Dwight Fetterman (FGCU) Media’s Portrayal of War

The media, in the modern era, are indisputably an instrument of war. This is because winning modern wars is as much dependent on carrying domestic and international public opinion as it is on defeating the enemy on the battlefield. And it remains true regardless of the desires of many journalists to give an impartial and balanced assessment of conflict.  The experience of the
US military in the post-Cold War world demonstrates that victory on the battlefield is seldom as simple as defeating the enemy by force of arms. From Somalia and Haiti through Kosovo and
Afghanistan, success has been defined in political, rather than military, terms.  Today’s military commanders stand to gain more than ever before from controlling the media and shaping their output. The laws and conventions of war, however, do not adequately reflect the critical role that the media play in shaping the political outcome of conflicts. International humanitarian law requires that media members are afforded the rights of civilians; the question is whether this is sustainable when the exigencies of war fighting suggest that controlling the media is essential.Members of the media remain entitled to express their opinions, whether or not they are belittling to US forces. In an era in which the media are less obedient to authority than World War II, and in wars that are less integral to their home societies, journalists have proved capable of fierce criticism, both of individual participants’ behavior and of the wider strategic purpose of a conflict.The relationship between the media and the military hinges on the extent to which the media’s civilian status can be considered compromised by the activities of the armed forces alongside which they operate. At whatever level the media interact with the military during times of conflict, there is always an inherent tension between the ostensible goals of impartial and balanced media reporting and the military objectives of the combatants.

In these uncertain times, all one has to do is glance at the front page to be reminded that war reporting is an issue of vital importance to American democracy. Not since the war in
Vietnam have correspondents played such a significant role in parsing war information, and their very visibility during Operation Iraqi Freedom has generated more discussion about wartime journalism than this country has seen in some time.

            Lying outright to the media may not, in many circumstances, make much sense, but controlling the flow of information emphatically does, and the purpose of the public affairs staff is precisely that—to control the dissemination of information so as to maximize the military and political advantage to US forces.            Whether for purposes of military deception or more broadly in an effort to control the public and elite perception of a conflict, the
US military has a keen interest in influencing how the media perceive the events on the battlefield. 

This entry was posted on 5. April 2009 at 19:37 and is filed under Introduction to Sociology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.