Contemporary Canadian military/media relations: Embedded reporting during the Afghanistan War by Sherry Marie Wasilow Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Communication Carleton, University Ottawa, ON 2017 © 2017 Sherry M. Wasilow ABSTRACT News reporters have been sporadically attached to military units as far back as the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, but the U.S. implemented the first official and large-scale embedded program in 2003 during the Iraq War. The Canadian Forces Media Embedding Program (CFMEP) was officially implemented in 2006 during the Afghanistan War. While considerable research has been carried out on the U.S. and British embed programs and their impact on media coverage, there has been very little academic study of Canada’s CFMEP, or its impact on media coverage of the Afghanistan War. This work seeks to investigate Canadian military/media relations throughout a period of roughly 10 years during Canada’s mission in Afghanistan. In doing so, it will examine how official procedures governing media coverage – particularly embedding policy – gave shape to the war reporting received by Canadians. First, within the broader subject area of military/media relations, this study establishes the origins of embedded reporting, and Canada’s reasons for becoming involved in the Afghanistan War. Second, it weaves together academic, official (both military and government), and journalist perspectives regarding the practice and effects of embedded reporting on Canadian war reporting during the Afghanistan mission. Third, it analyzes coverage by four major media organizations of Canada’s participation in the Afghanistan War during a 10-year period: from its initial military contributions in 2001 through to the end of troop deployment in 2011. It is the latter two components that fill a research void. i Results indicate first, continued concern with, and debate regarding, the concept of media objectivity; second, very high discontent among government officials with embedded media coverage of diplomatic and humanitarian efforts during the Afghanistan mission; third, largely untapped benefits of dis-embedded reporting, a unique component of the CFMEP in comparison to other countries’ embed programs; and fourth, a discernible impact of framing due to the fundamental configuration of a military-hosted and maintained embed program. It is primarily within the last three sets of findings that we can see the structural influence of an embed policy negotiated by two disparate cultures, the military and the media, on media coverage. The major result of an accord between the imperatives and constraints of the news media and those of the military was an overwhelming focus on the military – to the exclusion of diplomatic and humanitarian efforts – and more specifically military excursions, injuries, deaths, and ramp ceremonies. Several future policy considerations are offered later in the study, including a call for media organizations to conduct post-war debriefing sessions for embedded reporters on lessons learned. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express deep gratitude to: my supervisor, Dr. Christopher Dornan, for guiding me through the doctoral process, with perpetual good cheer, yet not pulling any punches; Dr. André Turcotte, who supported my goals from day one and was always my invaluable go-to person for real-world advice; and Dr. Michèle Martin, who willingly disrupted her retirement to help me make my work stronger – all three individuals are in the Department of Journalism and Communication at Carleton University in Ottawa, Ontario. I further thank Dr. Elinor Sloan of the Department of Political Science for her helpful comments, and must note my appreciation for the support I received from the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario. Finally, I wish to thank Dr. David Taras of the School of Communication Studies at Mount Royal University for his positive and constructive input. I would like to thank my three sons – Max, Quinn, and Greyson – for their love, patience, and willingness to put up with too many “breakfasts for dinner” and the constant clutter on the dining table, and who are truly my best accomplishments in life. I greatly appreciate the financial aid provided to me by the Robert McKeown Doctoral Scholarship in Communication, and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Doctoral Fellowship. iii I would especially like to acknowledge two individuals who gave me invaluable support I didn’t always know I needed: Sandy Milne, Coordinator of the Woman Abuse Program at Family Services Ottawa, and Barbara Wexler, MSW RSW, both of Ottawa. Words cannot express my appreciation for the support and love given to me by family and friends, even if they didn’t always understand why I had chosen this route. Please know that I always strive to remember the kindnesses shown to me by the many wonderful people I’ve encountered in my life. Far too often we take for granted those individuals who reliably make things happen, and have our backs when dealing with byzantine rules and regulations: my thanks to Coleen Kornelsen and Michelle Bateman, currently and formerly with the Department of Journalism and Communication at Carleton University. Many, many thanks to my interview participants. You greatly impressed me with your observations, insights, humour, and willingness to share your time with me. I am particularly grateful to Lieutenant Colonel Christian Lemay, who supported my research tremendously, helped me to circumvent barriers, and is a true gentleman. I would like to acknowledge the support and enthusiasm of Jeff Sallot, an excellent reporter and – even more importantly – a genuinely kind human being. I must also thank Chief of Defence Staff General Jonathan Vance, who personally helped me overcome bureaucratic hurdles. iv Unexpectedly, I would like to thank that handful of individuals who minimized and obstructed my desire to pursue and complete my Ph.D. Your objections helped to fuel my fire. Last but certainly not least, I dedicate this work to the memory of Elizabeth (Liz) Metcalfe, a dear friend who was tragically killed in a motorcycle accident during the early part of my Ph.D. program. Always larger than life, Liz believed in reaching for your dreams, no matter the obstacles, and savouring every drop of life along the way. You are, and always will be, deeply missed. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………..……….... ¡ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ……………………………………………….………….. iii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ……………………………………...……….... viii LIST OF APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………… ix INTRODUCTION ……………………………………..…………………………….… 1 CHAPTER ONE: HISTORY OF MILITARY/MEDIA RELATIONS LEADING TO EMBEDDED REPORTING …………………...……………………………..…. 20 1.1 Tracing the roots of embedded reporting ………………………………….……. 21 1.2 Technological advances used to conduct war as well as communicate warfare.. 27 Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………………. 69 CHAPTER TWO: WHEN WORDS CAN LEAD TO WAR …………………….… 76 2.1 Language as a form of power: Critical Discourse Analysis ……………...….…. 77 2.2 Media effects research: refined with time ……………………………...…..…… 89 2.3 Using Discourse to Frame a War …………………………………………..……. 97 2.4 Indexing ……………………………………………………………….……….… 105 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………..…. 114 CHAPTER THREE: CANADA’S INVOLVEMENT IN AFGHANISTAN…...… 120 3.1 Why Canada became involved ………………………………………..…...…… 122 3.2 The evolution of military involvement …………………………………….…… 128 3.3 The embedding of Canadian reporters in Afghanistan ………………….…..... 134 Conclusions …………………………………………………………….………….…. 140 CHAPTER FOUR: MEDIA INTERVIEWS …...............................................……. 145 4.1 Methodology ………………………………………………………………...…… 146 4.2 Results overview …………………………………………………………...…….. 149 4.3 Demographics ……………………………………………………………….…… 150 4.4 In their own words: the embedded, dis-embedded, or unilateral experience .. 151 4.5 The military experience …………………………………………………..…..…. 180 4.6 Media coverage ………………………………………………………….……….. 191 4.7 Editorial experience ……………………………………………………..…….… 201 4.8 Advice for the future …………………………………………………………….. 204 4.9 Epilogue …………………………………………………………………..……… 206 Conclusions …………………………………………………………….……….……. 208 vi CHAPTER FIVE: MILITARY/GOVERNMENT INTERVIEWS …………...…. 213 5.1 Methodology ……………………………………………………………….…….. 214 5.2 Results overview …………………………………………………………………. 217 5.3 Demographics …………………………………………………………………..... 218 5.4 The other side of the coin: government and military officials speak ……….... 218 5.5 The media experience ………………………………………………………....… 248 5.6 Media coverage ………………………….……………………………………….. 269 5.7 Oversight …………………………………………………………………...….…. 277 5.9 Epilogue ………………………………………………………………………….. 286 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………..…. 288 CHAPTER SIX: MEDIA COVERAGE ANALYSIS ………………………...…… 292 6.1 Methodology ………………………………………………………………..……. 293 6.2 Findings ……………………………………………………………….……….…. 298 Conclusions …………………………………………………………………….….…. 347 CHAPTER SEVEN: DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS ………………………...…. 353 7.1 A brief review ……………………………………………………………………. 354 7.2 Embedded reporting: It’s complicated ………………………………………… 355 7.3 Dis-embedding ………………………………………………………….……...… 368 7.4 Military versus civilian media coverage ………………………………..……… 371 7.5 Message control from the motherland ………………………………...……….. 375 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………..…….…… 382 CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………..…….