There are two major perspectives on what role the media occupies in the current political landscape: Pluralist and Marxist. Those who support the pluralist perspective see the media as performing two essential tasks, “(1) it informs the public and (2) it acts as a watchdog on those in power” (Edkins, and Zehfuss 157). The second perspective on the media, the Marxist perspective, takes the following view, “For Marxists, the ruling class uses the media as a tool of persuasion: they try and convince everyone that the hierarchical structure of society is serving everyone’s interests, not just their own” (Edkins, and Zehfuss 158). The unifying trait of these perspectives is the belief that media is influential in the formation of public opinion. Media is very important in forming public opinion, especially during war, however the media’s ability to report during wartimes has been different for each conflict. The government censors the media’s reports during wartime for several reasons. The primary reason is the need to keep information about troop movements and other security items secret. While the protection of military secrets is important, the freedom of press is an important tenet of democracy. During war there is an intricate balance between the freedom of press and censorship. Since the Vietnam War, the balance has gone back and forth. Only recently has a compromise between the media and the military been found with the practice of embedding journalists with troops. However, the process of embedding journalists with troops has impaired the media’s ability to act as a pluralist watchdog for public interests. The Vietnam War was the first war to take place after a series of massive technological advancements which ... ... middle of paper ... ...s likely that the embed program will be seen again in future conflicts. While the embed program seems to be a healthy compromise between the military and the media, in reality, it victimizes public interests because it prevents the media from informing the public in a fair and unbiased manner, and prevents the media from protecting public interests. Works Cited Edkins, Jenny, and Maja Zehfuss. Global Politics: a New Introduction. 1st ed. New York, NY: Routledge, 2009. Print. Kennedy , William V. . The Military and the Media. Wesrport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1993. Print. Hess, Stephen, and Marvin Kalb. The Media and the War on Terrorism. 1st ed. Washington D.C.: the Brookings Institution, 2003. Print. Sylvester, Judith, and Suzanne Huffman. Reporting from the Front. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishing Group Inc., 2005. Print.
Edkins, Jenny, and Maja Zehfuss. Global Politics: A New Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
Epstein, Edward J. News From Nowhere: Television and the News, Vintage, New York NY. 1973, pp. 16; Pearson, David. “The Media and Government Deception.” Propaganda Review. Spring 1989, pp. 6-11.
“Murrow, McCarthy and the media frontier analyzed” also discusses how “we as a country walked into the war in Iraq without the media doing its job…It may be official blacklisting or maybe not, but deception is just as possible today in different forms (Sasanow, 3).”
advance for the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong, but also gave the United States a
When the US initiated the 2003 invasion of Iraq, it gave the justification that the Iraqi dictator, Saddam aided the perpetrators of the September 11 attack on United States soil. The Bush administration also accused Saddam of engineering a nuclear program and amassing destructive weapons. All the US justification and the entire war have been highly criticized on many fronts. The media has taken the lead on shaping public opinion on both sides of the war, that is, the US or rather North America and the Middle East. It is a fact that citizens get to understand an issue such as the Iraq war through the perspective of the media (Al-Rawi, 2013). This paper focuses on the media, its portrayal of the war and the effect of its perspective.
This essay will discuss to what degree the media can be blamed for the United States’ loss in the Vietnam conflict ending 1975. It will be based predominantly on key written resources on the subject, but it will also contain - by means of an interview - certain first-hand observations from a Vietnam War veteran.
One of the greatest revolutions in the twentieth century was not political in nature, however, it aided in many different political revolutions. This revolution was the communications revolution. The twentieth century has experienced one of the greatest changes in means of communication including technologies such as radio, motion pictures, the Internet, advanced communications and most importantly the television. Sadly, political leaders and the government to convince or persuade the masses that their ideas supercede those of others have utilized these technologies.
The Vietnam War began in the year 1954, after the ascension to power of Ho Chi Minh, who was a communist leader in North Vietnam. The leader was spreading communism, and because the United States wanted to stop the spread, it sent military troops to aid South Vietnamese to stop this vice. The war saw about 3million people die with the inclusion of 58,000 American soldiers. About 150,000 people were wounded during the war. In 1975, South Vietnamese government surrendered the war after the communist forces forced them to surrender. Vietnam unified communism and became a Socialist Republic. Although decades have passed since the occurrence of the Vietnam war, the American culture, which was partly born as a result of this war, is celebrated today.
Mingst, Karen A., and Jack L. Snyder. Essential Readings in World Politics. N.p.: W.W. Norton, 2013. Print.
Minimizing harm done by journalism in times of war is a difficult task. Naturally, there are bits of information that the government needs to keep secret for one reason or another. There is also the danger of victims' stories being exploited and sensationalized. The SPJ's Code of Ethics recommends that journalists should "treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings worthy of respect" (Society). During the extreme...
Willetts, P. (2011), ‘Transnational actors and International Organisations in Global Politics’ in Baylis, J., Smith, S. and Owens, P. (eds) The Globalization of World Politics. An Introduction to International Relations. 5th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press
The year is 2006,watching TV, you flip through the various news stations to learn about the recent news in Iraq, the majority of the news simply says that ‘x’ amount of soldiers or marines were killed in such and such attack. You don’t like what you are hearing so you go online to read an independent embedded (embedded refers to news reporters who are attached to military units) reporters story. Online you read that two new schools were built, and the Iraqis, supported by US forces, led an attack to capture an insurgent leader. The big media corporations such as FOX, NBC, CNN, and many others distort the facts that are on the ground. The small, mostly independent, reporters generally try to get a first-hand account of the situation on the ground. They are their alongside the soldiers, sailors, and marines. In some cases these reporters may need to drop their camera or pen and defend themselves. These examples bring many questions that I want to know. The biggest of these questions is how do these different types of reporting, the “main stream media”, and the small independent embedded reporters affect the views that the American people have back home? The reason I chose this topic is that after reading The Good Soldiers and Moment of Truth in Iraq, I was intrigued in the considerable difference between what was wrote in books and what CNN reported on the nightly news. I did not find a ‘good’ answer I could find to answer my question, however I did draw three conclusions. The conclusions are as follows: the ‘big media’ misconstrues the information from the battlefield to fit their own agendas; the media fails to obtain a personal more in depth view and instead report after the smoke has cleared instead of what happened during t...
SCHECHTER, Danny (2001). "Covering Violence: How Should Media Handle Conflict?" mediachannel.org. Online at: http://www.mediachannel.org/views/dissector/coveringviolence.shtml, consulted on March 27, 2004.
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 American political spectrum. Those criticizing the media for its role are of the opinion that the media misunderstood the United States military effort hence hindering succession of the American will in a war which was to be won.
Rather than being a neutral conduit for the communication of information, the U.S. media plays an intricate role in shaping and controlling political opinions. Media is extremely powerful in the sense that without an adequate functioning media, it is virtually impossible for a sophisticated social structure like the U.S. Government to exist. Henceforth, all known sophisticated social structure, have always dependent upon the media’s ability to socialize. The U.S. government generally will exploit the media, often times manipulating the enormous power of the printed word. Ultimately empowering the U.S. government, strengthening it with the ability to determine and control the popular perception of reality. One way in which government achieves this objective, is by its ability to misuse the media’s ability to set the agenda. Contrary to popular belief, media is in fact an enormous hegemony. In fact, separate independent news organizations relatively do not exist. Rather than creating an independent structured agenda of there own, generally lesser smaller news organizations adapt to a prepared agenda, previously constructed by a higher medium. Based upon this information alone, it is quite apparent that media functions in adherence to the characteristics of a hierarchy. This simply means that media is structured in a way that it operates functioning from top to bottom. This is also identical to the hierarchical nature of the human body, in that from the commands of the brain transferred through the central nervous system, the body responds accordingly. In order for the U.S. government to control and determine the public’s popular perception of reality, the government must shape and oversee the information that the media reports to the existing populous. This particular process of democracy is known and referred to by political scientists as cognitive socialization. However, many of us, who do not adhere to the cushioning of political correctness, refer to it as the propaganda machine. Numerous political scientists consider cognitive socialization to be the most effective form of political socialization. According to theory, cognitive socialization is doctored up information, which is strategically fragmented in such a manipulative manner, that the probability of its rationalization is highly predictable. The manipulative properties of cognitive socialization are so diabolical and Machiavellian in nature, that I consider it to be the ultimate perversion of the democratic process. In all seriousness, numerous intellectuals, and gentleman held in good stature agree, that cognitive socialization is the product of an evil genius.