THE WAR
January 1st, 1968 brought forth a new year that was filled with hope for economic prosperity and faith in America’s mission to soon emerge victorious in the overdrawn Vietnam War. This hope and faith was only heightened by the blatant nationalism and push toward military support through the majority of the January 1st edition of Newsweek Magazine. Even the cover depicted military men abroad walking through a Vietnam forest with the caption “How goes the war?” The publication’s clear bias agenda was both refreshing and disheartening.
As an American, I appreciated the nationalism and support for the troops. As a citizen of 2011 America, I am frustrated by the ignorance of “expert” and media personnel, like Pentagon correspondent Lloyd H. Norman, who declared, “The crushing glacial weight of U.S. military power, I am confident, will bring the Viet Cong to defeat,” (1). Further, as an African American, I am disappointed that there were no remarks about the Civil Rights Movement (which was still raging at the time). It seemed as if, this trying time in America did not exist to the media or if the media was working harder to hide/ cover up the disease of hatred that plagued our nation instead of honestly reporting the grotesque events that happened in segregated America.
What continued to strike me about the Media’s pursuance of the Vietnam War was the reasoning behind constantly addressing the war throughout the article. Halfway through the magazine, a subheading stated, “Because Americans find it hard to be dispassionate about Vietnam, Newsweek recently sought an analysis of the current state of the war from four eminent foreightners,” (29). This statement shows that the constant reporting of the Vietnam War was not about seeking and reporting the truth and the other tenants of journalism. Instead Newsweek’s focus on the war was rather a means to appease audiences, gain popularity, and maintain that readership. This sort of “journalism” wouldn’t survive in today’s media, for the standards are much more reliant on code of ethics and reporting the whole truth.
ADVERTISING
The advertising in January 1st’s issue of Newsweek was also shocking because of both content and form. Never have I seen such eclectic advertising and well thought out advertising, than in this issue of Newsweek. The first ad that struck me was the advertising council’s advertisement calling people to action in order to help individuals who are mentally retarded. The argument for supporting The President’s Committee on Mental Retardation was that providing lifetime care for a person with a mental disability cost taxpayers more money -- $150,000 more – to help educate that person, because 85 percent of mentally retarded men and women have the ability to become functional beings in society. The advertisement seemed very New Deal in its method. The impetus for the advertisement was the economic downturn brought by the Vietnam war, like FAP advertisements used the Great Depression as a facilitator for advertising during the New Deal Era. The tagline “advertising contributed for the public good” even seemed reminiscent of Roosevelt’s vision to help people have a more abundant life.
The advertisements further shocked me, because they were disguised as news articles. I often found myself reading “news stories” and realized half way through that the “news story” in question was in fact an advertisement in disguise. Even advertisements that were clearly not a part of Newsweek’s journalistic content took on the format of a front page news article. This is ridiculous to me, for we are taught in the Schieffer School that any advertisement that resemble news content, or could easily be confused as such, is unethical because it misleads the targeted audience. This stark contrast really fascinated me and made me wonder when the standard of clearly distinguishing advertisements from news content came to be in the media.
HOLIDAY REFERENCES
Although this issue of Newsweek came out on New Year’s Day and less than a week after Christmas, there were very few references to these holidays present throughout the magazine. This was really surprising, because now everything is coupled with a holiday or seasonal special. Because of their rarity, the few religious references really caught my eye. The first reference was in relation to the Vietnam War and described how America’s Christmas a part of the war was celebrated by a 24-hour armistice used to honor Jesus. I don’t know how common this is; however, this flabbergasted me. It’s amazing how powerful religion is. It can stop the most violent of wars as well as start them.
The only other reference to the holiday season was the National Safety Council’s annual prediction of automobile accidents. According to the council, New Year’s weekend as well as Christmas’ weekend will be accompanied by 1,000 deaths and 55,000 serious injuries to Americans by automobile accidents (40). The fact that this was the only mention of Christmas seemed almost disheartening to the holiday spirit. Newsweek virtually said, “Merry Christmas. 1,000 more people died!” I was highly expecting information about different celebrations and festivities, so the lack of holiday cheer was disappointing.
I think your perception of the war and the lack of genuine awareness that the American people had about the reality of it speak volumes about the way we look back on the war now. With the way that the war is depicted in Newsweek, it is no wonder that Americans were disenchanted with the war. The absence of news on the civil rights movement also seems to show the difficulty that African Americans faced in the late 1960s.
ReplyDelete