American War and the Media: Friends or Foes?

Does media coverage of wars help the government achieve its goals or prevent them from success? The answer to this question has changed over time.

In the Civil War the media did not really help one side of the fighting more than the other. This is because since there was no nationwide source of news, each newspaper just reported that the side of the war they supported was doing well. This certainly riled up the public and could have been the reason the civil war was such a bloody one.

However, in later wars, such as the Vietnam war, there was a national source of media. The public was also much more divided in their support for the war. As national news broad casted generally negative things about the war, many citizens protested. With the advance in technology, there were many video cameras on the battlefield, with footage being sent home daily. This new raw view of the war inspired a peace movement against the war.


Today, this raw battle footage enabled by technology has become more common, more accesible, and even easier to send home. Innovations like digital cameras carried by soldiers themselves, and the internet allows Americans to see footage of the war in Iraq the day it was taken. It is clips like the following, that have been a main contributor to many American's dissaproval of the war in Iraq.



Although the government does it's best to censor the techology fueled raw footage Americans see of the war everyday, it can no longer keep the public from seeing the war's real horror. Today's incredible footage of war is starkly contrasted with the one-sided and sometimes made up news coverage seen in earlier wars. With continuing advances in technology, the public has become more and more opposed to the idea of war in general.