Question one
Media a medium through which the information is passed from one person to another; hence the semi-independent press shape how citizens engage in politics (Morhard, 2019). The media has got a direct relationship from the old age to the modern society since it is the major channel through which information is passed within a community. The evolution of media and government dates back in history where citizens struggled to express freedom of expression and write.
Competing papers during the Spanish American war used propaganda on major political and social stories to make sales. The papers propagated opinions among the public to have an interest in the war (Morhard, 2019). The most infamous manipulation of the stories in warmongering was a factor that led to the United States to declare war against Spain. In comparison with the article, it stipulates the necessity of objective journalism (shils, 2015). This would give a true impression of the situation being reported. Most modern media have an independent relationship with the government, but most of the time experience political interference. Political influence on the media affects the integrity and factual messaging.
Some similarities are evident since the reporting since they were not used to make any influence in decision making as it was not objective. The journalism of warmongers did not influence policymaking in the decision (Meyer, 2014). The article in the Vietnam War and that of journalism of the warmongers depicts how the relationship between the media and the government influences policymaking (Morhard, 2019). The government implies that the media could give a piece of false information that could shift public perceptions. In the case of negative political perceptions, it may lead to unpopular decisions or propagated political unrest.
Question two
The press played a role in shaping the perception of the public during the war in Vietnam. The media contributed to the shift of public opinion in the Vietnam War from one point to another as far As the involvement of America was concerned. Theorists have argued that journalists who covered the war adhered to objective coverage (Blood, 2015). Journalists inculcated objectivity and balance in covering the Vietnam War. The journalist did not give in to political pressure hence gave an unbiased coverage approach.
When elites began to question the strategy used by the Americans used in the war, reporters’ opted to anti-establishment approach. As opposition continued, public opinion shifted from the political figures to the mainstream media hence considered a win for the press in Vietnam War (shils, 2015). Some elites like President Nixon and some generals in the army, like General Westmoreland believed that the press contributed to the huge loss of America in the Vietnam War. They argued that the press presented the situation on the ground in a negative manner since they were granted exclusive access to the battlefield (yorker, 2015). The negative presentation of the situation made the public disillusioned that the Americans did not give enough effort.
Other factors contributed to the public opinion from press coverage since it promoted communism. The media presented the real and factual truth about the war to the American people hence compelled the government to reduce the number of troops to the battlefield, thus change on American policy regarding the Vietnam War (shils, 2015). It is a win for the media since the relationship between the press and America is the same today regarding current affairs as it was during the end phase of the Vietnam War.
Question three
If we treat all sides the same, are we drawing a moral equivalence between the victim and the aggressor? This quote has an application in the press coverage of the Rwanda genocide (Blood, 2015). Both local and international press contributed to the genocide since it propagated the killing, while others did not bother to report the true and factual situation during the genocide. The killers used the local media as a weapon since, in the beginning, the international media was not present (Kofi Atta Annan, 2017). As the public gets access to the news, it shapes its opinion on the actual situation regarding the victims and aggressors.
Since there was little statesmanship in Rwanda during the genocide, public perception forced the government to make decisions. Obtaining information from the general population gives factual information about the victims and aggressors as opposed to relying on newscasts and reporters (yorker, 2015). In the Rwanda genocide, there was information lapse in coverage; hence there was no moral equivalence between the victims and aggressors (Kofi Atta Annan, 2017). The media coverage in the genocide was not sufficient to attract international attention since the local media coverage, not objective.
To achieve moral equivalence between the victims and aggressors, it is essential to monitor the press coverage from the initial phases. Monitoring would give a factual situation of the massaging to get the clear picture of victims and aggressors (Blood, 2015). To achieve objective journalism need individuals who possess medical knowledge and sufficient linguistic abilities (Meyer, 2014). Ignoring the native media in the Rwanda genocide led to devastating effects since it propagated the killing through advancing the agenda of the aggressors. There was no understanding and collaboration between the local and international media.
References
Blood, J. (2015). The Tet Effect: Intelligence and the Public Perception of War. New York Psychology Press.
Kofi Atta Annan, K. A. (2017). The Media and the Rwanda Genocide. London: IDRC.
Meyer, m. (2014). One day in the war of images. Columbia journalism review, 41.
Morhard, E. (2019). Yellow Journalism as a Warmonger in the Spanish-American War. Oxford: GRIN Verlag.
shils, e. (2015). Vietnam war. We are bringing the battlefield into the American living room, 201.
Yorker, t. n. (2015). The scene of the crime. Letter from Vietnam, 78.