Sort options:
newest first |
oldest first |
group by author
Recent tags:
women
violent
sub-culture
sociology
communication
media
mass
politics
panics
moral
panic
bbfc
violence
horror
censorship
journalism
self-regulation
online
cyberspace
context
Degraded Capability review
Degraded capability focuses much of its criterion on the media coverage during the Kosovo crisis. Whilst it heavily attacks the media, it survey’s the coverage throughout the western media as a comparative study, giving us a huge insight to reasons for NATO’s interference.
The book is made up of several contributors writing separate essay’s on the events that transpired. These essays are then separated into the 3 categories.
The first part of the book is named ‘ The west’s destruction of Yugoslavia’. Diana Johnston starts proceedings by looking at how the decline of the USSR has lead to the emergence of the USA as a dictatorship for the rest of the world. Johnston looks at the Western Media as a culprit for influencing foreign policy or merely justifying NATO’s interference within the conflict. Johnston’s essay gives background to the state of the international relations whilst condemning NATO’s interference as ‘money driven’.
Secondly David Chandler looks in depth at the actions of NATO and interference from the west. Outlining that Western forces had taken 4 years to intervene. The chapter also shows Us interference may be to blame for encouraging Bosnia’s independence despite heavy opposition for Serbia.
The ‘West’s destruction of Yugoslavia ‘ ends with a look into how the lack of Media Scrutiny in regards to the legitimacy of the ICTY. It’s main argument that the law was only made applicable to Yugoslavs due to the limitations of the tribunal. The last chapter focuses on NATO’s ‘humanitarian’ aims and how they were prepared to cause more ‘genocide’ in order to gain control. Throughout the first part of the book it heavily questions NATO’s exaggeration of Albanian civilians killed, whilst also looking at the Aftermath NATO left behind.
Part 2 ‘ Seeing the Enemy’ looks at how the war was a ‘media spectacle’. It focuses its main topics on the military control of the media and the propaganda techniques used. Mick Hume’s essay ‘ Nazifying the Serbs, from Bosnia to Kosovo’ is rather self-explanatory. Hume’s analyses the long campaign of the media to ‘nazify’ the Serbians. This he states was cleverly done by such words as ‘holocaust’ and ‘Genocide’ being branded around by the mainstream western media.
The other ‘stand out’ chapter from part 2 of the book was Goran Gocic’s ‘ Symbolic Warfare: NATO versus the Serbian Media’. Gocic explains how NATO single handily destroyed the ‘Pro Western’ stance for many Yugoslav journalists. The chapter then proceeds to explain how the Yugoslavian media began to question the ‘absolute power’ the US after having pictures of a NATO stealth plane shot down. Much to the dislike of the US, who had repeatedly denied these claims. Gocic’s main point was that the western media was rather hypocritical in its critique of the Yugoslav media, as RTS (main Yugoslav channel) had become more impartial by just broadcasting events whilst the Western media showed its leaders justifying their aims of civilisation with propaganda laced speeches. The chapter then proceeds to tell the importance of the Internet and how it allowed the Serbian Media to score some ‘ symbolic victories’
The last Part of the book focuses on the reporting of the Kosovo crisis from around the world, focusing on the conflicts within Germany and Russia whilst also looking at the rather bias views of the UK and US media. The analysis is rather haunting and shows that the British media was just as bad as their US counterparts. The coverage is then summarised in a conclusion by the books editors Hammond and Herman. The conclusion is clear and concise and taking from each of the parts. The main argument being, how the Western media led the agenda for war by manipulating information and then selectively broadcasting events. It also summarises the Military operations and how Serbians were treated unfairly in the Rambouillet negotiations.
The book I believe critically analyses event’s and compares it to other War’s. It’s main focus however is the correlation between Media broadcast and actual events. It unveils how powerful the Media have become and that although it is harnessed as a weapon by the Western world, it in a sense has become the ‘dictator’ to the Western World.
The First Casualty - A Review
‘The First Casualty’ Review
Phillip Knightley’s book explores the role of the war correspondent from the charge of the Light Brigade to the Fauklands and in doing so, exposes the role propaganda and myth has played in some the most reported (and evidently, ‘under’ reported) conflicts of the past century.
In tackling such a staggering time period of over one hundred years (amounting to over seven significant periods of conflict), Knightley may be critiqued for being over ambitious and the content may potentially have been discordant. By introducing the reader to key players throughout history, whose parts as wartime correspondents were leading, the author brings a feeling of cohesiveness. Each story is overflowing with anecdotes and written extracts which are appropriately brief and offer the reader gripping first hand accounts. It is however, the conclusiveness to each players story (whether it be William Howard Rusell in the charge of the Light Brigade or American correspondent Westbrook Pegler in the late first world war years) which is key; establishing a feeling of neatness before the author guides the reader into the next period. The transitions read as natural ones, each player/anecdote woven into the next (which ultimately draws attention to the associative nature of each conflict). The author seems to have control over each player and, as such control of pace and narrative flow. One criticism may be in the authors ambition to cover multiple perspectives (particularly from chapter 5-7 in discussing the latter part of the first world war where we are offered ones of British, then American before jumping to the events leading to the Russian Revolution ); the reader, especially if unfamiliar with the subject war, may find the time lapse fragmenting. Equally, in doing such, the author may be praised for offering the reader further insight and ultimately a richer guide to each subject.
Knightley introduces the multiple approaches which were taken in terms of correspondence during war time and the feeling, or ‘zeit geist’, of each era. In doing so, he communicates a precedent underlining similarity behind each effort. Whether it be the utter patriotism of WW1 correspondence, the conspiracy during the Russian revolution, the passion and commitment to the Spanish Civil War, the frustration and hopelessness of WW2; whilst Vietnam correspondence saw ‘just one life after another’ (pg 391). Each represent propagandists efforts of sorts, which arguably lacked entire authenticity, truth or objectivity. Knightley implies that although methodology changed, the basic objective remained fairly consistent. As such the author brings about a ambivalence; when will it stop? It is in the authors efforts to evoke a feeling of relentlessness/ consistency which advances the book from plainly non-fiction to a thought provoking read.
Similarly, Knightley communicates a tone of frustration in regard to censorship (ie. as journalists in the early days of the second world war coined the phrase ‘the bore war’ during a ‘stalemate’ of journalism, where correspondents posted in France had little or nothing to say, whilst anything of any substance was censored). In such instances, one can read Knightley’s frustration; to which the commentary is at times ironic (ie. as the ‘bore war’ ended, the swiftness of sudden German advances means correspondents could not keep up and communications remained at a stalemate). In a further episode, where the author recalls the representation of the battle of Britain there is a similar tone of irony; ‘So the legend goes like this...’ (pg 234). The commentary is at times satirical, which seems to reiterate the absurdity of events. The author not only provides facts but goes further to include anecdotes;
‘... The Air Ministry total for the period July to October 31, 1940 was 2,698. Actually the Germans lost 1,733. ..The Air Minister admitted that it exaggerated it score by only 55 percent, whereas the Germans had done so by 244 per cent’ (pg 236)
In doing so the author engages with the reader; the humor encourages the reader to recognise the senselessness and absurdity. The commentary essentially directs the reader towards one theme; the futility of it all.
The theme of futility is revised as Knightly draws attention to the propaganda efforts of both the allies and Germans (the approach of enemy corespondents resurfaces throughout), who in the second war employed a successful propagandist campaign, or ‘PK’. The success of the PK 225, (after German frustration during the success of the entente powers propagandist campaign in WW2) became enviable. Knightley presents the changing approaches to wartime correspondence much like copycat child’s play; with nations looking at others for influence and ideas, comparable at times to a childhood game. Again, the authors reductionist approach encourages thought.
Although one may read the, at times, satirical tone which the author adopts as antagonism towards officials or leaders, the humour imbedded perhaps counterbalances this;
(a cockney soldier in reference to the failure of both the German and Allied offenses)
‘it’s a crazy war, guv’nor, I don’t see why jerry doesn’t bomb berlin and let the RAF take car of London. We’d both save petrol and we’d be none the wiser’ (pg 238)
Although such ironic humour provides entertainment, there is an underlining severity to it all. Like a modern day Oscar Wilde, each comedic element is weighted down by a key point or observation. The reader of today, who knows the fatal outcome, can appreciate the satirical commentary which essentially make remarks (such as the cockney soldier’s) that more tragic. The anecdotes do not simply provide humour but also expose shocking accounts, ‘unreported’ to the masses (particularly as the author recounts Vietnam). It is in these episodes, where the reader feels most gripped, as the author ‘enlightens’ them with a feeling of truth (which the author seems to search for).
An account of the early days post 9/11, entering Afghanistan would be a relevant edition to the book; perhaps focusing on a patriotically charged America of the early days compared to a sudden decline of interest/correspondence. This book leaves the reader feeling slightly flat or even depressed. This is neither a reflection of the authors capabilities or subject matter but an effect of Knightley commentary; the utter senselessness of it all.
Christopher Bridger's review of the book.
Kellner’s over the top diplomatic approach to this book does take something away from what I feel is a very insightful and at sometimes, painfully honest reflection on media coverage during the American elections in 2000 and 2004, and the Iraq war. One can’t help but think that were Kellner to provide somewhat more of an impartial argument against his republican counterparts; the argument he is making would hold more resonance to an audience. Kellner begins by describing how the “republican propaganda machine….attack those who criticise them� (Kellner, D, 2005) he also argues that the mainstream American media is no longer a ‘watchdog’ to the American people, is it a ‘lap dog’ to the Bush-Cheney regime of 2000-2008. He argues that the Bush-Cheney regime “used and manipulated the media to advance their interests� (Kellner, D, 2005) for instance, in regards to the 2004 elections in which Kellner likens the Bush-Cheney election campaign to none other than the campaign drive of ‘Adolf Hitler’. He argues that they used smear tactics in the media. John Kerry, the republic leader in 2004 also running for Presidency primarily lost the election on the strength of ‘big lies’ told about him in the mainsteam media by Bush, Cheney and Carl Rove, and Al Gore in the 2000 elections suffered the same fate- that is if you believe the strength of everything that Kellner writes about.
Kellners first chapter “Grand theft 2000� argues that “the 2000 US presidential election…was from start to finish a media spectacle� (Kellner, D, 2005) he argues that the “fight for ratings intensified the entertainment factor in politics� (Kellner, D, 2005) and he blames this on the fact that cable and terrestrial coverage of the election campaign was often round the clock- he then bemoans the lack of impartiality within his countries supposedly ‘democratic’ media. “Fox …was abashedly pro-republican…and it appeared that MSNBC and CNBC were also partial towards Bush. CNN and the three major networks claimed to maintain neutrality, although major empirical studies…indicated that the media on the whole tended to favour Bush.� (Kellner, D, 2005) Kellner’s main emotion as he wrote this book seems to be one of spite, he is obviously hugely passionate about the subject and feels that he, as an American citizen has been cheated by what he feels is primarily a ‘republican media’
Kellner argues that elections are now merely a parade for the masses- “presidential candidates were a brand name to be sold to voters� (Kellner, D, 2005) he argues that Bush only won the 2000 election due to his ‘friendly and likeable’ countenance on a late night talk show when in opposition to Al Gore. He poses an interesting argument on the role of the media in elections- and says that at times the media has become more important than the foundations in which an election drive is based upon. “Creation of image takes precedence over ideas, style replaces substance, and presentation trumps policy� (Kellner, D, 2005). Kellner’s other primary argument is that of the Bush-Cheney regime in manipulating the media to focus on some issues far more than others. Kellner argues that Bush and Cheney used these ‘media spectacles’ to hide behind the real issues surrounding their Presidency- a “Americans living in poverty rose by 1.3 million..to 35.9 million while those without health insurance climbed by 1.4 million to 45 millon� (Kellner, D, 2005) Kellner argues that Bush used the media spectacles of Iraq, Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein to blindfold the American citizens to the real problems. Indeed he states that “after 9/11, the media became weapons of mass hysteria that made Americans look to the government for protection rendering the population malleable to manipulation.� (Kellner, D, 2005) Finally he also argues how different political powers manipulate the media in different ways to portray different messages, for instance he comments on the American coverage differing greatly from the coverage of Iraqi television with regards to the war in Iraq. Kellner comments on how the American coverage attempts to focus on how the American soldiers and government are ‘liberating the people of Iraq’ whilst Iraqi coverage tends to be far more truthful and show the painful truths of the supposed ‘war on terror’.
Whilst I did enjoy reading this book I felt that Kellner’s extreme opposition to Bush and the Republicans soured the entire analysis- had he been more impartial I may have been swayed. However in the way it is written Kellner seems to be attempting to start a witch hunt against Bush and there is no sense of rationality within his argument. However despite this, I would say this novel is a fantastic insight into what seems to be a very corrupt political world- it is refreshing to read a book that spells things out rather than using pretentious language that no-one other than the author can understand.
Mass media and power
Mass Media and Power in Britain begins with the discussion of communication. It discusses communication from basis of language and how messages are transmitted through language. The medium in which the message can be trans mitted can vary from spoken word, to printed text, images or through satellite television. The book also looks at miscommunication and misinterpretation of the message/sign. For example the person who was drowning and not waving. A point made in the book is that “even the most elementary form of communication will be structured in terms of a message, a sender, and a receiver�. This can be taken that mass media always has a message or agenda behind every publication. Therefore it can be said that mass media is an instrument of social control. With the use of adverts, colours, sounds and fonts, mass media shapes the life and create various social groups. By getting the audience to participate in someway by projecting their ideas on the public. E.g. collective advertising. There is a relationship between mass media and the audience. The relationship between both the audience and mass media can be said to be a win win situation, because the both feed of one another. However the audience can be split into two, which would mean two types of relationship with mass media. One being a passive audience and the other being an active audience.
To say that the audience participation is involuntary suggests that they are passive receivers of information. The hypodermic syringe model (which started in 1930s) is a theory used to describe the interaction between the media and public belief. A concept of how people are affected by the information ‘injected’ into them through their information medium. The hypodermic syringe model suggests that the media can influence society and manipulate their thoughts attitudes and opinions. E.g. If a child watches violent things on TV they will be come violent. This model views the individual as a passive member of an audience, with no will or opinions of their own. Therefore a person is likely to take part in something when told to/when they see someone else doing it. Thus it could be said that the media to some extent can brainwash its audience simply by showing them something because their intended message is directly received and wholly accepted.
From the viewpoint of an active audience, an issue with the hypodermic syringe model is that it disregards other factors and differences in individual reception of media messages. Abercrombie (1996, page 140) argues, “Audiences are not blank sheets of paper on which media messages can be written; members of an audience will have prior attitudes and beliefs, which will determine how effective media messages are�. The gratification model (by Jay G. Blumler and Elihu Katz) opposes the hypodermic syringe model. It looks at how the audience uses the media rather that how the media affects the audience. That is, when the audience has a specific need, it turns to the media to consume various texts to satisfy those needs. This implies that the media has less power to influence.
Media, Conflict and Power
BOOK REVIEW OF:
The Media and the Military: From the Crimea to Desert Strike
The text traces the uncomfortable dealings between the military and the by and large ill-equipped and susceptible media, from the Crimea to the present day. It shows how the dawn of nuclear conflict has outlawed the patriotic wars of survival in the past, and untied the civilian from his age-old obligations in time of war, able to make up his or her own mind on the intrinsic worth of the situation. The book explains that it is here that the battle lies, in the fight for public persuasion as a necessary forerunner to war. This book details how the armed forces discovered the secret of media and public manipulation in the Falklands, all the way through from sending royalty to fight to keeping tabs on the journalists. Tested it in Grenada, and refined it in Panama before deploying it in all its glory during the Gulf.
There are however some problems with what is said in the book. It seems to suggest that nuclear war could end nationalism by ultimately destroying borders between countries. This notion seems completely farfetched to me simply because of the fact that nations defend their own lands. Why would a country stop/not defend itself from what it perceives to be an impending attack? As well as this the book also promotes the idea of free and open discussion in all areas. This would be impossible in places such as China, North Korea or any other country where people are forced to keep their voices down and stay in line. This is not a democratic world, there are always going to be countries who decide that democracy is a fraud and slowly drip into a dictatorship, either of a political party or of one person.
The way the book handles the journalistic values of war is extremely interesting, it constantly backs the notion that the journalist is there so that the public can learn the truth about what had been going on, in particular during the first Gulf War. On the first page Peter Young and Peter Jesser quote The American Society of Newspaper Editors saying the gulf war was ‘… the international humiliation of the profession of journalism’. They go on to argue that had the media been given the right to publish everything that went on in the gulf then they would have been completing their duty to the nation as journalists and delivered the truth.
In conclusion this book does ask very important questions of governments and of the media itself. Why the media was denied access? Why didn’t the public demand the media have full access and as a result have a clear view of the truth? Why did the media just simply back down? The facts still remain that the media during the Gulf War was stage managed by the American Government and as a result they had public support behind them. The authors of the book believe that without that support, the war would not have been any kind of a success for the establishment, there may not have been any war at all.
Review
Daniel C. Hallin’s “The Uncensored War – The Media and Vietnam� is an extensive look at the American media during the Vietnam War.
The book’s content is divided into two parts - The Vietnam War in the printed media and the war on Television. Hallin, in the first half concentrated on the changing war reporting in the New York Times. Chapters are divided by critical periods in the Vietnam War and the changing attitudes towards the war in the establishment, the public and the media.
Hallin manages to contextualize the events and the shifting attitudes towards the Vietnam War by presenting the reader with a combination of the historical event with the reported version. In most cases, the two are similar but the reports and what actually happened, as Hallin argues, do not always correspond.
In the book, Hallin at times uses his study of the Vietnam War reporting to delve deeper into the actual role and principles of journalism. Furthermore, Hallin discusses the limitation that comes with the principles of modern journalism in the United States.
Throughout the book Hallin challenges the notion that the media had contributed to declining public support for the war and the idea that from early on the media was set against the American (and at points the south Vietnamese) establishment. Hallin argues that media was purely reporting what the ‘public consensus’ was at the time, i.e. as the public support for the Vietnam War declined the media took on a more critical view of American activity in Southeast Asia and not, as commonly believed, the other way around.
The book looks at American politicians’ efforts to “manage� the media and the ways politicians use the media for public influence. Hallin comments on the “love/hate� relationship between government officials and representatives, the media, and the dependency on one another. Especially looking at how journalists rely on ‘officials’ in their reporting and how the establishment works that aspect of journalism in its favour.
What I’ve found personally interesting in the book is Hallin’s look at the way foreign policy and the war reports were constructed. He argues that the constrictions of journalism (format, “news-worthiness�, time and the notion of “objective journalism�) have limited the reporter’s ability to contextualise the events reported. Hallin uses the example of what he calls “the Cold War consensus� to convey the notion that journalists have to ‘condense’ certain information as a way of contextualising events for the Average American reader to be able to understand.
“The Uncensored War – The Media and Vietnam� makes a very interesting read. It challenges some concepts of modern journalism and sheds a light on the reporting process. Saying that, Hallin assumes that the reader is relatively well informed on some aspects and events of the Vietnam War. And although Hallin at points gives an historic account of the events, some are not expanded upon thoroughly enough.
'The First Casualty' Book Review-Megan Coker
This book is seen as one of the most ‘perspective treatment of journalism in time of war and conflict.’ The book written by Phillip Knightley is now in its 3rd edition. Since the book was first published in 1975, it has been adapted and added to as the media coverage of recent conflicts have been analysed by Knightley. With the aim to show ‘how war had been reported through the ages and important parts of the story that had been omitted or twisted.’
Phillip Knightley is an award-winning journalist who worked as an investigative journalist for the Sunday Times for 20 years from 1965 to 1985. His study of major military action from the Crimean war up to the present day Iraq war, challenges the reports journalists made on the events that took place in each major conflict of the past 150 years. Knightley gives a brief overview of all the major events in war's history and continues in each new chapter to analyze how journalists treated the war. From the very fitting title of the book, Knightley discuss whether war journalists are hero’s, propagandist or even myth makers. He uses first hand accounts from reporters, photographer’s and cameramen to piece together the medias portrayal of what happened contrasted to the actual truth of the war. Questioning what the reporters knew but couldn’t report, the myths they created and the major effect the media had on the support for the war back home.
The book includes some very graphic first hand accounts of horrific events, one particular distressing story was during the Vietnam War (pg433) This was a harrowing story of nine marines raping and killing a young mother and her entire family including a young child. This event took place in 1966 but was not published in the Esquire until 1969. It did not even attract any interest from major American Newspapers even though six marines were charged. This story is one of hundreds that started to be released after the story of the My Lai village broke. The correspondents were allowed to view the conflict and capture the action on camera, Knightley thought this ‘was an aberration. The freedom given to correspondents to go anywhere, see everything and write what they liked, is not going to be given again.’
Knightley contrasts the British and America’s coverage of World War 1, to show that reporting the same horrific events can be totally different. Both countries wanted to portray a different war, the British press wanted to cover up the horrific conditions of the war. This reinforces Knightley’s idea of the ‘myth-maker’ angle of reporting. Arguing, journalists are used as propaganda tools for the government to spins stories to help their cause.
He puts the Iraq war into context and expresses in most recent times media coverage of war has become even more censored. For example the governments refusal to release images of the dead soldiers coffins arriving back in America and the death toll of Iraqi civilian’s rarely being mentioned. The mass media at the news of the war did not question the motives but believed the American government. Knightly brings in to question the sad state of honest war journalism and examines ‘their roles in the promotion of war.’
‘The First Casualty’ is a very interesting account of war journalism and Knightley’s criticism of war correspondents being one him self creates a sense of honesty about his study. His overall conclusion is very pessimistic, that the outlook for un-edited and truthful war reports looks very bleak.
Megan Coker
An interesting, perspective altering read, -
Television and the Public Sphere: Citizenship, Democracy and the Media, Peter Dahlgren. (1995) – a review, by Anton Hawkins.
Written in an easy to read relaxed style, I found Dahlgren’s text extremely interesting and thought provoking, and to my surprise Doesn’t focus wholly on the television sector within the media industry. Dahgren covers in depth a wide range of interesting topics. Exploring the boundaries and limitations both traditional media and the newer widely accepted television industry. He also clarifies some of the wider known theories of the public sphere, critically analyses how the two interact with each other.
Throughout the text Dahlgren critically expands on Habermas’es previous workings on theories on public sphere communication, such as;
The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, & The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society.
And goes on to raise new questions, more relevant to this day an age where technology and communication within the public sphere are inextricably linked. Focusing on the increasing issues of the audience’s ability to interpret or resist messages and construct their own views and meanings.
The opening half of the book is extremely in depth and informative about the context in which this text exists, more specifically explores the fundamental ideologies and workings of democracy, which is deeply interesting and raises some key issues extremely relevant to the democracy driven country we live in today.
Such as: when viewing the public sphere or “people� within the current democratic world, issues arise when thoughts, feelings or views of the “people� contradict perceived correct ideological values/Political party goals of those in power:
“People are deemed as free agents, only when they happen to choose correctly�
Many of the arguments and points raised in the beginning of the book oppose Habermass theory, and after laying these down, Dalhgren formulates four separate “themes� that cover the different aspects of the public sphere, social structure, media institutions, media representations and sociocultural interactions.
After talking extensively about democracy Dahlgren moves his focus to television.
Exploring television as a medium of communication, power and importance. He analyses critically, television research, and other “television theory�. Expanding on this Dahlgren continues by breaking down the industry itself, exploring its professional practises and the direct links it shares with political economies.
As im sure many of you would guess one major sector of the media that is central to many of the topics within this book is journalism. Its role within the television becoming the main and most widely used source form information is extremely important and is a major factor when linking both the political sector and the public sector together. Dahlgren covers extensively both the positive and negative factors that surround television journalism.
In the latter half of the book, he moves toward the areas that surround the public sphere, examining historical facts and events that have helped form a greater understanding of the “public sphere� and looks at the complex relationship between what is public and private?
To be perfectly honest was pleasantly surprised by this book, and although television is not a topic I would consider my self to be passionate about, I found this book incredibly useful, raising many issues, which affect all sectors of the media today. Although this book is over 10 years old Dahlgren’s envisages the changes that have now taken place within the capitalist society, the public sphere and the media industry.
I think despite analysing all of these issues extensively its is clear that everything that exists within these three aspects of life modern age is affected directly by each other, and although I’ve summarised the entire book into just under 3 lines. I felt it was definitely worth the read and opened to me a new way of critical thinking about how the media operates within the Western Democratized World.
Review - Vietnam at 24 Frames Per Second
Vietnam at 24 Frames A Second is a ‘critical and thematic analysis of over 400 films about the Vietnam war’ written by Jeremy M. Devine. The book examines the history of the Vietnam War through its representation in film. Devine adopts a chronological approach in tackling the book which makes for a more comfortable read, especially for those readers with less understanding of the history and complicated politics of the Vietnam War.
The reader is eased into this book by a foreword written by Thomas Schatz. Here Schatz familiarizes the reader with the idea that films about the Vietnam War could be in a genre of their own and reinforces their importance.
“…[Vietnam at 24 frames a second] expertly traces both the genealogy and the trajectory of a crucial, complex cycle of films.�
(Schatz, ix, 1995)
Schatz opens his foreword by saying ‘no other film formula adheres so closely to “real� historical conditions and events’. Schatz then continues to describe the films made around the Vietnam conflict as being unique in numerous ways including their context and the various treatments used in their construction. For example Schatz discusses how easily the Vietnam genre merges or flirts with other ‘nonfictional’ genres including news and documentary.
Shcatz’s introduction underlines the importance of the Vietnam genre and this helps to strengthen the readers’ motives to read the book and get more involved with Devine’s ‘encyclopedic knowledge’ of the Vietnam films.
Devine’s chronological structure does not simply start by looking at the start of the Vietnam War. Throughout the book Devine will compare and contrast the Vietnamese conflict with World War 1 &2 and look upon the Vietnamese conflict as part of a meta-narrative of conflict or the ‘continuity of war’. A phrase used by Devine when analysing Coming Home in the Chapter that is aptly named Born Again.
This book could be an essential part of any film enthusiast, historian or media student. Devine demonstrates his depth of knowledge by not only using detailed plot summaries of the films featured but also by examining their impact on society. Devine also explains how the genre influenced developments in other popular culture and media platforms. For example Devine discusses Platoon and how it influenced video games for ‘the children of America’.
Towards the end of the book Devine continues his chronological approach with his final chapter ‘To the Gulf and Beyond 1990-1993’. In this chapter Devine continues to discuss not only a myriad of films about the Vietnamese war but also their importance in understanding the complex issues surrounding conflict in the more modern context of Desert Storm.
In summary Devine seems to have an ability to enthuse the text of his book with an almost incomprehensible knowledge and overt enthusiasm for films set around the Vietnamese conflict. Somehow Devine manages to maintain this enthusiasm for the films he is writing about while continuously making references to the chronology or meta-narrative(s) of not just conflict but also the world in which many global conflicts arise.
Perhaps Devine intended his book to explain how the portrayal of the war in Vietnam has influenced the way in which we choose to portray or even fight ‘our’ wars ever since.
Guardians Of Power: The Myth of the Liberal Media Analysis
The key point that Edwards and Cromwell seem to imply with ‘Guardians of Power’ is that mainstream media is only a subtle ‘cloak’ for real world events, and that the book generally reveals the “conspiracy of silence� that the broadcasted media hail strongly. “Guardians of Power� also reveal intellectual opinions and documents that the ‘mass-media’ would have missed on. It reveals that the evidence and cases pushed against Saddam Hussein were not all as incriminated as the media portrayed. The September 2001 attacks were used as a pretext for taking Iraq, and that the Bush and Blair, in particular the Bush Administration used Saddam as the scapegoat for their initial goal. “It’s all about finding a way to do it. The President saying ‘Go find me a way to do this’… From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go�. (Julian Borger, ‘Bush Decided to Remove Saddam ‘On Day One�’, Guardian, January 12, 2004).
“Guardians of Power� explains that the western ‘victims’ have been conditioned by corporate media system which serves corporate interests, not ours, and definitely not the interests of people on the ends of our 'benevolent' bombs or sanctions in Afghanistan, Iraq or Kosovo. It’s because of books like this and the ‘Media Lens’ that newspaper readership is diminishing as people turn to scripture and organisations like ‘Media Lens’, that help us think about the framing of news stories in a rational, critical and compassionate manner. The crimes of our society against the Iraqi people, such as the illegal bombings, the illegal war etc are examined under the microscope.
The emergence of the independent East Timor on May 20, 2002 provides a great of how western ‘free press’ acts as a propaganda system when covering western crimes. “News reports mentioned that about 200,000 East Timorese had been massacred following Indonesia’s illegal invasion in 1975. What was missing from the very deficient coverage by the Western media was that Indonesia has full support from the US and the UK. “We send Indonesian generals everything that you need to fight a major war against somebody who doesn’t have any guns…Without continued, heavy US logistical military support, the Indonesians might not have been able to pull it off…� (Quoted, John Pilger, Hidden Agendas, Vintage, 1998, pp. 285-6). The book gives a very clean cut impression that Radical Republican behaviour is the downfall of our society, and that Western Media is responsible for this growth in damage, mainly because the ‘real’ world has been mediated by our ‘beloved’ media corporations.
“Corporate interests need us to pursue a version of human happiness that serves profits but not people. The results include individual depression, global environmental collapse, and wars for control of natural resources.� (Edwards, D. Cromwell, D. 2006. Guardians Of Power: The Myth of the Liberal Media. London: Pluto Press. 210-211). ‘Guardians of Power’ overall pinpoints the flaws of today’s media driven society. Its books like this that has become the driving force behind the movement against ‘complete’ mediated forms of the ‘media broadcast’. I, as a reader enjoyed the overall expression the book generates, and it does co-operate with the opinions displayed by Robert Greenwald’s “Uncovered: The War of Iraq�. If you want to discover a more liberal ‘truth’ to today’s society, then I recommend “Guardians of Power�.