Hearts and Minds
"What was repeated for domestic consumption was that the United State was
engaged in an allied effort, supported by the United Nations, that also embraced
the sentiments of a good part of the world."
American people believed the US participated militarily in the first Iraqi War because we were contributing military support along with many other countries. What television and newspapers failed to mention were that citizens from Japan, Egypt, Jordan, Spain, North African cities and Latin America opposed participation in this war.
To loosen the "cocoon drawn around the American mind", the NY Times published a paid advertisement from a private group of Japanese making a statement against military intervention in international matters. This advertisement was placed weeks after the wars end, but it made a clear statement of an opposition to military involvement in the war.
United Nations support came from European, English speaking countries that shared similar industrial and economics interests as America. This too, was something not so visible to the American people who relied on the nations decision and the information provided from journalists.
posted by e.schaefer at 2:17 PM
1 Comments:
A good post.
The question is: Did the American media accurately portray world opinion about the Gulf War. Did they check the Bush administration's claims of international support with evidence of foreign public opinion?
Why is this important? Would the American public have cared if it had been demonstrated that the rest of the world was not on board for the Gulf War? Perhaps.
There was a lot more international support for the first Gulf War than for our current intervention in Iraq. How well have the Americn media kept us appraised of international reaction to this war? What does that say about our media? Is there any demand for this information?
Post a Comment
<< Home