“Media and the Vietnam War”

The Vietnam War, spanning from 1959 to 1975, was a source of large amounts of controversy amongst United States Citizens and the government. As the war raged on, it seemed that American disapproval only continued to rise until war protests swept the nation, including the schools and colleges. One of the reasons for this large disapproval that is often cited is the extensive journalistic coverage of the war. From print and broadcast, the media spared no details in coverage of the war. To many Americans, this was the first time they were witnessing the violence of war, and so for many, that was enough to change their opinion of war on the spot. This annotated bibliography will focus on the various ways in which media affected American’s views of war, and what affects the coverage of Vietnam had on journalism in general. Due to the outrage and general disapproval of the war, it is clear that the media had a significant affect on how American’s view war. It is also clear that the media’s role was significant because of the various constraints put on them after the Vietnam War ended.

Primary Sources

Cronkite, Walter. CBS News Broadcast. February 27, 1968The source is a famous news broadcast by Walter Cronkite, a reporter for CBS. Cronkite

initially supported American intervention in Vietnam, but after he experienced the Vietnam War first hand, he changed his opinion. On February 27, 1968, after Cronkite gave his usual reports and updates, he gave his parting words that would become famous. He talks about how neither side seemed to win the Tet offensive, and how ultimately both sides were in stalemate. The reason his next words were so surprising is that a news anchors job is to report the news with no bias, and his next words were his own opinion. He states that “it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could.” His statement is a response to his experience in Vietnam, and his experience to the violence he witnessed. He realizes that neither side will win they way they are going, and as protectors of democracy and freedom it is their job to stop it. President Lyndon B. Johnson also realized the significance of his words, because he realized that if had lost Cronkite he had lost America, who at the time was known as the most trusted man in America.

The broadcast is an example of how Americans were shocked by the violence in Vietnam and what was going on, and how they were essentially powerless to stop it. Cronkite could at least recognize that a diplomatic approach was needed in order to stop the fighting. I would use this source to discuss how media figures and Americans were affected by the War, and how specifically Walter Cronkite played a crucial role in coverage of the Vietnam War. I would also note how media figure like Cronkite played a significant role in shaping public opinion, and how even Lyndon B. Johnson realized his importance.

Fonda, Jane. “To American Servicemen Involved in the Indochina War.” 25 September 1972.Jane Fonda is an actress who gained significant attention when she became an advocate

for the Vietnamese people during the Vietnam War. During a U.S. Congress Committee meeting about internal security and traveling to hostile areas, Fonda described her time in Vietnam and how the Vietnamese were a nice and gentle people, and how they are more determined then ever

to not give up to outside forces. She then makes the assertion that the tragedy of the situation is not Vietnam’s, it is actually America’s, because they were raiding and bombing a country whose “spirit could not be broken,” and she essentially predicts that because of the Vietnamese struggle to retain their freedom for so long, there is little chance they will compromise. So essentially she is making a case for American’s to pull out of Vietnam, because she thinks it will end in stalemate, with the only thing to show for it is destruction.

This speech is important in media and Vietnam because Fonda is one of the first celebrities we see making a really strong case for anti-American involvement, which in past wars celebrities were usually used for help gain support and money for the war. This comes after conditions in Vietnam were public knowledge, due to the extensive media coverage. When violence is so prevalent and being shown right in your living room, it is hard to gain support for that. I would argue that without media, Fonda’s trip to Vietnam and her anti-American involvement remarks would not have happened.

Herbers, Joan. “250,000 War Protesters Stage a Peaceful March and Rally in Heart of Washington.” The New York Times. 15 Nov 1969. Print

The article recounts the details of a mass protest on Washington that included 250,000 people. The mass of mostly youths came to protest a “rapid withdrawal of United States troops in Vietnam.” At the time, it was the largest demonstration in American history, just above the march on Washington during the civil rights movement. After most of the peaceful protestors had left, an eruption of violent outbursts, that included burning the United States flag and throwing paint bombs, suddenly broke out by the Labor and Justice department buildings.

I would use this article to highlight how the largest protest of the time was about the Vietnam War, a war where the American public seemed to have the most information about it. I would argue that this is not a coincidence, but it is in reaction to not only conflicts between the media and the government, which aroused a lot of suspicion in Americans, but it is also a reaction to the fact that Americans could essentially witness the violence they were protesting. In the age of the hippie, it is not surprising that large amount of violence on television would entice many protests.

“March of Time Pearl Harbor.” NBC. December 11, 1941. Radio.This radio broadcast gives an example of the type of war media Americans were exposed

to before the Vietnam War. The broadcast is a recounting of the attack on Pearl Harbor, but in a theatric fashion. It features music and different men reading the parts of the men who were in the center of the action such as different government and military officials. There does not seem to be a sense of urgency in the voices of the men, and it does not mention any sort of carnage of bodies, or any violence at all. Ultimately, it is a radio broadcast that would be popular at the time, something with only reporting of the facts and nothing about the actual violence going on.

The radio broadcast serves as an important tool to contrast the media that was used before the Vietnam War. Americans were given the facts, but they were largely unaware of the actual conditions of war, due to the fact that they were not there and they did not have many visuals on it. It serves as proof as to why video footage of blood and shootings would come as such a shock to the American people, and how the media played a large role in many people’s lives of making them strongly oppose the war.

Nixon, Richard. “Speech on Cambodia.” April 30, 1970.

In this speech, President Nixon talks about how they have just pulled 150,000 troops out of Vietnam, but they still have to invade Cambodia because North Vietnam has headquarters there that have to be infiltrated. He assures that this is not another act of violence against another nation, but it is simply a strategy to gain the upper hand against North Vietnam and try gain some sort of advantage. Nixon talks about how he is not thinking about any political advantage, but of the lives of the 400,000 Americans in Vietnam.

I would use this speech to point out the rhetoric that President Nixon uses. He seems largely focused on making it seem that his decision was not a political one, but something he seems is simply right for the United States. His careful explanation that the United States is not invading Cambodia but just making a strategic move could be seen as an explanation, but could also be seen as him trying to appeal to war protestors who would not be pleased with another conflict in a different country. He also says that nothing is more important then the lives of the 400,000 Americans in Vietnam, which can also be read as a political strategy to let the American people know that he is thinking about the lives lost, not just a military win. This could also be seen as an attempt to settle some of the protesters, and restore their faith in him. Because it seems that Nixon is especially trying to appease the American people, his language is a direct effect of the Vietnam protesters, whose anger was only further driven by the media during the time. I would discuss this viscous cycle throughout the American people, and how it seemed to affect everything that was involved in American politics during the time.

Topping, Seymour. On the Front Lines of the Cold War: An American Correspondent's Journal from the Chinese Civil War to the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State Press, 2010.

Seymour Topping was a journalist during the time of the cold war and the Vietnam War. His book is a publication of all of his journals while he was covering the Chinese Civil War, the Cuban missile crisis, and the Vietnam War. Topping was also the first American journalist in Vietnam when he opened the first Associated Press bureau in Saigon. Along with being a journalist, Topping talks about how he not only wrote the stories; he became involved in international diplomacy, which gave him tremendous insight into the various wars and conflicts he covered. In this way, his first can account is valuable in the discussion between media and the Vietnam War.

I would use the details in this book of the conditions in Vietnam to further explain the violence that happened there, and why it was so shocking to a country who had not been subject to actual footage of anything like that before. Because he was not only a journalist, but also paid special attention and become somewhat involved in international policy, he also acts as another resource for explaining the politics behind Vietnam, which is essential in discussing how the various different forms of media interacted with the public, and assessing how accurate it was during the time.

Secondary Sources

Cloud, Stanley W., “Press: The First Casualty.” Time Magazine. September 10, 1990. Print.In his article, Cloud discusses how the freedom of the press has been restricted since the

Vietnam War. He first asserts that before the Vietnam War, national figures “preffer[ed] heroic

mythology to the reality of fire and death.” Of course when video footage of the conflict in Vietnam starting airing, this was no longer an option. He then further verifies that it seems to be true that the blood and gore seen in the living rooms of Americans did not help public approval of intervention in Vietnam. He then discusses how since the Vietnam War, the restrictions on journalists have been significantly tightened on the front lines. Cloud also discusses how the new pool system of journalism, which a small number of journalists are picked by the Pentagon to go cover the initial action in conflicts, has been “severely and unnecessarily thwarted.”

This article is extremely interesting and important in giving evidence for just how much of an impact the Vietnam War had on journalism, and specifically war journalism. The many restrictions attest to the fact that the government thought in some form or another that the media were interfering with their agenda. I would discuss the new form of journalism used, as mentioned as pooling, and how it is highly censored compared the journalism during the Vietnam War time.

Hallin, Daniel C. The Uncensored War: The Media and Vietnam. Cary, NC: Oxford University Press., 1986

This book discusses the various types of media used during the Vietnam War and how influential it was. It discusses how this was the first war to have such substantial coverage on television and other forms of media, and how the government had no control over the lack of censorship. In the first part of the book, Hallin discusses newspaper coverage of the war, on both the liberal and conservative sides. He specifically points out how sometimes newspaper articles and what the government was saying would not match up, which aroused suspicion in the American public. The second half of the books is devoted to television coverage of the war. Hallin argues that in some ways television coverage was also influenced by the opinion of the American people, because as support for the war lessened it appeared that television broadcasts got more and more negative. Finally, Hallin discusses how the relationship between the government, the media, and the viewer has changed since the war. Ultimately, he discusses how censorship, or lack there of, during Vietnam played a large role in the relationship between public opinion and the media.

This source is useful because of its extensive discussion of the different mediums used to cover the war, as well as their effects on the citizens of the United States. This book essentially encompasses the point a research paper on the subject would have, which is that media greatly influenced the lives of those during the War, and journalism during wars was never quite the same after. This book is also useful because it talks about the different forms of media from a liberal and conservative perspective, so there is a broad range of information that is unbiased because it is coming from both sides.

Keen, Jennifer D., Cornell, Saul, O’Donnell, Edward T. Visions of America Since 1865, A History of the United States. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2010

Visions of America is, of course, our textbook for History 129 that covers American history from the Civil War to present day. The particular chapter I would use is chapter 26, which discusses the Vietnam War. The chapter first explains how the importance of Vietnam, due to the threat of Communism and other strategic reasons, was growing until the United States had no choice but to intervene. It highlights the fact that the U.S’s relationship with the French was on the line, and many did not want what happened in China to happen in Vietnam. The rest of the chapter does a great job of highlighting the controversy that was happening in the United

States, as well as discussing the violence and conflict that happened in Vietnam. The chapter also has a section that discusses the power of the press in Vietnam, particularly in photography.

I would use this source to give some initial background information about my topic. It is essential to know what happened in the Vietnam War, and just how violent it was, to completely understand what I would be trying to accomplish in a fully developed research paper. I would use the text to put my argument in a historical context, and use the specific dates and numbers to describe the war and how much ammunition and man power it took up. It is also helpful this chapter has a specific section on the press in Vietnam, and I would definitely mention the famous photo of the man about to get shot in the head. To put it broadly, I would use this source to be the scaffolding for my argument, while I would use the rest for specific examples about how the media affected American’s views on war.

MacDonald, J. Fred. Television and the Red Menace: The Video Road to Vietnam. New York: Praeger, 1985.

This book covers a wide variety of topics leading up to the Vietnam War, including television and the Korean War, Presidential use of television, and the cold war in politics and news. The sections that I am interested in are the ones that involve the Vietnam War specifically and how television coverage had an impact on Americans opinions on the war. MacDonald discusses how battles were “telecast with gory intimacy” into the viewer’s living rooms, so it was easy to form an opinion on the war. MacDonald also contests that in a sense the coverage was form of propaganda, because it was used in a way to not just report the facts, but entice a reaction.

This book could be used to further my argument that media played a large roll in how American’s viewed the war, and played an important roll in public opinion. I would use it to specifically discuss the relationship between the government and the media, and who exactly is influencing whom. In that case I would discuss how the media seemed to act on its own without government influence or censorship, and how it had more to do with the citizens of America than the government.