Interconnection of Military and the Media - Research Paper Example

This paper will strive to examine the contemporary issues surrounding military and the media. Since the dawn of warfare, the press and media have involved in constant battle in order to pursue their own needs. In this context, the public also gets involved, which leads to more tensions, mistrust and miscommunication between all parties. Nonetheless, this paper will continue to seek the true intentions of each party. Walter Lippmann once quoted, “We must remember that in time of war what is said on the enemy’s side of the front is always propaganda, and what is said on our side of the front is truth and righteousness, the cause of humanity and a crusade for peace.” Undoubtedly, the relationship between military and the media has always been a fragile one. The issues surrounding military, media and propaganda are critical aspects that have changed the dynamics of media reporting in several ways (Hammond 5). Without a doubt, the relations between military and the media have been sensitive throughout history. Undoubtedly, military and media are two protectors of democracy. One attempts to safeguard the nation seeking justice to protect external threats. Consequently, the media defends the citizens against governmental improvement and by revealing the truth and attempting to inform the public of the true intentions of the military (Hammond 7). One cannot deny that at times both issues seem to clash within each other. In a democratic nation such as the United States, the relationship of the media is brilliantly depicted in every manner. Relationship is cordial. Censorship becomes a huge issue throughout history as seen in WWI and WWII Germans persuasions to sway public opinion. Military uses social media such as twitter to inform public Met by heavy criticism by government officials Military responded by stating future is social media Enhanced the dynamic of media used by military Military’s initiative to protect reporters during Iraq war First time during warfare that military took the initiative Reporter casualty was high-served as a reminder between the two Lack of Pakistan military to take initiative to propagate their cause Leads to miscommunication, misinformation and trust Ignores the critical element during warfare Engages the public to impose distrust in military Relationship will continue to be fragile Trust becomes vital for both parties The evolution from censorship to utilization of media is vital What is the future between the two? Military and media Walter Lippmann once quoted, “We must remember that in time of war what is said on the enemy’s side of the front is always propaganda, and what is said on our side of the front is truth and righteousness, the cause of humanity and a crusade for peace.” Undoubtedly, the relationship between military and the media has always been a fragile one. The issues surrounding military, media and propaganda are critical aspects that have changed the dynamics of media reporting in several ways (Hammond 5). In addition, the advent of technology has become a super highway for the media to not only report but give the power to itself to persuade public opinion. Without a doubt, the relations between military and the media have been sensitive throughout history. The concept of censorship and the media’s pursuit to inform the public through its various channels have become the focal point of the clash between the two sides that continue to be present even today. Undoubtedly, military and media are two protectors of democracy. One attempts to safeguard the nation seeking justice to protect external threats. Consequently, the media defends the citizens against governmental improvement and by revealing the truth and attempting to inform the public of the true intentions of the military (Hammond 7). One cannot deny that at times both issues seem to clash within each other. In a democratic nation such as the United States, the relationship of the media is brilliantly depicted in every manner. The relationship between military and media has been extremely fragile for various reasons. The media can play the devil’s advocate or propagate the military cause. However, one cannot diminish the fact that the media has its own agenda in its mind. In essence, the media understands the fact that it must serve the public by delivering vital news. Although that is the true purpose of the media, one cannot refute the fact that it is still a revenue making machine. The media agencies are consistently competing with each other to gain revenue and establish themselves. Propaganda at this context of military can be really exploited by media. Media can use selective stories that may seem bias and then re-emphasize those facts to make the audience sway against the military(Hammond 10). In addition, the media could use partial facts and use some facts of historical context to utilize for their own agenda. These type of tactics can used by not only the media but the military itself. At times of war, hate and extremities can build up and play a powerful role in media’s coverage. The first casualty of war in any particular case is the truth. Both the media and military use the notion of truth to justify their cause. The horrific events that occurred in September 11 were on the finest cordial relationships that truly showed a mutual relationship between the military and the media. The public already shocked and dumbfounded looked to media for full coverage of this particular tragedy. Moreover, the public wanted the media to advocate and justify the military operations that were going to take place. This truly was remarkable; it served as a reminder to military officials of the true power that media can unleash. It enabled military to document and justifies its causes through the media which the media fully embraced. Although this similar type of event occurred in World War I, the war against “terrorism” was truly one of the first conflicts that was fueled by the public’s demand that benefitted both sides mutually. The relationship between media and military is sensitive yet at times very cordial, informal and cooperative. Throughout history, the government had to learn to develop relations with the media during 1854. This was a pivotal point as the media portrayed the horrors the military conditions during the war so much so that the military was forced to implement reform from the middle class. This issue became such an obstacle that military all around the world continued to implement censorship of media internationally. Even during World War in 1914, the element of censorship became critical as the British and French would not allow the media to cover the news in the battlefield. However, the Germans saw this as an opportunity to convince the neutral reporters as a gateway to persuade the majority of the public in their side. Eventually, the British and the French had to embrace this and allowed reporters to enter the battle. This war became the centric piece on how the government handled media during warfare eras. This was mainly due to the fact that the army spent massive amounts of money in the war which the public never knew about the casualties that plagued the war. Without a doubt, the hidden facts played a vital role that created mistrust between military and the media. Nonetheless, this is still prevalent in modern day coverage of media in the military. News has become the tool that the military used it for strategic purposes. The starting of the 19th century marked the advent of the electronic press which drastically enhanced the operations between the military and media even more. The press was able to exercise its freedom and managing the media became difficult for the military. Finally, during the period of the World War II eras, the German and the French both allowed reporters to capture the true essence of warfare. For decades, the military has strived to understand the powers of the social media. Social media has become the catalyst for initiating stories and informing the public today. Moreover, the impact of modern technology has played a dynamic role in informing the public. Social networking websites such as Twitter and Facebook have completely given media supreme authority for channeling their information through other gateways. Todd Johnson, author of the “Military strives to understand the social media” brilliantly explains that recently the Department of Defense commander, General Ray Odierno, recently joined Twitter. Although one can question his action; this serves as a brilliant reminder on how the US military is trying to incorporate social media into national security. Carafano, one of another essential public figures, sarcastically states, “Look at the White House now with a MySpace and Facebook account,” Carafano said. “Maybe the government will look at it as ‘data mining,’ and looking for information. “(Johnson) One cannot wonder and ask that the actual usage of a social media can seriously pose risks to the public as this information can be fallen into wrong hands. One of the advocators against this practice, is officer Tanji, who states “If (senior officials) fight (social networking), not only will they lose the best and brightest now… they’ll alienate future generations of potential national security professionals and they’ll make the nation less safe.” (Johnson) Yet, the head administration states that the government cannot ignore the benefits of the social media but rather utilize it in such a manner that can be beneficial for the military. The usage of social media has dramatically enhanced the dynamics in which the public can be engaged with the military. Undoubtedly, this proves that the utilization of the social media has created a symbiotic relationship of media and military. The issue at hand is a yet a fragile one. It will be interesting to see how this type of relationship will impact the future between these two parties. Another great type of symbiotic relationship that the can be depicted between the military and media can be portrayed in the issue of journalist safety in war. When the Iraq war was initiated, the media was engrossed in the issue as many journalists and reporters had to go to Iraq for their career. Therefore, the British military took the initiative to enforce journalist safety during the war. For the first time, the British Military has set complete protocol that takes journalist account into safety. Interesting enough, the reporters are allowed to move freely in the battle space. One can question whether the soldiers’ lives can be at risk since reporters are free to roam around. The MOD or the British Ministry of Defense continues to address these issues since safety is so vital. The basic recognition of journalist safety in war is the first time that this issue was addressed. For the first time in many years, censorship was not a critical point. Undoubtedly, the modern times have embraced the culture media and have taken initiatives to protect the reporters from unexpected circumstances. Clearly, the military could have not taken any better approach to emphasize this issue but the British military wants to lay a solid foundation of this enactment of this legislation for the future. At times however, the relationship between military and media can be truly dangerous. British newspapers reported that the American military plans to penetrate social-media by pushing negative propagate to counter Islamic extremism. General David Petraeus informed and admitted to these policies as he wanted to "...ensure that credible voices in the region are heard.” Clearly, these strategies are to provoke and spread propaganda through the channels of the media are absurd. It almost seems that at times the military uses this advertising to manipulate and lie to its public, something that the media tries to avoid. In essence, the military is violating its promise to protect and serve the country in the midst of these critical issues. However, interestingly enough, the social-media has not raised any issues regarding this. Now one can question the fact that the bond between military and media has been so tight that the military’s agenda to use media for its own purpose does not bother the media itself. The military itself admitted to implement fake personalities online that promoted pro-American war agenda in different languages such as Persian, Arabic, Farsi and Urdu (“US Media abuses social media”). . This plan exploits the basic principles of online social experience that includes authenticity, reliability issues. Sacrificing these aspects are detrimental towards the relation between the media and military. Abusing this legislation clearly taints the military’s name and ruins the relationship between the two. One cannot diminish the fact that relations between the military and military will continue to be fragile. One interesting scenario in which the military did not utilize the media to propagate the right cause could be brilliantly depicted in the recent navel attacks that occurred in Pakistan. This “wrongful negligence” is not only embarrassing, but also extremely hypocritical as the Pakistani military has full access and control of its nation’s media(“US Media abuses social media”). A critical issues that involved a terrorist attack in Pakistan’s naval base; the military was accused of being complacent and not providing enough information to media regarding these attacks. Furthermore, the media took no steps to sway the public in its side. As mentioned above, the military at times must make its objective to propagate for the right cause utilizing the media. However, if the military does not acknowledge the gravity of these critical issues, it allows not only the media but the public itself to embed mistrust in their opinion. As a result, tensions flare between both sides that can lead to miscommunication, conflict and misinformation. Lippmann’s wise words will continue to leave an ever-lasting mark that depicts the relationship between both sides. The symbiotic relationship of the media and military is truly enigmatic and fascinating to study. The evolution of this relationship from censorship to utilization of the social media by the military itself due to the advent of technology is truly remarkable. It will be interesting to see how this relationship will either solidify or become more sensitive in the near future. One can only wonder what truly lies ahead? Works Cited Hammond, W. M. (1988).Public affairs: the military and the media, 1962-1968. Washington, D.C.: Center for Military History, United States Army :. Military strives to understand social media . (n.d.). Medill Reports. Retrieved June 6, 2011, from http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/washington/news.aspx?id=134973 Viewpoint: U.S. Military Abuses Social Media | CMO Strategy - Advertising Age. (n.d.).Advertising Agency & Marketing Industry News - Advertising Age. Retrieved June 6, 2011, from http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/viewpoint-u-s-military-abuses-social-media/227487/ Read More