Summary On the Media's Coverage of The Vietnam War

In the mid 1960's, things were different. Thanks to technological advances, most Americans were getting their news from television sets as opposed to periodicals. Imagery was a big part of the media's involvement in the Vietnam war, and you can accomplish a lot more when your images are video clips of the actual war, as opposed to just still pictures or political cartoons. This was as raw as it gets. Horrific scenes of violence shown right there on your television set.
     In 1965, America officially entered the war by sending in ground troops and ordering bombing raids over North Vietnam. Coverage during this time was mostly favorable and Americans, although concerned about the amount of violence going on within the war, felt the war was necessary, and supported the government's stance that we needed to be there we needed to support South Vietnam in the name of democracy.
     As the years went on, so did the increase of American troops, as well as an increase in ratings for television news channels. People were glued to their sets, and news channels were providing every gorey detail of the war on a nightly basis. Some of the material was questionable, like American troops shown burning down entire villages with cigarette lighters and harming not only the enemy, but innocent civilians. American viewers started to see this war as nothing more than senseless violence at the expense of american casualties. In other words, a war that doesn't seem as just and necessary as it once did. The Tet Offensive in 1968 helped strengthen this belief, and so began the decline of American support.
     Already unfamiliar with the guerilla warfare tactics of the Viet Cong, Americans and their South Vietnamese allies were taken by surprise during the Tet Offensive, a simultaneous attack on hundreds of sites in South Vietnam including not only military sites, but villages and cities as well. The element of surprise always count for something, and not only were troops initially stunned, but their American audience back at home were also shaken up. The difference here is, after the smoke cleared, military officials saw this attack as a failure on the part of the Viet Cong, and the American public saw this as yet another reason to pull out. Unfortunately for those in government who wanted the war to continue, the media took the side of the people.
     Soon after this, the war seemed to get more violent, and senseless in the eyes of the American people. A Viet Cong officer shot point blank, execution style in the middle of a town as opposed to a battlefield is one of the most horrifying images shown not just then, but ever. Americans wanted out. They needed someone they trusted to side with them, and show them that yes, they were right for feeling how they did. Walter Cronkite became that man.
     Already one of the most influential voices of his time, Mr. Cronkite was the most respected journalist at that time. People trusted him to bring them the cold hard facts, the truth behind every story. Although they didn't know him personally, Americans shared a connection with this man on a somewhat emotional level. With all the craziness going on in this war, they needed someone there to make sense of it all. Someone to do damage control and regain the support Americans once had for the war. So when Cronkite traveled to Vietnam to see just how bad it really was, the outcome all but officially ended the war.
     Prior to him traveling to Vietnam, Cronkite was a firm supporter of the government. He trusted their judgement, just like American viewers trusted his; and although journalists are taught to just report the news for what it is, and not take sides, Cronkite jepordized his credibility and did what he felt was right on a very human level, for the sake of the country. He did this without the use of propoganda, without lies, without false information. He showed the war for what it was, and it was ugly. Cronkite looked like a somber, beaten man. A man who was ready to accept defeat and move on out. The tone of his reporting was depressing, and put the nail in the coffin of any hope the government had of gaining support from it's people. President Johnson, after watching Cronkite's piece on the war is quoted as saying "I've lost Cronkite, I've lost the war".  This was the beginning of the end for America's involvement in Vietnam.
     It wasn't long before other media sources joined in. In 1971 the New York Times and the Washington Post began producing secret documents showing America's interest in Vietnam wasn't in the name of democracy or humanity, but rather political gain. Anti-war demostrators were increasing, voices were getting louder, and soon the U.S. had no choice but to pull out of the war. It wasn't long after Cronkite's piece that President Johnson announced the reduction of U.S. troops, and his decision not to run for reelection. It is yet another moment in our storied history where journalism played a big role in shaping our country.