One of the most abiding myths in the recent history of war coverage is the ‘Vietnam Syndrome’ . the widespread belief that the mainstream American media were opposed to the Vietnam War and openly hostile to the US military and its South Vietnamese clients ; and ‘that as a consequence of their critical coverage they lost the war for the US’ ( McLaughlin. 2002. p. 73 ) .

This of class bears small or no relation to the media’s existent coverage of the war. yet it has shaped and influenced political and military control of the media in the subsequent struggles from the Falklands War to the American invasions of Grenada and Panama and in the consecutive Gulf Wars. By the mid-1960’s. telecasting was considered to be the most of import beginning of intelligence for the American populace. and. perchance. the most powerful influence on public sentiment itself. As telecastings became more popular in the place. more Americans began to acquire their intelligence from telecasting than from any other beginning.

Therefore. as the Vietnam War dragged on. more and more Americans turned to telecasting as their primary beginning for intelligence. When intelligence plans aired images of conflicts and decease. Americans at place felt as if they excessively were in the jungles of Vietnam. Additionally. intense visuals helped explicate the complex nature of war to Americans who could non understand the military’s proficient linguistic communication. Anchors and newsmans rapidly became sure. family names because the populace turned to them every dark for the day’s information ; Walter Cronkite was even referred to as the “most trusted adult male in America” throughout the war.

( McLaughlin. 2002. p. 75 ) . This trust allowed the sentiments and prejudices of telecasting intelligence personalities to hold some influence on the manner in which many Americans viewed the war. Therefore. Americans progressively depended on telecasting for images and accurate histories of the Vietnam War ; what they were watching. nevertheless. were edited. thirty-minute versions of an highly complex war. By the autumn of 1967. 90 per centum of the flushing intelligence was devoted to the war and approximately 50 million people watched telecasting intelligence each dark. Up until this clip. the war had strong support from the media. the populace. and Congress.

The military continuously reported that the U. S was doing encouraging advancement. Gradually. nevertheless. support for the war began to diminish. Because no military censoring was established. journalists could follow the armed forces into combat and describe their observations without formal censoring. ‘Thus. as journalists saw more grisly combat. they presented the populace with more in writing images. Besides. for the first clip. interviewed soldiers expressed their defeat with the advancement of the war. ’ ( Brothers & A ; Caroline. 1997. p. 120 ) .

Support began to diminish in the autumn of 1967. but the major turning point in television’s coverage of the war occurred during the Tet Offensive in late January 1968. ‘Television. nevertheless. portrayed the onslaught as a barbarous licking for the U. S ; the media. non the military. confirmed the turning perceptual experience that the U. S was unable to win the war’ . ( Cumings & A ; Bruce. 1992. p. 82 ) The per centum of telecasting narratives in which journalists editorialized intelligence jumped from 5. 9 per centum before Tet to 20 per centum in the two months after. The most important statement came from the “most trusted adult male in America” . Walter Cronkite.

The intensely negative coverage of the war influenced both politicians and the populace. Americans depended on telecasting to see and understand the war. but the decease and devastation they saw appeared as irrational violent death when chances for the war became progressively negative and the bulk of Americans withdrew their support for the war after the Tet Offensive.

Mentions

1. Cumings & A ; Bruce. ( 1992 ) . War and telecasting. London: Verso. 2. McLaughlin. G. ( 2002 ) . The war letter writer. London: Pluto Press. 3. Brothers & A ; Caroline. ( 1997 ) . War and picture taking: A cultural history. London: Routledge.