Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How media effects war
Media Bias and Its Influence on Public Opinion on Current Events
Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How media effects war
War against Iraq By Olivier Gaudreau
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.
North American Media’s Portrayal on the Iraq War
The Bush administration claimed that they intended to protect the American people from the imminent or future attacks by Saddam from the weapons of mass destruction. They further claimed that their goal was to install the much needed democracy in Iraq. What surprises is the fact that these arguments were not questioned as it should in the US media. The Iraqi war was depicted as USA verses Iraq or Bush verses Saddam. The perception assumed that the only players were Bush and Saddam and the goal being to win the war.
Media coverage only displayed the fact that Saddam`s regime was a threat to world peace and that the only solution was to go to war (Miller and Gordon, 2002). It failed to highlight past relations between the US and Iraq such as the 1991 war and its consequences on the Iraqi people over the decades. Coverage only focused on the past relations between Iraq and the Al-Qaeda. The US media could have consid...
... middle of paper ...
...
Kumar, D. (2006). Media, War, and Propaganda: Strategies of Information Management During the 2003 Iraq War. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, Vol. 3(1). Pp. 48-69.
Luckhurst, R. (2012). In War Times: Fictionalizing Iraq. Contemporary Literature, Vol. 53(4). Pp.713-737.
Miller, J. and Gordon, M. R. (2002). Threats and Responses: Baghdad’s Arsenal; White House Lists Iraq Steps to Build Banned Weapons. New York Times.
Rosenberg, D. (2013). The Faces of the Iraq War, Ten Years Later. Slate.
Sachs, S, (2003). A Nation at War: Mideast Coverage; Arab Media Portray War as Killing Field. New York Times.
Soroka, S., Loewen, P., Fournier, P. and Rubenson, D, (2013). The Impact of News Photos on Support for Military Action. Canadian Election Study Working Papers Series, Vol. 2. Pp. 25-26.
Szoldra, P. (2014). Tell Me Again, Why Did My Friends Die in Iraq? Slate.
September 11, 2001 marked a tragic day in the history of the United States; a terrorist attack had left the country shaken. It did not take long to determine those who were behind the attack and a call for retribution swept through the nation. Citizens in a wave of patriotism signed up for military service and the United States found resounding international support for their efforts in the war on terror. Little opposition was raised at the removal of the Taliban regime and there was much support for bringing Osama Bin Laden and the leaders of al-Qaeda to justice. Approval abroad diminished approximately a year and a half later when Afghanistan became a stepping stone to the administration’s larger ambition, the invasion of Iraq. The administration would invent several stories and in some cases remain silent of the truth where would prove positive for the Iraqi invasion. It seems they were willing to say anything to promote the largely unpopular and unnecessary war they were resolved on engaging in.
Saddam Hussein’s main purpose of sending troops to take over Kuwait was to take control of their oil fields, which Hussein believed would be an easy task; however, he failed to understand that the United States and United Nations were keeping a very close watch on the Iraqi’s actions. Hussein also had other motives, such as freeing himself from the debt he was drowning in from the Iran-Iraq War just two years earlier. He set the pretense for war with Kuwait by defining their refusal to give land to Iraq as an act of military belligerence. President Bush ordered the United States to respond just five days after Iraq had invaded Kuwait. If the United States had not taken action, Hussein would have possibly continued to invade other oil producing countries and take control of the United States main sources of oil as well as threaten a number of innocent people’s lives.
The media takes a biased approach on the news that they cover, giving their audience an incomplete view of what had actually happened in a story. Most people believe that they are not “being propagandized or being in some way manipulated” into thinking a certain way or hearing certain “truths” told by their favorite media outlets (Greenwald 827). In reality, everyone is susceptible to suggestion as emphasized in the article “Limiting Democracy: The American Media’s World View, and Ours.” The
The task of the United States demonizing Saddam Hussein was facilitated by many factors, both real and imaginary; a mixture of true facts and public relations image making. On the fact side, Saddam Hussein was indeed a dictator, and responsible for some true atrocities. Hussein ruled with an iron fist. Most accounts of political analysts looking at Iraq agree that his rein was one characterized by fear of the state.
In conclusion, the media played a big role when it came to influencing people from all around the world. The media did an excellent job at manipulating millions of people. The sad part is they did it with absolute ease. As discussed throughout this piece, the media manipulated the feelings of people in regards to 9/11 on a daily basis, increased the belief of Islamophobia, and help create many lasting effects directly in relation with 9/11. Ultimately, 9/11 is an event that will go down in history as one of the most devastating events to ever take place.
Shaheen, J. (1985). Media Coverage of the Middle East: Perception of Foreign Policy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, v482, pp. 160-75.
it does not tell us the impact of the television address, so we do not
7. Purdum, Todd, S., and the staff of the New York Times, A Time of Our Choosing; America’s War in Iraq, Times Books, 2003
Ells, Mark Van. 1998. "No Blood For Oil: Protesting the Persian Gulf War". Journal for the Study of Peace and Conflict
The 'Standard'. (2011), “On Behalf of a Grateful Nation: Conventionalized Images of Loss and Individual Opinion Change in War.” International Studies Quarterly 55, 545-561. Gelpi, C. (2010) “Performing on cues? The Formation of Public Opinion Toward War.”
George Bush even announced a radio broadcast, saying that the war was directed against the ruthless men leaders of the country and that it would deliver help in different forms for the people of the country to create a “new Iraq”. George W. Bush believed that Iraq people were innocent and needed to be liberated from under the govern of Saddam Hussein and so issued that if Hussein and his sons chose not to leave the country of Iraq within 24 hours, conflict would be unavoidable according to the document George W. Bush, 2003. Bush wanted the terrorism that threatened America and the rest of the world to be terminated and that it would only happen if the root of the problem, Saddam Hussein, was disarmed according to the source. If left unchecked, he believed that Iraq would only grow in power and come to challenge “all free nations” and so issued an announcement that is shown in the first source as his announcement of US invasion of Iraq. “The United States with other countries will work to advance liberty and peace in that region.” George Bush said, talking about the threat in
In the book, The Media and Foreign Policy, Simon Serfaty, Executive Director of the Johns Hopkins Foreign Policy Institute in Washington, D. C., and research professor of American foreign policy at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced international Studies, shares his own and fellow authors collected essays on the media's effect on foreign policy and foreign policy decision making of the United States, if there is any. Serfaty has edited several books on foreign relations and foreign policies as well as authored many of his books and essays. His work has been primarily focused on foreign policy and foreign relations since the onset and ending of the "Cold War". In The Media and Foreign Policy, Serfaty brings together a collection of essays that defend the media's current and past role of reporting the United States' foreign policy decisions and relations.
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...
The main aim of this report is to analyze the impacts of changes in the media concerning the societal and individual view of politics and politicians. The report also describes significant milestones in mass media since the year 1960 and examines the impact of mass media on how people think politically. The report then considers the effect of technological advancements in mass media and the effect on the results of elections. The use of mass media has increased over the last fifty years in that it is a primary medium through which supporters of various campaigners share their ideas and views concerning politicians and different political parties. Through social media, behaviors and performance of several activists have brought
Both groups further believed that th... ... middle of paper ... ... 004). This shows the role played by the media in the Iraqi War and how the media was used to change the general public perception about the invasion. Bibliography Knightly, P. The First Casualty: From the Crimea to Vietnam: the War Correspondent .