earlier in mountainous Afghanistan than in balmy NJ), several hundred thousand--if not several million--civilians were sure to die. The more extensive UK coverage accounts for the fact that the Guardian (a major British newspaper) has got five times as many hits from Americans surfing the web since September 11th.
It certainly does appear that the mainstream US media is framing the debate on the war. First, the media is supporting the war effort virtually unanimously, often zealously: "We'll do whatever is our patriotic duty''--News Corp exec Rupert Murdoch; "the U.S. should bomb the Afghan infrastructure to rubble--the airport, the power plants, their water facilities, and the roads"--Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly); "America roused to a righteous anger has always been a force for good. States that have been supporting if not Osama bin Laden, people like him need to feel pain. If we flatten part of Damascus or Tehran or whatever it takes, that is part of the solution"--Rich Lowry, National Review editor. Second, they are marginalizing contrasting views, as seen by CNN Chair Walter Isaacson's comment that it "seems perverse to focus too much on the casualties or hardship in Afghanistan." Third, media dissent
The media in the United States of America has grown on a massive scale in the form of the Liberal Model. This of course entails market-dominated practices and professionalization in journalism in all adequate media aspects. The First Amendment has provided the American citizens with the freedom of speech ever since it was established. This privilege is very evident in today’s society as news media on all sides of the political spectrum gets mass amounts of coverage throughout the country. The U.S. observes never-ending debates going on in the political atmosphere everyday because of the countless issues occurring in the country including the management of the economy, handling of taxes, and many more. Although it is nearly impossible for the media to please everyone in society as a
What this paper seeks to address are the differences and underlying reasons in media coverage and national perceptions, as demonstrated by the case of Bergdahl and Shalit. Despite the remarkable similarities between the two stories of their captivity and release, why did each play out so differently in their countries’ respective media outlets? These two cases can help us understand what role the media plays in delivering the news and how certain news is framed and for what purpose. It also demonstrates the role that partisan coverage plays in the current media environment and how those narratives define perceptions of the event and essentially tell the viewer what to believe, instead of giving them information to make their opinions.
No one anticipated the international chaos that would emerge during the twentieth century, especially the devastation caused by World War I, World War II, and the Cold War. World War II was the most destructive war in human history and changed the history of the world forever, engaging the world’s most influential superpowers in the largest international event of the era. World War II was fought not only by the armed forces, but also by the home fronts of every belligerent nation, exhausting the economy, the industry, and the morale of those living at home, escalating the conflict into a total war that was larger and fought more expansively than any other conflict in history. The use of American propaganda in the World War II war effort
Background/Cause: The September 11 attacks were largely caused by Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda. He held beliefs about the United States leading up to the attacks saying that America was weak. According to his comrade, Abu Walid al-Masri, bin Laden believed that the United States was much weaker than some of the people he was associated with. Bin Laden believed that the United States was a “paper tiger,” a belief not only held because of America’s departure from Lebanon, but also by the withdrawal of American forces from Somalia in 1993 and from Vietnam in the 1970s (Bergen).
There are many different hidden truths in the media that people do not know about due to the fact that the media emphasizes on just one particular point of view. Throughout the years, people have been biased in the media and the reason as to why this happens is that people choose to lean on one side such as republican, democrat, libertarian, or conservative. To be biased means to only be on one side of an argument or situation and only favor more of what one person has to say. There are a variety of different news channels in which they all tend to lean more on one side, there is not a single news channel that is on the same side as another. There are many current events that have multiple contentious between other news channels. The viewers
An article in this month's "Stuff" magazine for men, titled "Die American Scum" tells us that the world sucks. It sucks because while Americans have given other countries "Mickey Mouse, burgers and gum, won wars for them, kept the peace and disposed of dictators," all we have gotten in return is terrorism. The article, by John Parrish, goes on to discourage Americans from traveling to 10 "terrorist" countries including Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Colombia and Mexico.
Ever since the outbreak of war in both Iraq and Afghanistan there has been a large interest surrounding the news coverage of international conflicts and the governments’ best efforts to manage it. The truth is often blurred in the ‘fog of war’, as Knightly (2003) wrote in The First Casualty and it had started to manifest within the reporting of Iraq as the government pushed for sympathetic media coverage to legitimise and sustain war. The media was acknowledged as essential for the propaganda to “win the hearts and minds” (Allan & Zelizer, 2004) of the public. Therefore, from the pre-war period and onwards, many media conglomerates became competitive in a pressure to be ‘first’ to report on the war. This resulted in the increased use of ‘embedded’ journalists. However, these journalists were soon faced obstacles of censorship from the military and political officials, as the government tried to “spread the idea the war is an acceptable part of modern life.” (Miller, 2003, p. 68)
The terrorist attacks of September 11 led to a lot of pressure from the public to find those responsible and bring them to “justice”. In order to do so, President Bush declared a war on terrorism just a few days after the attacks, but little did he know that this very decision would also bring devastating consequences to many countries. Over time, people have been losing faith in the war and in its purpose. Consequently, countries whose economies have fallen under the Military Industrial Complex have manufactured a societal fear against Muslims and jihadists. As a result, they are now being stigmatized and portrayed as the enemies of democracy, and of the United States in particular. To make matter worse, it has driven western countries to
Terrorism and the United States A cloud of anthrax spores looming in the sky of San Diego California
The world has been changed forever since the tragic attack on September 11, 2001. An observer described the atrocity by saying, "It just went 'bam,' like a bomb went off. It was like holy hell (CNN 1). " The new world will be different from what any American has known before. A new war has arisen, not against a foreign country or a major region of the world, but rather against a select group of people who have the capabilities to destroy the lives of so many. The war against terrorism which the United States is now forced to wage will not be an easily won battle. This war will not be fought solely on scattered battlefields in certain countries. It will instead permeate through every aspect of life as we
September 11th changed the lives of many Americans, irrevocably. The horrendous attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon altered the way American’s viewed their positions within the world, not to mention their lives and their safety. The attacks brought terrorism to the forefront of national attention, in every aspect. The government became immediately immersed in an effort to understand and defeat terrorism, and simultaneously, the media, with its perverse fascination with violence and profit-driven espousal to round-the-clock, up-to-the-minute coverage, demonstrated an obsession with the attacks, by broadcasting almost nothing but the latest developments in the search and rescue efforts and investigations
"Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one." This quote by A.J. Liebling illustrates the reality of where the media stands in today's society. Over the past twenty years there has been an increase in power throughout the media with regard to politics. The media's original purpose was to inform the public of the relevant events that occurred around the world. The job of the media is to search out the truth and relay that news to the people. The media has the power to inform the people but often times the stories given to the public are distorted for one reason or another. Using slant and sensationalism, the media has begun to shape our views in society and the process by which
Another way media frames political issues is inserting media’s own position on the issue. The media’s position tends to be more liberal and promotes more democratic policies and issues. This bias coverage stems from a long growing relationship between the media and liberal forces (Ginsberg, Lowi & Weir, 1999). However, any bias can distort new coverage and influence audiences in that direction.
Ever since the beginning of the terrorist attacks on American soil, the War on Terror has been involved in the lives of Americans and nations near us. The War on Terror’s background originated through conflicts between warring countries in the Middle East; U.S. involvement started when a terrorist guided plane crashed into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 in New York City. The attack was suspected to be the work of the middle-eastern terrorist group Al-Qaeda. The U.S. military, under the leadership of then commander-in-chief George W. Bush, declared a “War on Terror” on the terrorist group and the fighting began.
The Global War on Terror is a military campaign led by the United States and the United Kingdom and supported by other NATO members. It was originally against al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them. This paper discusses how the Bush Administration handled the War on Terror as well as different aspects of it, including its terminology, its objectives, its military operations and criticism against it.