Activity 22, What is the Role of Reporters in War?
Many reporters, who were inexperienced in the technology of modern warfare, poorly understood the exotic weapons and therefore were totally dependent on the military's explanations and evaluation of their performance. Unlike Vietnam, the Persian Gulf War was so swift that it was impossible to gain substantive knowledge. Use of reservists made the war popular and the public was impatient with the press when it showed skepticism about the war effort, or probed for shortcomings, inconsistencies and mistakes. The result during the Persian Gulf War was press coverage that glorified American and allied triumphs, fueling a surge of public patriotism. But is this the proper role of the press and media during periods of conflict?
Some observers believe that the press' role is to remain aloof and serve as a watchdog of the government and the military. CNN correspondent Peter Arnett stated, "I learned in Vietnam to believe only what my eyes have seen as [opposed to] anything I hear from any official of any government or from any person. I have an inborn skepticism because I am a journalist. I can only confirm what my eyes see." CNN's Bernard Shaw believed that his role as a journalist was to be neutral, even though as an American citizen he might take sides. However, he could not let his personal beliefs interfere with his neutral role as a journalist.
Others strongly disagree. The press, particularly during time of war, has a responsibility to line up behind the government and the military to support the war effort. The media's role in time of war emphasized the press' responsibility to support the war effort. Because the draft ended in 1973, most journalists who covered the Persian Gulf War had never worn a uniform and were antiwar. As a result of whining reporters badgering the military briefers and the negative and nit-picking press reports that followed, the American public saw just how antiwar the press was. As a result, the public's distaste for the press increased. The adversarial relationship between the press and the government did not play well with the American people when the nation was at war. The press is a part of the American society and should conduct itself with a sense of responsibility toward that society. The public realized the paramount objective of war is victory. Reed Levine, chairman of Accuracy In Media said, "In wartime, the rules change. The press cannot stay neutral."
American journalists who attempted to present balanced reporting of the war met with hostility from the public and the government. When media outlets aired alternative interpretations of the U.S. war with Iraq, some condemned the media for giving comfort and aid to the enemy. Senator Alan Simpson accused CNN's Peter Arnett of complicity with Iraq for reporting the Baghdad government's side of the war. At CNN's Atlanta headquarters, pickets protested the network's coverage of the enemy's perspective. Other U.S. media entities that tried to present Baghdad's side of events were criticized for giving a perspective other than that of the United States. Readers of the Philadelphia Inquirer objected to a headline about the bombing of the civilian bunker in Baghdad because it gave too much credence to the Iraqi government's contention that the building was a civilian bomb shelter and not a military command and control center, as asserted by the U.S. military.
Striking the proper balance between the people's right to know and the military's need for secrecy has always been a contentious rhetorical battleground. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Homes wrote in his decision affirming the conviction of an antiwar pamphleteer during World War I under the Espionage Act: "When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured as long as men fight and that no court could regard them as protected by any constitutional rights."
Student Questions
What do you believe is the proper balance between the people's right to know and national security during wartime?
What if the Gulf War had gone on for years rather than just days? Should the censorship have continued?
What if American casualties had been much higher? Should censorship have been imposed upon the number of Americans who died?
Return to Activity 22.
Go to the Contents page for International Conflict and the Media.
Go to the Bibliography.