Soldiers Disuse

"Several department officials said the problem may have played a role in the suicide of a soldier last year after he was taken to Fort Lewis in Washington State from Iraq. His intentions to kill himself were clearly documented in his digital medical record from overseas, but doctors at Fort Lewis did not consult the file and released him, according to department records and defense officials."

link to article

"More Viewing Less Knowledge"

"Despite all the coverage, people in the United States knew remarkably little about many crucial aspects of the back round and context of the war. The more people knew, the less likely they were to support the war; the less they knew, the more strongly they supported the war. People who generally watched a lot of television showed dramatically lower levels of knowledge and were substantially more likely to strongly support the use of military force against Iraq."

This goes back to what Ewen was saying about the portrayal of the war through the media. It says that people who watch more television are more likely to support the war and military force against Iraq. The reasoning behind this is that the media is not giving Americans all the facts about the war. We do not have a full understanding of why we are at war. There is no back round of why we invaded Iraq. Therefore Americans are left with no choice but to believe what we watch on television. The media can not explain the full back round and current story of the Iraq war. In conclusion of this article many believe that the media failed in relaying information to the public.

The wars portrayal through the media

"The answer arrived on TV. Not long past five o'clock as people returned home from work and watched the evening news , human devastation as popular entertainment became real. It was here. It was "fight night"; amidst a disorienting feeling of churning stomachs and dread, Americans sat and watched the show unfold. Long in the planning stage, the production values were high. Video-computer graphic teams had worked for weeks to punctuate a tenor of telegenic urgency. Bold letters filled the screen - "AMERICA AT WAR." WAR IN THE GULF"- providing stylized and alarming logos for the hours and days to come.This was truly the "living room war" that Vietnam had only purported to be."

The point that Ewen is making here is that this war with the Gulf has not been portrayed through the media in a realistic way. The war has been set up as if it was a boxing fight on television instead of a war. This keeps people from understanding the reality of the war. It was as if this first night of war had been set up in order to reel in viewers. It says in the paragraph "teams worked for weeks to punctuate a tenor of telegenic urgency." The media wanted the public to have a sense of urgency in order to raise their number of viewers.

No News is No News

"News, like nature abhors a vacuum, and in the absence of any other information, journalists in the gulf have often repoted little more than they have been told by governments. The result is an amplification of offical statements that cannot be independently verified and rudimentary explanations for a war that is one of this countryd most fateful undertakings. Despite their valiant effort to do so, the media cannot serve the country well under such conditions."

"but because of the pentagon restrictions they have not so much gotten the story "right" as avoided getting what they have of it wrong. "

"yet for each successful "smart bomb" video publicized by the pentagon now many others reveal weapons that failed to hit their targets?"


To me this artice was very intresting becuase it showed how the media and the government were working togahter but at the same time they are working against eachother so the media is basically having to create something from nothing becuase of the limited stories avaliable to them.

The War Potato

"Though citizens may protest, as they did in Vietnam, war encourages us to minimize the independent thought and action central to a democracy." Penley and Ross elaborate on this point by even saying that war is the most undemocratic activity of all, which holds weight in many aspects. It is hard to imagine one being able to gather enough objective information through the media to actually develop an independent thought. With a firewall on the information avavilable to the public, it is difficult for one to create an unbiased opinion about our involvement in a war. In terms of propaganda, I feel this article is highly unlikely to persuade its audience; The title catches the average reader, but the body, through its confusing vocabulary, and is clearly aimed towards an educated reader, in essence, turning off the "couch potato."

More Viewing, Less Knowledge

"Our Data suggested that thew television seemed to confuse more than to clarify. Even after controling for other variables, we discovered that the correlations between TV watching and knowledge were mostly negative," said Morgan. All through the article their is an association between heavy TV news watchers and less TV watchers. More people who watch TV will know less about the war than the less TV watchers. This fact is strange because it should be the other way around. It could be related to a sense of sensationalism that the media was trying to sell about it. They seem to only know more on what they see, than what they have read

Dangers of Cultural Invasion? By Mustafa Mahmoud

Dangers of Cultural Invasion?
By Mustafa Mahmoud

“It was not long ago that colonial powers came to take spices, slaves, gold and mineral ores, draining our resources and occupying our land. Now they are returning with considerable cunning to occupy our minds by different means, through science, technology, economy, art and philosophy.”

Mahmoud states how the world he lives in is still being subjugated and taken over, just like during the way it was dating back to the Crusades. Except now, the pillaging and occupying is done through subterfuge. That the press plays a great part in it, and how 65% of the world’s news comes from the United States. How the ideals of the western worlds (whether it is the United States or others like France) ideals are being forced on the people in the Middle East, and Africa.

Mahmoud compares the conquests and wars of the first crusade to the “war” today. Except this war is not being done with guns, knives, or bombs this war is being perpetrated through propaganda and money. How the Western World is dominating the rest of the world through the press, through offers of loans, grants and foreign aid. That the West has the same goal they had hundreds or even thousands of years ago, to eradicate the rest of the worlds different culture, identity, traditions, and liberate their resources, except this time their just doing it through technology and money.

Stuart Ewen, The Public Eye:
War in the Persian Gulf: A Report from the Couch

“Tabloid newspapers submitted to the exhortations of national cheerleader President Bush in a lurid flood of extravagant headlines: ‘Butcher of Baghdad!’ ’Hitler!’ ‘Child Abuse!’ and so forth. (I kept waiting for ‘SADDAMY!’ or ‘IRAQ & A HARD PLACE’—only to be fustrated.)”

Stuart Ewens article blasts the handling of the press by the American Government during the Persian Gulf War. The article begins quoting Walter Lippmann who had critiqued the United States policy of mass persuasion following the first World War. Ewen then goes on to bash the coverage of the war, claiming that the U.S. controlled the press throughout the war. How the first night, the press was somehow coerced into depicting imagery and news that said the war was won that first night. How because of the news that the media was forced ( at least he implies forced) to show the public, the next day they had to find a new way to spin things positively.

Ewen argues that after we did not have this immediate victory, the news was only allowed to show other ways to “sugar-coat” America’s involvement and the events taking place in Iraq and Kuwait. He goes on to say how the government and administration then started to use the media as a way to keep a military budget high and advertise for military spending.
Basically this entire article questions the ethics of the media, and our government during the first war in Iraq. He refers to how Vietnam gave the American public only a taste of a “Living Room War” but during the Persian Gulf War, it actually was a “Living Room War.” That the government carefully controlled the press to control public opinion and that the press itself had become nothing more than a tool for propaganda and the press was a joke.

Ewen the director of the Film and Media program at Hunter College; uses this article to push his own “Leftwing” and political views. He bashes the president, and the press itself for trying to cover the war. All over the internet and scholarly websites, there are many articles and works written by Ewen. Many are anti-Bush (both of them) and many anti-republican. After reading his article which argues against the administration and media during the conflict, I cannot help but wonder if he realizes how much of what he says sounds an awful lot like propaganda, at least to me.

The ABC After-School War Special

Journalists and networks were able to cash in on ratings by promoting coverage that was appealing to viewers. ABC appealed their coverage to younger viewers. Peter Jennings hosted a children's war special. He addressed the needs of his youngest viewers by informing them about the soldiers safety, and how the Americans were the best prepared for war. Saddam's chemical weapons were the only indication of death in the broadcast, and a reassuring notion that these weapons had never been used. A person in a chemical protection suit made an appearance to stage to help assure the children the Americans were well protected from dying from a chemical weapons threat. Jennings ended the special with the optimist attitude that most people who go to war, come home safe at the end of the war. The book did not mention if ABC discussed how the children in Iraq lived through the Gulf War. The focus of the special was to reassure the American children that they were safe and so were the Americans fighting in the Gulf.

"Most people who go to war come home from war. He neglected to mention that
certain Iraqi children who never went to war would never leave their homes
again."

The children's special appealed to the children's emotions of fear and safety, and reassured the young viewers that the Americans would be safe from harm during the war.

In chapter two (selling babies) MacArthur takes us from, media executives initially agreeing to factors that enforce "selling babies," and "designing war," when video workers made up visuals and graphics to fill in the empty spots left behind by military censorship. MacArthur makes it clear that the governments information is managed with censorship. This can be very controversial at a time of war when government is supposed to be trusted to relay trustworthy information to the many lives that depend and are in stake because of this war.

Hotel Warriors

"...the labyrinth where the press and the Pentagon are pinned down in a kind of static battle to see how the next war will be covered." - John Fialka

Scott Applewhite was one photographer caught in this struggle. He arrived Dhahran where an Iraqi scud missile produced the most costly damage to U.S. troops of the war, and 27 GI's were killed. Sott was pushed around by guards, had his film confiscated, and was escorted back to his hotel by a public affairs officer.
The favorite hotel of reporters was located within the airport seeing massive amounts of incoming U.S. troops everyday. Policy on how to cover the war was not coherent, and the gap driven between journalists and the military was still very apparent from the Vietnem War. Some people in the forces think the journalists lost the Vietnem War. There would be 159 journalists covering the war, more than twice that of any previous war.

"We were an indigestible lump being fed into a military press-handling system that was woefully short of resources and teetering on the verge of collapse. The Pentagon had insisted that in this war reporters must be accompanied by military escorts, but it had not provided enough seasoned public affairsescorts and vehicles to do the job." Fialka

In this particular war, it was not the military or Pentagon's censorship that brought back a gap filled report. It was the competition between journalists and the lack of Army cooperation. Several of the major battles of the war were not recorded at all, hardly any Iraqi fatalities were photographed, and tank battles were not captured either.

'' I hooked up with units, mostly the Marine Corps, because the press rules were established by the Army, and the Marines saw this as a great conspiracy against the Marine Corps, and were very welcoming." - Chris Hedges, The Gulf War Pool System

Press vs. Government, The Second Front

In chapter Four, Vietnam Syndrome, Macarthur quotes an NBC correspondent saying "Several officers...charged the Press with negativity, sensationalism, and questionable loyalty in Vietnam." Gary Matsumoto, the correspondent, also claimed to find a "spirit of confrontation" frome the troops and officers. In Vietnam, as well as in the Gulf in the 90's and Iraq today, this argument presents a double-edged sword. Are the troops' complaints justifiable in regards to how the press has presented the wars? I believe so; however, there may be others to blame. As discussed in this class, the press, typically, has followed the lead of politicians, and how they create their own spin during wartime. While I support all the troops, then and now, and their argument, perhaps they should look at the government officials as well as the press about how the outlook of the war is being percieved by the American public.

From Light to Heavy Duty

At the beginning of World War II the American public had many advertisements and newsreels illustrated to them. Most "images suggest the general Allied understanding of the war at it outset. Perhaps ("with Gods' help") quickness, dexterity, and style, a certain skill in feinting and dodging, would suffice to defeat pure force." (Fussell 3) Unfortunately for the American public these illustrations proved to be a farse depiction of the war taking place. The fact was that light power had to be replaced. "Instead, what counted was heavy power...that constituted the emblems of the Second World War." (Fussell 9) The American public came to realize that "the war is brutal, bloody, and terrible to endure that it must be ended (that is won) without the waste of a single minute more and won by any means, moral or immoral." (Fussell 8) The Americans did this by changing their tactical plans and strategical warfare strategies. Now, bombings artillery, tanks, heavy armored vehicles, the mass production of planes, and other heavy duty machinery became the symbols for World War II. There was no way around the losses of civilian life, let alone military soldiers and officers. World War II became sybolic through the live depictions in newsreels and advertisements. The American public was know seeing the truth about modern warfare for the very first time.

Opportunity !

In this article, the art of advertising is being displayed as the most important way of winning World War II. Through advertising a fighting spirit must be developed and that "Fighting spirt that drives and urges and makes of hard work and sacrifice a sacred privilege." (Weir 13) How do we spread that fighting spirit, the cogenent vehicle that exists for interpereting this way of life and rousing that spirit is advertising. (Weir 13) What people must realize about this article is that the fighting spirit t must be developed to win the war. The best way to do this is through advertising because it takes place in all aspects of society during the war. This fighting spirit lies at the heart of every American, and without it being advertised for every citizen to see, these citizens may never realize how special the American way of life is and that we must do everything in our power to protect it.

The Gulf War as Total Television

When did the news media become an untrustworthy faceless corporation? We may never know but what Engelhardt does set out to prove in his article "Gulf War as Total Television" is that this can be a dangerous situation particularly in war time. If the public feel they can not trust the media then the only source for news becomes the US government which is then propaganda. This happened during the first Gulf War when a critical Washington Post article labeled follow journalists as cocky, self-righteous, and whinny. Also according to the article,

"The briefings, commented spokesman Lieutenant General Thomas Kelly, were 'the most significant part of the whole operation because for the first time ever...the American people were getting their information from the government-not from the press"

This can certainly be harmful because all this does is lead to propaganda from the government since it will not release any information that could be harmful to them. Advertisers, who keep much news media running are not helping matters much. According to this link, advertisers tend to prefer these untrustworthy sources. A change must be done in order for us to get truthful reliable news.

War in the Persian Gulf: A Report from the Couch

This will not be another Vietnam. Our boys will not be fighting on foot. All of the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were destroyed on contact when we bombed them. All of those things were said and heard by the public during the Gulf War. We were told by President Bush at the time that this would not turn out to be another Vietnam War and that there will be absolutely no ground attacks or soldiers on feet. Well, 1 out of 2 isn't bad I guess because I guess when you have the power that he did, you can make it seem like it isn't going to be another Vietnam, but when it comes down to it, we as viewers to this war were being told things and having things hidden from us that would've portrayed more of a truth that what the government and the President of the United States were telling us at that time. The fact of the matter is that, though this may not have been as bad as the Vietnam War, it was a lot worse than the what the government was portraying it to be. Pictures were obtained by the media and people were able to see that everything wasn't as peachy and good as they made it seem to be and that the war was not over on the first day after we "destructed" everything and anything that the Iraqis had. The fact is that things were made to seem as if everything was going great while when the truth was found out, there were anti-war movenments galore, military spending had come under question and, wouldn't you know, the war wasn't over after the first attack we launched on the Iraqis and, you know, no war usually is.

Couch Potatoes Aren't Dupes

It is in the article "Couch Potatoes Aren't Dupes" by Constance Penley and Andrew Ross in which something is said that is rarely ever noticed and that is that television isn't as big of a harming agent as people make it out to be, but, in fact, war is. It is in this article where it is plainly said and that is: "But it is war that makes people stupid, not TV." That is something that I completely agree with. It is the television that helps give people information and helps them be who they want to be. By watching the television, the people who aren't involved in the war will be able to get all information on the war, good or bad for their country and will be able to form their own opinion or just be able to gather information to back up the beliefs that they already had. It is war that makes us people that we aren't. It is the people involved in the war and the government who try to sway the people who have their own opinion and beliefs against war into believing in war and that it is a good thing for the country. You see, you as a person should be able to have your own beliefs and opinions on things and by watching television or listening to any type of media, you are able to form your own types of opinions, which is how it should be. With war, it's support war or were going to try as hard as possible to sway you from your beliefs so that, to you, war isn't so bad and the people involved in war dont' feel so bad for being in one and that just isn't the way things should be done.

Persian Gulf War, the Movie!

Persian Gulf War, the Movie

"The war in the Persian Gulf was an unprecedented motion picture spectacular. It crammed into its first month alone the entire imagery- and firepower- of four years of bombing in World War II. But unlike a carpet of explosives leveling cities and setting off firestorms, or of GIs "flushing out" Vietcong from their hiding places, we were shown "seeing-eye" bombs zooming in on their targets, followed by computer graphics tracing the ground offensive against an invisible enemy...Desert Storm was the first major global media crisis orchestration that made instant history." (Gerbner, Persian Gulf War, the Movie. 247).

The six week long Gulf War that took place between January 17, 1991 and February 28, 1991 was a "short and sweet" excursion of the American military, under the direction of then-President George Bush. The Gulf War lasted just the right length of time to satisfy America's fighting instincts, while still being able to keep the interest of Americans' short-attention span (afterall, the MTV generation had been born back in the 1980s).

As the author, George Gerbner, explains, "Instant history is image history." The coverage of the Gulf War was a "sanitized scenario" directed by the government and the military leaders like General Norman Schwarzkopf who forbade casualty estimates and, instead, released sortie counts (not body counts). The hands of the media were tied and they were only allowed to report, for the most part, on what they were fed by the military leaders in their daily briefings and press conferences. The "happy ending" of the Gulf War fit right into the plan of the "moviemakers." Yellow ribbons were the perfect "supportive sign" to hang on the old oak tree for a job well done. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! or was it???

A ballard for the fallen reporter...

Everyday I ponder about one thing... why do children idolize things that make America seem good; as to symblolizing things that make the country look bad (no pun intended)?

... now what I mean is that the media portrays the Military to look rather rewarding if one was to sign up. But the real question is... How does the military portray the media? According to the Good News or No News article written by James Lemoyne, military officials have the authority to tell reporters which units they can and cannot visit. Thats just the tip of the iceberg; there known to have unimaginable privilages during news reports. nonetheless, these reporters never get the credit they properly deserve. This article speaks of the Pentagon and there deviant ways to pursuay the media into thinking that everything was o.k. The list goes on from staged interviews to camera-less interviews. The worst part of this whole scenario are the reporters that become casualties of war. and yet our youth generation grows up wanting to fight for this country; so they join the military. but to the youth of America... if you want to fight for this country, then show the world what's really happening. What if we tought our youth to become reporters, and journalists?...

I wonder...

School of the Soldier-WARTIME--P. Fussell

One of the most attention worthy paragraphs I have read so far, was in the beginning of chapter 5. What was so striking to me was that many of the soldiers that served in World War II were so very young. Many of them were teenagers and sometimes sneaked in the service. Melville in his poem felt that in war we must rely on the young men for two reasons. First we need young soldiers for their strength and physical stamina and also for their innocence of their own mortality. When you're young you have little fear and you think you're unstoppable and will live forever.

Gulf War propaganda and reasoning

The 1991 Gulf War: Mobiliztion of World Public Opinion.

The first Gulf War was most certainly was an intriquing time in America. Most recently since the Cold War post World War 2 era, the United States typically seems to oppose any country that choses not to live by similar customs of the US. These customs include democratic and capitalist societies. Iraq, which at the time was run by the tyrant Saddam Hussein, was pretty much the polar opposite of the United States in every way. In 1990, Hussein and Iraq invaded Kuwait and the United States sought out their chance to eliminate the "threat" or Iraq. In order to avoid another disaster like the Vietnam War the United States claimed the innocence of Kuwait which did include a free election democratic society proved how the dictator Hussein must be stopped. The send out this propaganda in spite of the fact that Kuwait was not a total democracy since women did not receive many human rights in the country. More examples of censorhip and propaganda during the Gulf War can be found at this site.Despite this, the United States continued on thsi propagnda to build support and rally the people. Iraq also had some interesting propaganda at this time. According to the article

"First, (Hussein) claimed that Kuwait had wrong his country by deliberately stealing Iraqi oil; then he claimed Kuwait was historically part of Iraq: and finally he sought a jihad-a holy war against the infidel because the American forces were foreign invaders who were drinking alcohol, eating pork, and practicing prostitution on the holy soil of Islam."

Both sides used this propaganda to build something bigger then it probably was as a way to win the war and in the end that's how the war was decided. Hussein's message did not unite the Arab world as he had hoped whereas many countries rallied behind the United States "freedom preservation" plan and in the end the United States won the conflict. This shows how propaganda could make or break a war effort.