Vietnam Question 2

“The war on colour television screens in American living rooms has made Americans far more anti-war than anything else. The full brutality of the combat will be there in close-up and in colour, and blood looks very red on the colour television screen”.

The USA declared war on Vietnam at a time of evident mass media involvement. The technological progress that was made allowed the full ruthlessness war to be broadcast the people of America. As a result, the entire course of the war was dramatically changed. The images shown on the television consisted of distressing images which showed the full brutality of the war. Filming was not restricted, thus, all images were uncensored. This was a major problem due to the increasing number of American with access to television sets, receiving news of more and more casualties on both sides. The television sets became such powerful mediums due to the uncensored images and recorded coverage which horrified the American public.

Source D can be regarded as North Vietnamese propaganda. It shows the US army surrounded in a jungle, waiting for a surprise attack. This is referred to as “Guerrilla Warfare”. This source shows the inexperience and the incompetence of the American soldiers. However, this source has been distributed on behalf of the North Vietnamese guerrillas who were the enemy. The famous quote “Propaganda is that branch of the art of lying which consists in nearly deceiving your friends without quite deceiving your enemies.” – (Frances Cornford) does not apply in this case, because the Americans were deceived by this due to the media “revolution” during this time. The poster creates the impression that communism in Vietnam will overcome the capitalist might of America to win the war using the tactics shown in the poster. Indeed, this source is bias, but it shows that guerrilla warfare was effective, and in retrospect, we know that this is correct. Americans who saw this poster at home if this was available would want the soldiers to be withdrawn. This kind of propaganda caused widespread protests across America.

Source E shows two children fleeing napalm bombings, which was published during the war. Unlike Source D, this is a real photograph taken by an American photographer. Presumably, the American public’s response was not encouraging. The idea that children were being targeted by the American soldiers horrified the Americans and swung public opinion.

In addition, behind the children, there are American soldiers aiming there guns at the distraught children, fleeing for their lives. There is also another soldier taking a photograph behind the children, which begs the question: If the war is against communism, why are children being targeted?

Source E is very useful because it is a photograph by an American photographer and seems to be unbiased. It was published during the war and is therefore reliable. The idea that a young girl had to literally rip her clothes off because they were burning, due to the napalm bomb, will have ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Richard Hamer, an American journalist, expresses the difficulties of fighting the guerrillas. This source (Source F) was written after the My Lai massacre. It shows the difficulties of fighting a war when the civilians and the guerrilla fighters are mixed. The inexperienced soldiers will have killed the innocent unintentionally. Hamer states that as the Americans walked through “rice paddies”, they were attacked with mortar shells. This leaves many Americans dead and scores injured. The soldiers are left in a dilemma. Did one of the peasants throw the mortar? If so, which one? Should you kill them all or just some? This can be referred to as psychological warfare because the Vietnamese are playing with the minds of the US soldiers. In addition, if the soldiers were to kill all the people present, this would have been viewed negatively in the minds of the American public. Hamer also states that winning the war of “hearts and minds” cannot be achieved by killing random people that you suspect. It also cannot be won by using heavy weapons such as the napalm bomb. This leaves the soldiers in a major problem. If they cannot use the heavy weapons which only the USA has, they are as weak as their foes. However, the foes know the landscape very well, whereas the Americans are baffled by the landscape. This idea relates to the idea in Source D where the soldiers had walked into a trap because they did not know where they were going. Therefore, Source D has been proved to have some truth to it using the ideas of an American journalist in Source F.

The My Lai massacre in 1968 was presumably the most significant event in the Vietnam War. It resulted in 347 unarmed civilians being murdered. Source F is the reaction of an American soldier after having just been told about the massacre. There are elements of delusion and justification for the massacre. He explains that many of the soldiers had “never been away from home before”. From this quote alone, he begins to reason and justify what had happened. The fact that 347 unarmed civilians is not mentioned in the source shows that he is almost reasoning with himself, which is delusional. The quote also shows that the soldiers were inexperienced. He also states that “they were going to do something courageous on behalf of their country”. This is an indication of naivety of behalf of the soldiers. It seems that they were only going to Vietnam to be war heroes. They might not have known what the war was about, or even where Vietnam was. It was the fact that they wanted to show how “courageous” they were. This reinforces the idea of inexperience because they did not know the conditions or dangers of war. The repetition of the word “Nazi” in the 5th and 6th lines could be used deliberately in an emotive way, because the Nazi party was a Brutal regime which has little support. The language used by one of the soldier’s friends can be interpreted as a way of justifying what happened at My Lai. This source is relatively reliable because it was written by an American soldier. However, there are elements of bias in the source and omitted factors which are very important to the subject in question.

Source H is a cartoon published in the British magazine Punch in 1967. It shows the effects of President Johnson’s war policy on the ‘Great Society’ – his vision to “feed and shelter the homeless… to provide more education and medical care”. The source is labelled “The cost of the Vietnam war”. In contrast to this quote, the cartoon shows the ‘Great Society’ being dismantled with an axe. This source portrays President Johnson as a man who does not keep to his word. He had stopped providing the money necessary to pay for the Vietnam War. The “Great Society” is being dismantled to burn in the steam train’s engine, which burns in a cloud of smoke with the word “Vietnam” written on it. The ‘Great Society’ symbolises the policies and promises of Johnson’s government to the public, which were “to provide more education and medical care” and to “feed and shelter the homeless…”. Neither of these were fulfilled in Johnson presidential term. In American society today, there are an increasing number of homeless committing crimes so that they can receive food and shelter in jail. The source is not entirely reliable because it was published in a British magazine and may have bias messages. In conclusion, the source is very useful in explaining how the media manipulated the hearts and minds of the public.

Source J is a photograph from an American school textbook showing anti-war demonstrations at Kent State University in 1970. The picture shows an ample amount of people with banners saying “Fight poverty” and “stop all bombing”. It is a peaceful protest which could have been triggered by the increasing amount of distressing images shown on the television. This statement relates to what I had stated in Source D, which was the image would cause widespread protests across America. This source is quite reliable because it was used in an educational book used by American students.

Public opinion polls asked if Australians wanted their forces to continue in the war or be brought back home. Source K shows the results of Australian Public opinion polls. The table shows the percentage of people who wanted to continue the war, the percentage of people who wanted the soldiers back, and it also show the amount of people who are undecided. The dates April 1969, October 1969 and October 1970 are shown in the table. There is a decrease of 9% of people wanting the war to continue from April 1969 to October 1969 (48% to 39%). One year later, it increases by 3%.

In April 1969, 40% of the Australian public wanted the soldiers to come home. It then increases by 11% in October 1969 (40% to 51%). One year later it increases by 1%. This could be due to the fact that it was America’s war against Vietnam, and had nothing to do with Australia

There is a steady decrease in the amount of people who were undecided. In April 1969, 12% of the Australian public were undecided. In October 1969, 10% were undecided and in October 1970 8% were undecided. As you can see, there is no dramatic decrease in the 18 months of the opinion polls. The entire source is in favour of bringing back the forces from Vietnam. This could be due to the images shown on television. However, this is pure speculation on my behalf. We do not know if the Australian public had easy access to a television set at this time.

The final source that will be analysed is Source L. It is from the film “Born on the Fourth of July”. The film show the psychological damage the US army suffered from witnessing massacres and the killing of the innocent. In particular, the storyline consists of a young soldier who had his legs amputated due to a surprise attack from a village. He is sent back to the USA where he expects to be hailed as a war hero. The contrary happens. He learns that a member of his family is going out and protesting over the war. The former soldier then begins to think about what he has experienced in Vietnam.

On the day of his parade through the small town he lives in, he is asked to recite a speech. It is evident that he has now become a conscientious objector to the war. But he looks around and sees the people who have supported the war; he cannot bring himself to express his objection.

The film shows bloody scenes, which shows the full extent of the war and its consequences.

This is a secondary source and is reliable. It shows both sides of the story, after all there is always “two sides to every story”. However, there is no evidence of how the television influenced the premature end to the war. The film is from 1989 and the war occurred in the 1960s. Therefore, no American would have seen this film. In addition, this source is a film based on a true story. The film could be dismissed as propaganda because the directors had the benefit of hindsight while making the film.

The sources discussed all indicate that the era of mass media involvement contributed to America losing the war. All the sources effectively change the minds of the American public. However, different techniques are used such as emotive language and pictures, cartoons that portray America as wasting money on Vietnam and propaganda. Other factors could have contributed to the loss of the war such as financial difficulties and conscientious objectors to the war. The Vietnamese guerrilla warfare tactic would have certainly added to the fear and help them win the war psychologically.

In conclusion, the era of mass media involvement definitely contributed to the ending of the war, for “Truth is the first casualty of war”.