Things That Go Un-Noticed When Thinking Of War

When everyone thinks about the war that is taking place in the Middle East right now, all that is thought is people are dying, we are there for the wrong reasons, we are there for oil, there is no reason to be there. But along the way no one takes a step back from looking at the barbarity of it all and focus's on the smaller yet larger things in a sense. In Nicholas D. Kristof's A Merciful War, the talk is about what lives we are actually saving since our invasion of the Middle East. If I had never seen this, I would never have thought that with us being in Afganistan and aiding the people that are sick that we could have possibly have saved the lives of "112,00 fewer children and 7,500 fewer pregnant qomwn dying each year." (Kristof) It's sad to see a government care so less about its people that it allows so many of its children to die from things like measles and diarrhea, and many women to die giving birth, these are 2 important aspects of making the country continue. Yes the country does not have as much money as other countres but it's the countries governmental duties to take care of it's people, instead of having an invading countries people take care of its own people.

Why can't we see this war?

Journalists have been denied access to American troops in the field in
Afghanistan to greater degree than in any previous war involving U.S. military
forces. Bush Administration policy has kept reporters from combat units in a
fashion unimagined in Vietnam, and one that's more restrictive even than the
burdensome constraints on media in the Persian Gulf. Neil Hickey

To me this seems to be another scandel that the Bush Administration has gotten involved in. Why can't we see whats going on rather then always hearing about it. The media coverage of this war is horrible, it seems we only get the coverage that the media outlets want us to see. Whatever they feel is good enough they will let us watch. With the other wars that were taken place during this technological age we were able to see the whole rather then a peice. The Bush adminstration is keeping certian issues under wraps and not allowing the country to hear or visualize the whole picture. In this they create propaganda and believe that this is the right way to go, but without hearing or viewing the complete story we will never know the truth.

Selling Babies, and horse...

On page 41 of "Second Front-Censorship and Propaganda in the 1991 Gulf War", John R MacArthur writes:

"Later, in the summer, the Bush Administration would cynically beat back attempts by members of Congress, disturbed by Hussein's violent conduct and belligerence toward Israel, to place stricter controls on U.S. trade with Iraq. And in the July 25th meeting between ambassador Glaspie and Hussein, the U.S. strongly suggested it would not intervene in a conflict between Iraq and Kuwait."

Juxtaposing this revelation with President Bush's speech we saw in class, where he made the case for going to war with Iraq, one cannot help but be impressed with just how cynical and manipulative the Bush Administration was at the time. How the president kept a strait face while delivering that load of _ _ _ _ is a testament to his skill as politician, I guess.

Ruling Family of Kuwait

What's wrong with this picture?

In his article "War in the Persian Gulf: A Report from the Couch" Stuart Ewen writes:

"One of the most disturbing elements of the television coverage was the battalion of retired military brass, war college instructors, intelligence personnel, and state department aparachiks (sic) who were there in the newsrooms, participating in the reportage as honorary members of the news teams...Now, with all references to the Independence of the fourth estate tossed aside, it was the military coming to the service of the media professionals, helping them do their job. assertations of journalistic sovereignty had become a joke."

I don't know who to be more angry at; the federal government, for twisting the truth and outright lying about the situation in the middle east to bend public opinion toward war, or the news media, for being the government's lap dog, and for being too lazy to do their own legwork. Having military personnel on the reporting teams for war coverage is like having mafia dons help you with a story on organized crime. The next time the news networks want to do a story on political corruption, maybe they'll hire Eliot Spitzer. OK, I understand the news people were over a barrel. The feds and the military were simply not going to let the real story of the Gulf War be told, at least, until it didn't matter anymore. But that does not excuse prostituting themselves for the sake of having something to show on the nightly news. They could have run stories on how they (and us) were being bamboozled by the administration and the Pentagon. Not as easy, but at least it would have integrity. I'll never take anything I see or read at face value again, unless it's from the Bible!

JARHEAD

Jarhead is a written account of one solder's experience in the Gulf War. He talks about his fears, his fear of going to war, his fears once he is there. He tells us his experience of the war.

"They shake our hands and urge us to speak freely, but they know we have been scripted; they know our answers to their questions have already been written on our faces, though maybe not in our hearts. The Boston Globe women looks bored, or at least not very interested in what we might tell her. She just heard the same stories a few miles away.
"Yes, ma'am, I believe in our mission. I believe we will quickly win this war and send the enemy crawling home."
"Yes ma'am, I'm proud to be here serving my country. I'm proud of our president standing up to evil..."
"This is about freedom, not about oil. This is about standing up to aggression, like the president says. Nobody want to go to war..."

When the solders were told what to say, how to answer the questions put to them by reporters, some solders argued that they have freedom of speech. But they were told they have no free speech, that was over when they signed the contract to be in the Marines. Many don't even try to argue for their right of speech, they know there is no use. The solders know that they have to give the answers that have been prepared for them. They cannot tell the public the truth about the war. The truth that many did not believe in the war, did not believe in there mission. The truth that most were scared and wanted to go home, not stay and honor their country. The truth that they were protecting the oil businesses as much a the right to be free. The truth that they didn't care if the war was won or lost, they cared about staying alive and getting home, forgetting the war. As the solder said, they might have been able to change there faces but not there hearts.

A Media War

"From the moment Bush committed troops to Saudi Arabia on August 7, the
Administration never intended to allow the press to cover a war in the Persian
Gulf in any real sense,and it intended to tightly manage what coverage it would
permit." (Second Front) John R. Macarthur pg.5-6.

The Gulf War from the beginning was not going to be like previous wars before it. From the time President Bush announced that America was going to war he believed that this time America would be ready. America would go into this war with nothing holding them back or restricting their strength. The government strategically only let the media in on certain aspects. They wanted the war to be portrayed as America being the liberator of this uncivilized culture with no democracy. This is where America and Saudi Arabia had more in common then they realized. America this land of democracy was restricting their press coverage of the war. During war-times citizens rights goes out the window, because freedom of press was highly put to a stand-still.

On Watching the War in a Razzle Dazzle Age

"At one point the picture was bouncing between Top Gun and the Coverage of the war , i realize with a start that i couldn't tell which was which. they both had martial music, splendind graphics, high tech shots of planes soaring into the sky. it was only when tom cruise came on the screen that i knew which was the movie" Carl Rivers

Intrestingly enough this sentiment is reminscent of the feelings most people have about our current war. From watching any televesion news station, the war had been dumbed down into a series of shorts and dramatic music. We are so un informed and dissassociated from the counrty we are at war with that we lack empathy and understanding. " I had this eerie sense that something was very wrong. one just shouldn't be munching Dortitos watching a real war- that's for the Superbowl" i can defnatlet relate to ths statement because there have been evenings i find myself flipping through the channels only stoping on Cnn if something explosive catches my eye. Whether it's right or wrong, the media has definatley played the old mind Trick on us.

Stewart Ewen; a review from my desk

"Iraq and a hard place" as Stewart Ewen put it, would have been one of the best propaganda slogans of the entire desert storm operation. Mr. Ewen points out in this article that unlike any war before this one, more and more critics, authors, analysts and just everyday people formed opinions on the war based on the 24 hour coverage that proceeded it. Although it is important today to point out that much of what we saw was censored by the military and the government. Stewart Ewen also points out how President Bush was an important figure head for the propaganda layed out to the people. Careful planning went into every word of his speeches. His closest associates and advisers helped create an image to the American people that would hopefully propel us to believe in our cause like during the times of World War II. It is in this important time period of mass media that constant news coverage coupled with clever slogans like The Butcher of Baghdad would lead the U.S people to the conclusions our elected officials believed we should have. Essentially censoring our ability to obtain our own true opinions. In Stewart Ewen's article "War in the Persian Gulf: A report from the couch." He clearly lays out just how American sentiment towards the first war in the gulf was in a crafty slogan of his own. Our opinions were formed from the couches and dinner tables of our homes. These opinions were carefully guided by our elected officials, and argueably still carrie's on today.

No News at All

R. Michael Schiffer and Micheal F. Rinzler' article No News is No News suggests the governmental restrictions of the media during wartime has a counterproductive outcome. Schiffer and Rinzler argue that the governmental restrictions of the media during the Gulf War of the nineties, "amount to censorship". Although the restrictions were implemented to protect National security they in turn prevented adequate coverage of the war and led to distortions of the little information released. Having little information to report on, "The media themselves have become the story." The act of news reporting on location overseas became a spectacle and created a form of entertainment rather than a source of information.

The Gulf War: Was it really a new form of Entertainment?

"It is a commonplace of opinion research that the public does not much care about foreign policy. There is, however, one very dramatic excemption: war. No political event inspires more public intrest or emotion than war. This is why, if war is " the health of the state," it is also the health of the news media, at least in terms of audience size."

In this reading, the article suggests that the Gulf War was used as a means of entertainment. It reveals that 22 of the 25 largest newspapers circulated information on the war. For example, CNN had the highest ratings that the station has ever had during that time and due to the major coverage of the war, it interupted day time televison and for the first time, local television stations didn't complain about it cutting out soap operas and many other shows on the line-up. Now we ask ourselves why?, well, the media fed off of the fact that there were lives at stake and these very same lives had families back home who were disrupted by it. Not to mention in effort to keep the war as a form of entertainment, the media used its popular resources such as Entertainment Tonight and People magazine and once the war is over the coverage was sold as collectors items in effort to make huge profits. So, to conclude, the war was a serious thing however it was also a way to entertain and make huge profits. Therefore i say, yes, the war was a new but quick wave of entertainment.

T.V. War Soaps

"Television is where 80% of the people get their information, and what was done to control that information in the six weeks of war "couldn't have been better"

(New York Times, February 15, 1991)

It seems as if Americans really don't realize how much the television effects their daily life. Anything from the soap we use, to the clothes we wear, to the toothpaste we use, the T.V. set controlls the daily images of all of this. Herbert I. Schiller seems to really understand how corrupt (but in a positive motive for the networks) televisions was during the Gulf War. It was set up to look like a very organized war and yet what we don't know is how much was really cut out of the networks. The eyes play tricks on us all, and during this war many believed what they saw and spread the news of a great war, a simple war that we were winning. Television only gave us what they wanted us to see, as for everything else (well lets just say the military took action on that part).

Risky Business

"

The US press had an agreement with the Pentagon that combat coverage would be carried out by journalist working in pools with media escorts. The Saudis had stiffened it with a decree that said any unescorded journalist found whithin 100 miles of the war zone would be arrested and deported

"(Hotel Warriors, p45).

Dozens of reporters were staying at the Fao Hotel in Hafar al Batin, only 60 miles south of the Iraqui border, and yes within the restricted area.These reporters were taking big risks. They believed it was the only way to deliver the news. The lead stories however were taken from pool reporters or official briefings instead of unilateral reporters. Reporters were arrested, shot at, and nearly killed traying to get to were the action was. Most of the coverage of the war came from hotels, but television briefings made it seem as if the war was near.

Journalists efforts shortened in war

Many journalists were grouped and sent out into war, but didn't have a lot of footage to back it up. Most of the footage either was shown on TV when they returned or the journalists didn't get to get a lot of footage. It seems the media and news channels didn't display the full effect of what was going on in the war. Journalists were risking their lives to get coverage of the war in the battlefield, but most of their efforts didn't get shown. When they did get footage it took a long process to get it to the companies and editors to view and show them.

"One reporter's copy took as long as two weeks to make the eight-hour drive from the battlefield to Dhahran. A news photographer's film took 36 days. A television correspondent's videotape of two stories never got back at all,". (Hotel Warriors by John J. Fialka)

This shows how the system was/is. Journalists are sent out to get the stories, but sometimes its for nothing. Why send someone out to get a story, have them risk their life and not show or write about what they covered. Maybe not all of the stories could be used, but use more than they did. Its understanding that not every story will get shown or told, but it seemed people held back more than we think and who knows what editors edit out before airing. It seems they show what they want us to see and then for use to imagine what else is happening, though we all could probably figure out a fragment of what else could or is going on.

CNN.....As Just Another Form Of Manipulation!!

Is it safe to say that CNN is used as another method of persuassion and manipulation during a war. In my personal opinion CNN, which is considered to be a "unique" coverage of news is used to inhhance the negative and not give relay a story to it's full extent. CNN can be viewed all over the world, individuals look to this source of news for information on a number of various issues one being war.

"Just as General Powell turned to CNN for news from baghdad ,so Iraq officals turned to it for news from around the world and used it to transmit news that it wanted to get out......"

I find that CNN soley covers the most horrific stories in which they label "breaking news". And according to aRicahard C.Vincent elites depend on CNN for vital information. He also states that the pentagon uses CNN to recieve information that other soucres may not have recieved yet. One question that should really be asked is, is the news being recieved accurate!!........

Censorship

" Still, many of the more than 500 journalist assigned to cover the war expresses intense dissatisfaction with the quality of information furnished to them by the United States command and even more with restrictions on their ability to go see foe themselves." (R.W. Appple Jr.)

This article is about the pentagon's control over the media coverage during the Gulf War. The reporters, gaining a sence of censorship, became upset with the vague or even sometimes total lack of, information being provided on the war. Even when the pentegon created pools of small groups of reporters to be escorted around the outskirts of the war, some went to extreme measures, traveling on their own.

War Graphics

“The Gulf War… was about the ability of the mass media to deliver and even shape the news, and also about the ability of governments, both ours and Saddam’s, to shape and control the news.” (MacArthur 79)

This statement is a critical generalization in accordance with the 1991 Gulf War, and furthermore, propaganda in general. It is fascinating to discover that the U.S. was so well prepared to intervene with Iraq and Kuwait. It’s also interesting to observe this ongoing saga of international relations during wartime:

After engaging in the text, the pages confirm, that a country will support a war if it is beneficial to them. On the contrary, a country may reject helping another government if it is foreseen to impair them, even if a country sincerely needs help. This was made evident when the U.S. allowed Iran and Iraq to beat their heads together simply because it was more convenient for the United States.

Upon the many methods governments might use to gain political views, propaganda still seems to be the most poignant force in shaping how the public perceives the news.