The war on Iraq a case study.
Following on from the first gulf war in 1990, when George Bush came into power in 2001 the idea for a second invasion of Iraq become a prominent feature of the US foreign policy. Bush accused Iraq of developing weapons of mass destruction which then lead to the United Nations intervening and assessing the countries weaponry. No such weapons were found but the US pressed the issue further, gaining backing from the UKs Prime Minister Tony Blair, along with other countries such as Poland and Australia. On March 20th 2003, the US declared war on Iraq with the backing of coalition forces. The invasion by the coalition forces was quick initially, but were slowed several times by the Iraqi army. This ultimately didn’t …show more content…
The US military made it clear that the media was unwanted within the Iraq conflict so they strategically based reporters 700 miles away from the action. This meant that reporters had to rely on the statements released by the military for its information and couldn’t provide up to date coverage of the action, ensuring that the military could censor or manipulate the story before the press were able to broadcast. However, from the mass criticism of the media coverage of the first Gulf War, the US led coalition decided that the safest way to allow reporting within the war zone, without compromising the safety of both troops and journalists was by basing reporters directly within military units. This allowed journalists to work hand in hand with the troops to get their information from the inside. However there are many negative aspects of embedded journalism, primarily with issues of independence and bias, losing their story to government censorship and failing to see the other side of the story. The bush administration through the use of embedded journalists were able to push western media into a vernacular that promoted the war and thus the coalition’s foreign policies. Western media focused on positive effects of the war claiming it was a ‘war of liberation’ and expressing their concerns over the oppressive regime of Saddam Hussain. Shaping the public’s perception of the war …show more content…
Causing animosity between the Arabic news outlet and the Coalition forces who saw them as an aid to the Saddam Hussein. Al Jazeera opened its English language services in 2006 and shortly afterward their online services providing 24 hour news on the war. Claiming independence from its royal family ties, al Jazeera provided a comprehensive impartial view on the war that was not heard of by western media. Notably the differences between Al Jazeera and pro Bush administration media was the westerns battle coverage was censored of all bloodshed focusing instead on the heroic nature of the war, the exciting element such as weaponry and the military action itself. Whilst Al Jazeera on the other hand focused more extensively on issues such as diplomatic efforts, anti-war protests along with the graphic aftermath of the coalition’s bombing campaign by showing horrifying images of civilian casualties that were not present within the western media. This form of War correspondence has led to the then US secretary of state claiming that the main purpose of Al Jazeera’s reporting was to entice hatred against the US (Gentzkow and Shapiro, 2004).Al Jazeera however claimed that they were just providing an alternative
Following on from the first gulf war in 1990, when George Bush came into power in 2001 the idea for a second invasion of Iraq become a prominent feature of the US foreign policy. Bush accused Iraq of developing weapons of mass destruction which then lead to the United Nations intervening and assessing the countries weaponry. No such weapons were found but the US pressed the issue further, gaining backing from the UKs Prime Minister Tony Blair, along with other countries such as Poland and Australia. On March 20th 2003, the US declared war on Iraq with the backing of coalition forces. The invasion by the coalition forces was quick initially, but were slowed several times by the Iraqi army. This ultimately didn’t …show more content…
The US military made it clear that the media was unwanted within the Iraq conflict so they strategically based reporters 700 miles away from the action. This meant that reporters had to rely on the statements released by the military for its information and couldn’t provide up to date coverage of the action, ensuring that the military could censor or manipulate the story before the press were able to broadcast. However, from the mass criticism of the media coverage of the first Gulf War, the US led coalition decided that the safest way to allow reporting within the war zone, without compromising the safety of both troops and journalists was by basing reporters directly within military units. This allowed journalists to work hand in hand with the troops to get their information from the inside. However there are many negative aspects of embedded journalism, primarily with issues of independence and bias, losing their story to government censorship and failing to see the other side of the story. The bush administration through the use of embedded journalists were able to push western media into a vernacular that promoted the war and thus the coalition’s foreign policies. Western media focused on positive effects of the war claiming it was a ‘war of liberation’ and expressing their concerns over the oppressive regime of Saddam Hussain. Shaping the public’s perception of the war …show more content…
Causing animosity between the Arabic news outlet and the Coalition forces who saw them as an aid to the Saddam Hussein. Al Jazeera opened its English language services in 2006 and shortly afterward their online services providing 24 hour news on the war. Claiming independence from its royal family ties, al Jazeera provided a comprehensive impartial view on the war that was not heard of by western media. Notably the differences between Al Jazeera and pro Bush administration media was the westerns battle coverage was censored of all bloodshed focusing instead on the heroic nature of the war, the exciting element such as weaponry and the military action itself. Whilst Al Jazeera on the other hand focused more extensively on issues such as diplomatic efforts, anti-war protests along with the graphic aftermath of the coalition’s bombing campaign by showing horrifying images of civilian casualties that were not present within the western media. This form of War correspondence has led to the then US secretary of state claiming that the main purpose of Al Jazeera’s reporting was to entice hatred against the US (Gentzkow and Shapiro, 2004).Al Jazeera however claimed that they were just providing an alternative