The embedding of
journalists in times of war gives unprecedented access to media outlets, but
also allows the military to manufacture a positive outlook on war. Access to military units allows for an
unprecedented viewpoint of war, but also limits media outlets into reporting
the trials and tribulations of the individual military units which does not
allow for impartial, objective and fair coverage.
Embed with you
The
strategic placement of journalists in military units during the invasion of
Iraq was planned by the pentagon to streamline the censoring process of war
journalism. Journalists were mandated to
go through basic military training and familiarize themselves with the units
they were embedded with. The conflict of interest that arises from the
embedding is apparent when observing whether embedded journalists reported
positively or negatively on the war. By having a journalist train, eat, sleep, and
ultimately depend on the military units for their safety, it created an
environment where journalists were unable to establish objectivity.
The essence of journalism lies with the
concept of being objective, fair and impartial, but the process of getting a
journalist ready to embed, undergoing military training and getting to know the
soldiers on a personal level, indoctrinates the journalist in military ideology
and inevitably allows for the journalists to have a pro-military viewpoint.
Although the core principles of
journalism lie with the ability to give an objective and unbiased viewpoint of
a particular conflict, the role of media during the invasion of Iraq after 9/11
facilitated the use of media as a tool of propaganda for the Pentagon. After 9/11 being pro-war was equated to patriotism and any opposition to the
war was met with harsh criticism and was labeled as being unpatriotic and
un-American. Journalists wanting to
obtain firsthand information pertaining to the invasion of Iraq had little or
no choice whether to embed themselves with a military unit or be “on the
ground” with the civilians.Furthermore, journalists handpicked by the military based on whether previous
publications were pro or antiwar. The pro-war
journalists were picked while the antiwar journalists were omitted from
consideration for embedment with a military unit. The selection process
conducted by the military did not allow for objective, fair and unbiased
viewpoints of the coalition invasion of Iraq in 2003.
I Object
The
role of journalists during the initial invasion of Iraq was as the public
affairs arm of the military. The Pentagon placed pressure on journalists to report positively on the troops and their involvement, obliging journalist to present the role of the US as positive. Journalists
have played a valuable role in manufacturing public consent. The Pentagon, aware of the power of media on
public perception, easily justified the inclusion of embedded journalists in
the invasion. Contractually constricting them, as well as fostering camaraderie
between the soldiers and journalists, created a social dynamic that made it
practically impossible to obtain objectivity, fairness or impartiality.
The
strategic use of embedded journalists during the invasion allowed for a
sympathetic US audience to find commonality with the soldiers and observe them
as heroes and protectors of democracy. The intellectual sacrifice which
journalists had to make allowed them to justify their actions because of the
almost “Stockholm syndrome” like commonality which the journalists developed in
the field, making it very difficult for journalists to scrutinize and obtain an
objective and fair view of the war.
The
inability and incapability of US journalists to embed themselves with Iraqi
soldiers and civilians did not allow the US audience to see the social,
physical, and physiological impact of the invasion on the public. This disconnect, created and fostered by the
embed program, allowed for the US public to have an idealistic and optimistic
outlook on the war and the consequences of the US presence in Iraq.
Trust me
The
dangers of embedded journalism are on both the domestic and international
level. Domestically the inability of
journalists to give an impartial viewpoint of the war created an illusion that
the war was not only justified, but also wanted by Iraqi civilians. This
portrayal of consent allowed the US public to justify the otherwise illegal US
presence in Iraq. The US media also portrayed the Iraqi’s as grateful
recipients of democracy who were liberated form the authoritarian regime of
Saddam Hussein. Internationally,
embedded journalism created a mistrust of US media outlets and was understood
to be a tool of the US government in manufacturing consent for the
internationally illegitimate and illegal war against Iraq.
[1]
Brandenburg, H. “Security at the Source: Embedding journalists as a superior
strategy to military censorship,” Journalism
Studies (Vol. 8, No. 6, 2007)
No comments:
Post a Comment