Gelpi's Analysis

By 1968, more than half of the American people relied on television as their principal source of news. What they saw informed, engrossed, and unsettled them. CBS Evening News anchor Harry Reasoner referred to it as “horrors and failures.” The Vietnam War dominated the network newscast as it never had before. Suddenly the war was everywhere. The impact on the American public would indeed be great. It set off a critical reaction to the war within the American media and gave greater credence to arguments against the war that a vocal protest movement had been voicing for some time. The media coverage of the Tet Offensive had a great influence on the eventual outcome of the fighting and its aftermath. Clarence Wyatt, author of Paper

Her husband trusted her with everything so much so that he never asked advice from anyone other than her that is why on his death he said that she knows about everything, which is why she took over the business herself. “Gliki participated in all the business decisions (“he sought no advice from anyone, having talked over everything with me”), drew up the partnership contracts, and helped with the books and the local pledges” (12). Because she knew of everything she was able to take care of the business and pay off the debts that her husband racked up during his lifetime while they were together.

The established freedom within this uncensored war, unleashed an unprecedented amount of evidence, thus allowing the media to become a tool for oral and visual communication for the masses, ultimately changing the method of historical approach. The ‘nature of evidence’ significantly changed during the television age as the intensity of war coverage changed. Professor Phillip M. Taylor ascertains that the role of the media enabled the general public to be "take a front seat at the making of history on the shirt-tails of journalism”. Therefore, the public became histories witnesses - albeit indirect participants - through the media. Many theorists argue that the media did not create or script any events that played out in the war, rather the

News media has a largely, overwhelming influence on Americans in this day and age. Over the years, audiences have been exposed to various types of broadcast journalism, each with their own forms of bias to generate attention towards various topics. The audience perceive bias in news media program. An in-depth analysis of bias on opinionated news compared to non-opinionated news is key to figuring out how the news media may be sensationalizing a problem.

Introduction: Today, developed societies are fabricated on obtaining information about the current world through multi billion dollar news corporations which can be be accessed from televisions, papers, websites, and radios. Since the general public is accustomed to this manner, these substantial publishers can effortlessly mold the population's beliefs to suit their desired ideals by reporting on news with incorporated propaganda and subjectivity. So when it's becoming perplexingly more difficult to access factual information about current world events, you have to to analyze whether the source your obtaining news from contains any political agendas, subjectivity, or assumptions. If none, the truth can then be founded upon evidence,

Journalism today plays a big part in war. It presents the people of a nation with information about the war, casualties from the war, and other important occurrences. Ideally, journalism should be obtained and presented from a non-biased point of view, this meaning all sides of an issue should be covered equally, so that every group has their voice heard. Unfortunately, thanks to prejudice, nothing can ever meet up to the exact ideals of today’s world.

According, to my interpretations of the documentary 'War Made Easy’, the news media plays the social role to inform to the people, but moreover is a business that needs high rating to sell and be profitable, which makes necessary to cover what is a subject of interest to the people, many times no weighting or making an objective analysis of the situation, and war is not the exception.

Can media help win – or lose – a war? Answer through detailed discussion of coverage in one war since 1945.

A response to this critique may be that the variable of enemy labelling is a direct test for framing or counterframing. It is important to see whether news coverage is complying with the administration’s frame or deviating from this. Language used in news media is important as it affects public opinion about the war. It is a subtle element of bias from the news programme that gives away a political stance that may have not been explicit. This is because it establishes a sense of evaluating the situation morally. Counterframing, as Aday notes, can occur by the media rejecting obvious administration framing devices, such as enemy

In his book Public Opinion (1965), W. Lippmann talks about how it is impossible have a direct experience of everything in the world, in order to be a part of the contemporary society. He believes that that people primarily depend on ‘pictures in our head’, mostly put forth by news media, in order to learn more about the world. As it is not possible to personally experience it all, Lippmann says that at numerous incidents these ‘pictures in our head’ lead us to behave in a certain manner or make certain decision based on these images. These pictures and images are delivered to us through media. According to the ABC news (1996), 76% of the people form their opinions based on what they see or read in the news while only 22% say they were well

Soriano also points out that, because of the nature of television news media being short (90 second) stories, it is impossible to tell the whole story and give context to the events unravelling before the viewer’s eyes. The television media does not go into any real detail, thus simplifying the story for the viewer to the point that it has little to do with the actual events. This has great implications for society and social pressure on the government, though one would have to assume this is not beneficial to the terrorist organization. The terrorist organization would receive massive media coverage for a visual, easy to cover attack, however, this does not mean that the viewers would be aware of why the attack occurred or the ultimate goals of the terrorist organization. This is a complex situation in which the television media are both beneficial and detrimental to the cause of the terrorist. Categorizing the relationship between terrorists and the media Soriano examines the relationship between terrorists and the media, suggesting that there are several different levels of relationship. He sites Michael Wieviorka, a French sociologist, who splits these relationships into four different levels: Complete Indifference, where terrorists complete their act of terror with no regard to media coverage; Relative Indifference, in which terrorists complete their

Modern media coverage - the main means of mass communication - gives us news from around the globe, allowing us to develop an informed understanding of the world and its issues. Armed Conflict and tension between the world’s countries has only become more vehement, which has lead to an onslaught of media coverage, orchestrated by countries on either side of the conflicts, as well as countries that are regarded as outsiders. Information about these conflicts can be propagated by a myriad of different sources, which often besmirch its reliability by having a subjective stance. The biased viewpoints of this type of coverage can influence

Part of the problem is ethnic blame discourse is realistic group conflict theory, which suggests that the discourse associated with tension expresses actual conflicts of interest between ethnic groups(8). A section of this literature review deals with the questions pertaining to what drives media bias and perceived bias. News content can have a significant effect on political attitudes and voting behavior by (DellaVigna and Kaplan, 2006; Gentzkow and Shapiro

Media has power to create, shape and change public opinion. At the same time, it is also created and shaped by community. In war or conflict discourse the power of media is crucial because it affects the image of the country on the international stage as well as public mood and atmosphere in the country. The ongoing Russian-Ukrainian conflict has been a matter of debate between many countries including but not limited to Russia and Ukraine. The research area of the current study is the current Russian-Ukrainian conflict in media discourse. The present study seeks to determine whether this conflict as well as its key actors are viewed and discussed differently in Russian, Ukrainian and European media, as well as whether media sources

Articles are written by various scholars and professionals in the public relations field and once approved by their peers, are published in this journal. Six comprehensive issues of the latest research and studies are published a year by a board of editors that are experts in the field. An article that was written by Kim Young titled “Understanding publics’ perception and behaviors in crisis communication: Effects of crisis news framing and publics’ acquisition, selection, and transmission of information in crisis situations” and published by Journal of Public Relations is the reason I choose this specific authoritative resource. The article is a study that demonstrates how people react to the way a certain event is portrayed by the news. The purpose of the study was “To better understand publics’ perception and communicative behaviors in crisis communication” (Young 35). The audience for this article is people in the public relations field, members of the news, and anyone that wants to know more about how news is manipulated to compel the public to think a certain way.