The Military 1 Running head: THE MILITARY AND THE MEDIA The Military and the Media Haines Group 1 SGM Kenneth D. Carmickle SGM Timothy J. Lamb SGM Barrington Ricketts SGM Joseph J. Alexander MSG Boris Saavedra MSG Angie Blanchette United States Army Sergeants Major Academy Class # 58 SGM Scott A. Landy 27 November 2007 The Military 2 Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………3 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….4 Civil War…………………………………………………………………………………………..5 World War I ………………………………………………………………………………………6 World War II ……………………………………………………………………………………...7 Transition from World War II to Vietnam.………………………………………………………..8 Vietnam……………………………………………………………………………………………9 Desert Shield-Desert Storm……………………………………………………………………...10 Somalia…………………………………………………………………………………………..10 Pre-911 Summary………………………………………………………………………………..11 The Realationship Between The Media and The Military...……………………………………..12 First Amendment………………………...………………………………………………………12 Guidelines for Media Relations…...……………………………………………………………..13 Military and Media Proposal…………………………………………………………………….14 Operation Anaconda…………………………………………………………………………….15 Media and Fallujah…………………………………………………………………………........16 The Media’s Impact on Current Operations and Human Rights………………………………..18 Jessica Lynch.……………………………………………………………………………………18 Pat Tillman.………………………………………………………………………………………19 Recommendations………………………………………………………………………………..21 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….24 References……………………………………………………………………………………26-27 The Military 3 Abstract Even though the 1st Amendment gives the media the right to broadcast news without regard to military opinions, the Media must consider the impact it has on the public’s perception of the military when they portray an incomplete or sided story. Reporting of this nature has and will have negative impacts on the military’s ability to win wars. After looking at the relationship between the Military and the media, it’s clear that over time their roles and relationships have changed. This paper examines the relationship between these two groups starting with the Civil War and finishing with the Global War on Terror (GWOT). The paper also addresses possible solutions to problems presented. The Military 4 The Relationship Between The Media and The Military Introduction Throughout the history of the United States, the mutual dependence of the military and media has created a complex relationship. The founding fathers understood the need for a free and independent press to keep the nation on a straight and true path. The writers of the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights felt that free press was so important that the issue of free speech is first in the Bill of Rights. While understanding the importance of free speech, the original members of the Constitutional Convention were aware of the impact positive press could play in public perceptions of the government. It’s no coincidence that Benjamin Franklin, who has been considered one of the smartest men of his time, published his own newspaper. Benjamin Franklin used his newspaper to influence the opinions of others. After the establishment of the United States of America, local newspapers played a critical role in keeping the citizens informed about their government. The government would develop a relationship with the press that allowed almost unlimited access to those in the upper levels of power. These political figures used and trusted the press to present an honest and unbiased view of the workings of the country’s government (Longacre, 2006). However, the relationship between the media and government has not always been stable; it has evolved and changed overtime. The evolution of the relationship between government and the media has been influenced by various world events that have occurred in American history. This paper will discuss how the media’s coverage of different wars has shaped public opinion and in some case even influenced military decisions. Over time the relationship between the media and the military has changed from supportive, to dependent, to hostile, back to supportive, and finally to friendly. Over time these changes have shaped and influenced America’s support of the military The Military 5 and the conflicts they were fighting. As the average American’s beliefs and values have changed so has the media’s view of their role in society. The changes in society have in many cases left military leaders unsure of their ground when dealing with the media, since a free press and operational security in wartime will be in conflict at times, some sort of common ground between the two must be established. Even though the 1st Amendment gives the media the right to broadcast the news without regard to military opinions, the media should consider the impact it has on the public’s perception of the military when they only portray a portion of the story. Also, the military has a responsibility to do a better job with the exchange of information to assist the media in creating a positive perception. Civil War The close relationship between the media and the military can be traced back to the American Civil War (Anon, 2007). By this time in history most Americans had become used to and possibly even dependent upon the media of their time supplying them with local and national news. The workings of the government and political elections were covered in great detail and closely followed by newspaper readers. Technological advances had produced the ability to take still photographs allowing Americans to see and visualize news stories in ways never imagined. Because of the use of photography and other new inventions some historians consider The Civil War to be the first modern war (Anon, 2007). But what was the relationship between the press, the military, and the American public? In the “beginning of the Civil War” many newspapers felt that “all ideas deserved First Amendment protection and fair-handed treatment,” but not all newspapers followed this trend as the war progressed (Dickens-Garcia, 2007). Reviewing newspaper articles from that time will show once the war begins many newspapers began to have a more biased slant. Depending on which side of the war the readers came from (either North or The Military 6 South) the paper’s reporting was designed to constantly re-enforce the views of their readers. Most newspapers weren’t trying to make breaking news but rather report news they felt was relevant, honest, and supportive to their reader’s views. Sometimes newspaper reporters even played an active role in shaping the public’s view of certain military generals. President Lincoln had newspaper reporters communicate with him directly on the personal affairs of General Grant (Longacre, 2006). Overall, during the Civil War the relationship between the military and the media could be called one of mutual support and admiration, with shared goals and views. Very few times did the media and the military come in direct conflict with each other. World War I The media’s relationship with the military during their coverage of World War I and World War II would reflect the changing landscape of American society and showcase new advancements in technology. At the time of World War I (WW I), newsreels and movies were becoming common across America. The media and government would use the new art of movie making to show Soldiers in the trenches of the front lines. However, great care was taken not to show scenes of dead American Soldiers to the American public. From the Civil War to WW I the American media had become more involved in using their power to begin shaping events their publishers felt were important. One example of this is how the Hurst Newspapers chain help lead the cry for America’s involvement in the Spanish American War. While these changes were occurring the military began to realize and appreciate how the media could be used as an instrument in support of their goals. The relationship between the media and the military was still one of mutual support and admiration. Most media personnel thought of themselves as patriots first and reporters second. This isn’t to say their reporting wasn’t accurate or embarrassing at The Military 7 times. Rather the military and media had a mutual trust that both sides would exploit for their own purpose. World War II One example of this trust is when two days prior to the invasion of Sicily; General Eisenhower told the media about the plans and the time of the invasion. The media gave their word not to disclose it prematurely and they didn’t (Atkinson, 2007). Another example is the incident where General George Patton slapped an American Soldier in the head and accused him of malingering, General Eisenhower asked the media not to report on the incident and they agreed to his request for the good of the war effort (Atkinson, 2007). There are several reasons the media agreed to these and many other requests. First and foremost the reporters felt it would be unpatriotic to report on issues that could hurt morale at home. Also they didn’t want to give America’s enemies ammunition to use in the world press against the American Soldier. Most importantly there was a level of trust between the military establishment and America’s media. This level of trust resulted in the media trusting American commanders to take care of business (and punish those that crossed the line like Patton) (Atkinson, 2007). Additionally, this level of trust allowed the military to give the media unrestricted access to Soldiers and the military operations that were taking place. This isn’t to say that the media would not report bad news, they could and did, but in most cases the media would talk to the military first and try to look to the greater good. This greater good can be described as a conflict between the public’s right to know and support for the American war effort. It’s safe to say that relations between the military and media were better during WW II than any other time in history. The American public would be the beneficiary of this relationship by receiving outstanding news coverage of the war.