| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "MEDIA PROPAGANDA TIMES WAR": |
|
|
Media and Propaganda in Times of War, 2005.
A paper describing the propaganda role the media has played in the past during times of war and the likelihood of it continuing to play that role during times of war in the present era.
3,025 words (approx. 12.1 pages), 378 sources, MLA, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper attempts to investigate if the Western media would willingly co-operate as an instrument of propaganda in time of war by examining the attitude of the media in the recent conflicts such as those of Iraq, Yugoslavia and the Falklands. Various views presented in literature are considered along with the prominent opinions that have been presented in order to attempt to reach a conclusion.
Introduction
The Military and the Media in Times of War
Media Bias in Recent History of Wars
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The military denied permission to the media to accompany the Special Forces into Afghanistan and only 29 reporters were permitted to cover the Falkland conflict [Brown 2004]. The reporters covering the Falkland conflict became very friendly with the troops as a result of living together and sharing the facilities as well as the dangers and very favourable reports were presented to the audience even when things went wrong because they were 'our boys' fighting 'our enemies' and this is quite natural in any war [Seppala 2003]. Hence, the presence of 'neutral reports' in a war can do much to enhance the standard of reporting, but even these neutral reporters can be subjected to censorship, information manipulation and denial of cooperation. Even the neutral reporters will not be liked and believed by all. Enlightened generals do understand the requirements to have the media on their side because reporting on the conduct of war can influence key decisions about the war that are made by politicians [Boje 2002]."
| |
|
Media Propaganda, 2005.
This paper discusses an article written by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman on media propaganda.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 1 source, £ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper relates that the article written by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman on media propaganda suggests that the elitists control the mass media; therefore, newspaper and magazines is skewed. The author points out that Chomsky and Herman claim that all media outlets are subject to elitist opinions and agendas. The paper cites that Chomsky accuses journalists of manipulating the truth in an effort to promote the interests of the media owners and conglomerates.
From the Paper
"Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman designed the "propaganda model" in an effort to explain the role of the mass media and its' corruption. The authors suggest that the media, including newspapers, radio, and television, is controlled by the elite particularly in democratic societies. Many people assume that media control is more typical in dictatorship societies, however Chomsky and Herman believe otherwise. They claim that the purpose of the media is to provide the public with information and entertainment. The authors also suggest that the media influences society's norms, values, codes of behavior, and beliefs."
| |
|
Media Propaganda, 2002.
A review of the way in which the media was able to influence public opinion in the recent war against Iraq.
1,129 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 5 sources, MLA, £ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at examples taken from "USA Today" and the "Washington Post" which related to the recent Gulf War and the reasons for President Bush "had to" launch the war against Iraq. The paper argues that the media is an incredibly powerful force which has the ability to manipulate the minds and hearts of the American people.
From the Paper
"Noam Chomsky writes that, ?propaganda is to a democracy what violence is to a dictatorship.? Indeed, nowhere is this more clear than in recent debates over the impending war with Iraq. On one side of the fence, the conservative Right argues that war is essential and that Iraq is in league with Al Qaeda. They argue that Saddam Hussein is developing weapons of mass destruction which he would like to unleash on the free world. On the other side of the fence, the liberal Left argues that such a preemptive war is ?unjust,? and that there is no definitive proof that Hussein was ever in league with Osama Bin Laden or that he has developed weapons of mass destruction. They worry that a unilateral strike on Iraq sets a disturbing precedent, that it presents the United States as unreasonable and willing to employ force to protect any interest it so desires."
| |
|
Foreign Policy, Media Diplomacy and Propaganda, 2006.
This paper examines the role of media diplomacy, public diplomacy and propaganda in the reporting of the meeting between the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Israel on April 15, 2004.
1,068 words (approx. 4.3 pages), 4 sources, APA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper looks at several different reports of this event and analyzes how the use of media and public diplomacy, along with propaganda, shape the way in which news is actually reported. The paper discusses how the United States focused on the commitment to fighting terrorism as its outcome of the meeting, the Middle-East focused on the United States' public support of the continued oppression of the Palestinians while the United Kingdom saw it as another act of arrogance by the Bush administration and used it as an attack on its own Prime Minister. The paper shows how vastly different the reports of one event can be and what one event can mean to so many different people.
From the Paper
"Public and media diplomacy are closely related and often confused with each other. Public diplomacy is defined as a one-sided, usually half truthful communication designed to persuade public opinion where media diplomacy is essentially the same but uses a television medium to get the point across either locally or internationally. Many media and press outlets utilized this particular event to get their one-sided point across to the only audience that mattered, the one that was listening."
| |
|
Propaganda and Media, 2005.
This paper uses the theories of Noam Chomsky and Kathleen Jamieson to discuss propaganda and the media.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 21.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article the theories of Noam Chomsky and Kathleen Jamieson are used to examine propaganda and the media. The writer looks at Jamieson's view of media manipulation. The writer also discusses Chomsky's view of civic democracy and the right to meaningful participation.
From the Paper
"Noam Chomsky proposes two alternative views of civic democracy in which on the one hand the public is perceived as having the right to meaningful participation in the management of their own affairs and the means of information are open and free and on the other hand a view holding that the public must be barred from such activities and the means of information must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled. Kathleen Jamieson argues that while the media in a democracy is a source of ... "
| |
|
The Use of Media in War, 1999.
A look at how NATO and Slobodan Milosevic took excellent advantage of propaganda using the media as a communicator during the Kosovo War.
1,835 words (approx. 7.3 pages), 6 sources, £ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A look at the effects of propaganda during war with special reference to the war in Kosovo. The writer argues that opinions do not simply exist; they are always formed. Usually, it is propaganda that produces the most effective results and especially when the question of concern is war. Both NATO and Slobodan Milosevic took advantage of propaganda using the media as a communicator.
From the Paper
"Everybody pretends to know the truth about this war. Yet, they all have difficulties defining truth. The reason is that people confuse knowing the truth with having an opinion. And opinions do not simply exist; they are always formed. Usually, it is propaganda that produces the most effective results. This war was not an exception."
| |
|
War and Media, 2004.
A discussion of the impact that media has on war.
3,157 words (approx. 12.6 pages), 10 sources, MLA, £ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the media during four periods of history in which America was at war. The four periods are World War II, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, and the War for Iraqi Freedom. The news sources that were most prevalent are discussed, as well as the effect that these types of sources had on American opinion, and how technology had changed since the previous period.
From the Paper
"The media is pervasive in today?s society. It is often taken for granted the amount of information one can now receive on current events. Yet, it has only been in this last generation that the media has truly exploded into a variety of new avenues. What once was relegated to the newspaper headlines, or the nightly news, is now available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week on cable networks devoted entirely to the news, and Internet news releases that can even be set up to come directly to one?s e-mail."
| |
|
The Mass Media and the Iraq War, 2003.
Discuses public influence by the mass media on the subject of the Iraq war.
870 words (approx. 3.5 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Early in the war between the United States and Iraq, a poll taken showed that 67% of Americans believed that they decided to support the war in Iraq because of a media campaign against Saddam Hussein. This paper shows that during the Iraqi conflict, mass media played a unique role. For the first time in history, American reporters were "embedded" with U.S. troops and could present the war to the American public from the front lines. But was this merely a ploy by the Bush administration to bring its own version of the war to Americans? This paper discusses the role of mass media in the war in Iraq and shows how public support for the war was influenced by media coverage.
From the Paper
"American television tends to stress the symbols of patriotism, reflecting the pro-war sentiment of the government, and, presumably, of American society. But is the mass media shaping this sentiment by showing such images? The American media rarely showed Iraqi civilian casualties, but highlighted U.S. troops' humanitarian assistance to Iraqis. This should make it obvious to all that the media did not present a fair and balanced picture of the war. Media can influence the public as much with what is left out of its coverage as by what is reported."
| |
|
Media and the War on Terror, 2006.
An essay looking at media representation of the War on Terror.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 6 sources, £ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay discusses the role of media in the war on terrorism. The paper asserts that media provides a pre-packaged hysteria that has dominated both U.S. rhetoric and mainstream media, who, at times, are joining forces to create cynicism about the global war on terror. In short, it is a business, a product. If people are scared, they are going to want to know what is going on, driving both the medium and the message; even if it is, at times, difficult to tell exactly who is wagging the dog.
From the Paper
"At a media event last fall, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told soldiers at a Florida base how to combat growing confusion about the war on terror. Acknowledging that soldiers could find themselves fielding queries about America's goals, Rumsfeld briefed soldiers like a spin-doctor, printing off a figurative sound bite to keep handy in their hip pockets. "Tell those who ask such questions that you...are standing on the front lines to protect them and to safeguard their freedoms... And you can tell them something else: America is not what's wrong with this world."
| |
|
War and Media, 2007.
An analysis of the way that society's view of war is shaped by the media, focusing on "The Battle of Algiers," directed by Gillo Pontecorvo.
2,965 words (approx. 11.9 pages), 3 sources, MLA, £ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the portrayal of war within media. It specifically focuses on and gives examples from the epilogue of "The Battle of Algiers," directed by Gillo Pontecorvo. It describes scenes in the film and the ways in which Pontecorvo illustrates many of the aspects of war. The paper finally discusses how the media affects the way that society sees the realities of war.
From the Paper
"Media both causes and expresses reality. The landscape and local identities of war have been reshaped for our consumption. Modern media is instrumental in legitimizing war wherever it takes place by outlining differences in culture and identity. In The Battle of Algiers we could see this as the commanding military officer and the press questioned spokesman for the resistance. One of the reporters asks, "Isn't it vile to have women carry bombs in their baskets?" The questions had little to do with the reality of bloodshed and suffering and everything to do with shaping cultural values. The role of media in war is to anchor conflicts in its own media landscape, and then adopt a critical stance, while at the same time it constructs identities discursively. This is a change from the older function of literature "to point to the ideals and values related to war beyond the literary constructions" (p. 487). Larsen (2004) tells us that the "modern function of literature is to remind us that the real landscapes, with real bloodshed and real persons, only reach us through the arbitrary and abstract constructions which are circulated by the media" (p. 488)."
| |
|
The U.S. Media and the War in Iraq, 2006.
An analysis of the role the US media played in the war with Iraq.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, £ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how since September 11, 2001, it has been painfully evident that the U.S. news media has been much more interested in promoting the Bush Administration than in being objective reporters of the news. Their abandonment of journalistic standards and integrity has had serious consequences, ranging from the disastrous war in Iraq to massive and systematic violations of our Constitution and our laws by the Bush Administration. The paper further discusses how despite overwhelmingly supportive media coverage, the Bush Administration's Iraq policies have been clearly based upon hype instead of facts. Before the war, many Americans and much of the international community suspected the Bush Administration of ulterior motives in Iraq and the Middle East.
From the Paper
| |
|
Punic War Propaganda, 2005.
This paper discusses the effectiveness of a propaganda poster from the Punic Wars.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the Punic Wars were between Punic and Rome, starting in 264 B.C.E. and ending in 146 B.C.E., and were for control of the central Mediterranean Sea, which eventually resulted in Roman Empire's massive military forces subduing Carthage. The author points out a specific psychological poster made by the Romans, during the Punic Wars, to influence the Roman citizens as to the importance of the war and to imply that their participation in it would give them a sense of pride. The paper contends that this poster works because it neither belittles the enemy nor targets the wrong audience; rather, it correctly identifies its objective and glorifies its own resources instead of wrongly focusing on its enemy's attributes. The paper includes examples of Nazi and Japanese war propaganda.
Table of Contents
Punic Wars
War and Propaganda
The Selected Poster and Its Effectiveness
From the Paper
"The use of this poster was all about manipulation of emotions. During the war, people are often confused as to how they should react to the situation. Sometimes the media with its various tactics steps in the picture to make people's decisions for them and to help them think in a certain manner. Their emotions are manipulated and use to politicians' advantage. We can better understand this by the help of another example. During the Nazi period, the German government wanted to win the support of nation on the issue of driving Jews out of the country and killing them. The government tried to play with the emotions of people by issuing a leaflet "The Girl You Left Behind"."
| |
|
Media and the Gulf War, 2002.
The paper analyzes the role played by the media in the first Gulf War (1991) and the lessons that should have been learned.
3,685 words (approx. 14.7 pages), 14 sources, APA, £ 70.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses whether the image presented in the media was a misrepresentation of reality and claims that much of that coverage was superficial and misdirected. The paper examines how the American administration wanted to shape the story of the war in a certain way and utilized the power of the media to achieve this goal. It also looks at the gullibility of reporters and the way they were easily led.
From the Paper
"As America prepares for another war in the Middle East, the news media as well as American troops are preparing for the effort to come. It is a good time to reconsider the lessons that should have been learned from the last Gulf conflict, when the government tried to control the news media as much as possible, and when the news media failed to see certain aspects of the story and reported much false information. The news media has a role in a democratic society, and that role is not mere boosterism for the position of the administration but the need to provide all the information possible so the public can make informed decisions regarding its leaders, their policies, and all actions being taken in the public's name. This does not mean providing information that would be damaging to security, and the line between what is damaging and what is essential is not always easy to draw. The issue may be whether the news media draws that line on the basis of a business decision, either to gain audience by reporting scandal or to cater to an audience by avoiding bad news, or on the basis of fulfilling its obligation in a democratic society."
| |
|
Media and the War in the Middle East, 2005.
This paper is an essay discussing the design and ethical relationships of the media's presentation of the war in Iraq especially information from the internet.
1,955 words (approx. 7.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper states that everyday television reporting of the war in the Middle East seems inconsistent with the logic of television's informative-realistic effect because, it seems as if the reports produce fiction and the escalation of horrors transforms fact into fiction. The author believes that the war is not only changing the perception of the media as such but also the perception of society; television is not a mirror of society, but society is a mirror of television. The paper explains that the web seems to offer a global reference resource but it presents many problems of credibility, reliability, bias, timeliness and comprehensiveness.
From the Paper
"Turning on the television means establishing a connection with the place of broadcasting and being literally and continually present at the birth of the picture. The television picture materializes because of a short circuit between the place of transmission and the place of reception. But due to the speed of transmission of the electronic signal, the television picture is practically simultaneous and we do not notice a delay in time. As a result, we are able to establish a physical contact with one of the most traumatic events of our time, the situation in Iraq. The individual viewing the television experiences events as though they were happening presently and in close location. This is the case even if the events are thousands of miles away, occurring at a different time and in a different place."
|
|
|
