The prototypical story of the Vietnam War revolves around a television news anchor at his desk in the studio. Of the 3,596 days of war in the population of my study, I collected 953 days of reporting. Analyzes of the data show that presentations of violence do indeed differ significantly between Vietnam and Iraq.
Explicitness of Television News Images of War
In fact, less than 17% of Vietnam reports show any of the four measures of violence. During Vietnam, the enemy is portrayed as the perpetrator only 37% of the time.
The Public's Perception of CNN and Fox News Ideology
CNN and Fox News often choose radically different approaches when broadcasting images of war violence. There is a widening divide in partisan differences between viewers of both CNN and Fox News. Second, CNN and Fox News' evening news programs both appear in prime time (7:00 PM - 10:00 PM), the most watched period for both cable networks.
Third, the evening news programs of CNN and Fox News are similar enough to traditional network news programs (ABC, CBS, NBC) to be interesting. Analyzes of the data show that CNN and Fox News' reporting on the war in Iraq is largely similar in the images they broadcast. However, there are clear differences between CNN and Fox News regarding some features of their programming.
When and how often the decision to cover the Iraq war varies between CNN and Fox News. 71% of stories: CNN and Fox News make the same decision; both coverage and no coverage for Iraq.
Cable News Decision Making: How often do CNN and Fox News cover Iraq?
The most easily observable difference between CNN and Fox News reports on war is the length of the story. Let's compare CNN and Fox News reporting to an anecdotal war event that made headlines. Content analyzes of violence in Fox News and CNN's coverage of the Iraq War, sample evening news broadcasts 2004-2007.
Network news decisions about who to portray as perpetrators and targets of violence tend to fall somewhere in the middle between CNN and Fox News. As anyone who has encountered CNN and Fox News stereotypes can expect, comparing the tone of the two networks pays off. Comparing the tone of network news to that of CNN and Fox News over the same time period is both expected and surprising.
Network news is neutral about the president 61% of the time, compared to 49% for CNN and 84% for Fox News. That said, CNN and Fox News differ in some important ways about their newscasts.
Mistake to Send Troops to Vietnam/Iraq? percentage saying
One of Gallup's key indicators of war support for both the Vietnam War and the current war in Iraq asks Americans whether it was a "mistake" to send troops to these countries.
34;yes"
Yet his work remains a predominant explanation of public support for war among policymakers and academics alike (Burk 1999; Klarevas 2002). Taken together, this literature argues that it is the events of a particular conflict that directly influence public support for war. HI: Increased levels of violent war imagery in television news will decrease public support for war.
In the case of justified violence, an act of violence does not act as a deterrent against public support for war. This will be particularly useful as I evaluate how television news affects public support for the president and his wars. H4: The portrayal of civilians as targets of violence is negatively related to the level of support for military action.
H5: The portrayal of Americans as perpetrators of violence is positively related to the level of support for military action. H6: The portrayal of foreigners as perpetrators of violence is negatively related to the level of support for military action.
Public Support for the Iraq War over Time
Things" "Looking back, do you think the United States did the right thing by taking military action against Iraq, or should the United States have stayed out?" 27. Gallup "Failure" "In light of developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the US made a mistake by sending troops to Iraq or not?". PSRA "Right Thing" "Based on what you know now, do you think the US did the right thing by taking military action against Iraq last March (2003), or not?”28.
The Decision" "Do you think the United States made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force against Iraq?". Thing" "Do you think going to war with Iraq was the right thing for the United States to do or the wrong thing?" 28 Beginning in March 2004, this question was given a slightly different wording: “From what you know now, do you think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq [last year/two years ago ], or not? ".
The common bond between rally events is their prominence in the public mind. To determine major war events in the Iraq War, I conducted an additional content analysis of.
Distribution of Iraq Public Opinion Polls, by Month
To avoid the overlap between log casualty rates and time, I measure the raw number of US casualties in the month preceding each poll30. These "rally events," as they are known in the literature on public support for war, can cause either declines or increases in the level of support. 30 This approach modifies methods used by Gartner and Segura (1998), Gartner, Segura, and Wilkening (1997), and Gartner (2008), who used data for the marginal number of Americans killed between support measures.
Therefore, when modeling support for war, I include dummy variables for each of the eight events that fit my criteria. Analysis of the data shows no statistical relationship between public support and the severity of violent images, the variable of primary interest. The control variable for month of conflict exhibits the strongest correlation, suggesting that support for war is likely to decline over time.
TONE is the average evaluative tone received by journalists (regarding the stated position of the President and his administration.) in the month before the election. Building on John Mueller's (1973) discovery of the negative relationship between support for war and casualty rates, models of public support for war have expanded to include a large number of considerations. Over time, analysis of these factors has increased the level of detail in our understanding of public opinion formation.
Feaver, Gelpi, and Reifler, on the other hand, argue that tolerance for war casualties depends on the perceived level of success of the war and the individual's initial level of support for it (2006). They are likely to avoid some of the partisan baggage of more direct questions about absolute support for the conflict.
Distribution of Support for the War in Afghanistan
H1: Exposure to high levels of violent war images in television news will decrease support for war. However, those subjects in the other two treatment groups showed statistically significant differences in levels of public support for Afghanistan. Because of the random sample, note that other characteristics that typically predict levels of public support for war are equally distributed across groups.
Exposure to a lot of violent war images in television news reduces support for war. This experimental study offers the opportunity to advance our scientific understanding of public support for war. Empirical tests in Chapter 5 provide further evidence for the effects of violent images at the individual level, suggesting that high levels of violence suppress public support for war regardless of the framework.
Images of violence changed an individual's level of support for the war between 6% - 13% on a 100-point scale. Models of public support for war must be revised to take into account the impact of violent images.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
Nonviolent_Unjust video)
This week we will look at the stakes of the war in Afghanistan, which President Obama has placed at the top of his foreign policy agenda. Its people less hopeful, and its government less democratic than at any time since the war began. Security has deteriorated to the point where the US plans to send 30,000 more troops on top of the 32,000 already here.
We need to improve the security situation in Afghanistan in a very real way, and we also need to improve the perception of security in the minds of the Afghan people, no doubt. Although the US has been in Afghanistan for more than 9 years, the last year was by far the most dangerous since 2001. The cloud of violence hangs over Afghans as they see none of the promised changes in their quality of life. theirs.
He looked at the people and he asked them if they were willing to sacrifice and had the strength to do this. American commanders say the goal of the surge is to bring trust and confidence to the Afghan people through better security, but it increasingly appears to be having the opposite effect.
Violent_Just video)
With the battle for Kandahar looming, the biggest offensive since 2001, the battle here is expected to be intense. As U.S. soldiers seek local support to combat rising levels of violence, U.S. commanders are looking for national support. The battle for Kandahar will be bloody, but unfortunately it is unlikely to advance democracy for all Afghan citizens.
The population is more hopeful and the government more democratic than at any time since the start of the war. Security is improving as the US plans to send 30,000 more troops on top of the 32,000 already here. U.S. commanders say the purpose of the wave is to instill confidence in the Afghan people through improved security, and it increasingly appears that it is having the desired effect.
The battle for Kandahar will be bloody, but fortunately, it could lead to greater democracy for all Afghan citizens.
Violent_Unjust video)
Next, I would like to ask you questions about your recollection of the news about Afghanistan that you saw earlier in the study. Soft News Goes to War: Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy in the New Media Age. The role of cognitive emotional mediators and individual differences in the effects of media violence on aggression.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
The Power of Television Images: The First Kennedy-Nixon Debate Revisited." Journal of Politics. News Coverage of the Gulf Crisis and Public Opinion: An Examination of Agenda Setting, Priming, and Framing." In Taken by Storm: The Media, Public Opinion, and US Foreign Policy in the Gulf War. The myth of the reactive public: American public attitudes toward military deaths in the post-Cold War period." In P.
The role of meaning construction in the persuasion process for viewers of television images.” In James P. On television viewing and citizens' political attitudes, activity, and knowledge: Another look at the impact of media on politics.” The Western Political Quarterly.
