To what extent does the media assist or limit the conduct of military operations Essay Example for Free

To what extent does the media instigate or limit the conduct of army appendages EssaySome form of controversy has been regularly generated between the press and the host especially the question of media overture to the subject field. Conflict between reporter and the soldiery is non new. As fight correspondents became of age in the Civil War, the military began its determination to protect its transactions. The media urinate often called this determination censorship. The military/media relationship is seriously degraded because of suspicion between the two entities.Sources of this mistrust atomic number 18 analyzed, to complicate cultural differences the perception of biased reportage mis imageing and ignorance and speculation. In all operation there are many aspects of military/media relations which include operative security system, the press pool system, logistics, ordinary opinion, etc. However, there has been animosity between journalists and the milita ry. The military frequently views press as offering hardly potential harm not benefit (Carruthers, 2000).The press, on the other(a) hand, has a history of being lively of the military. For instance, U.S. media and professional associations insist that the military essential accommodate the press in struggletime situations, for three good reasons which include the press has always been present when wads devote been involved the public has a fundamental justifiedly to know and restrictions put violate the First Amendment. Yet on some ground between the military operational requirement for information to be made available only on a tush of takeing to know, and the right of the citizens of a democracy to know about what their military is doing, lies a middle ground (Dandeker, 1995). worldwidely, soldiers infer fighting and journalists understand communicating, yet none of them knows that the political impact of combat depends on how the fighting is communicated. so both side s wishing one some other. Key civilian and military leaders have now embraced the feature that successful inclusion of the press to ensure adequate coverage is not an optional luxury, but sooner is a necessity in todays information age and the expectations of the citizens.The benefits gained from the news media coverage of military operations outdo the drawbacks, and therefore press coverage should be permitted. There is no set solution appropriate for each situation, since each war is unique. But improvements in military planning, officer training, and press indoctrination will help lick some of the current problems in the military/media relationship. How media assist the conduct of military operationsIn todays technology-driven world, the media is a fourth dimension added to air, land, and sea and the operational commander must contend with this potent entity to be relevant. Moreover, the media is an gas pedal of immense importance in todays world in respect to the operat ional factors of time, space, and force affecting the operational commander decision-making. The reason why the military should engage the media is probably best stated by General (Ret) Dennis J.Reimer in a 1997 memorandum to his fourth-year Army leaders.Our success, as an institution, depends on the degree to which all senior leaders communicate clearly to the people. It is in fact part of your METL Mission Essential Task List, said Reimer. To fuck off with, the military has the need for improved defense related public relations. The media is an important force multiplier, and it must be harnessed to win the battle of the hearts and minds of the people and keep them fully abreast of developments at understructure and abroad.This will ensure that they are not misled by rumors, propaganda and dis-information this could happen if they do not have access to a truthful and speedy account of the facts and the progress of events. Secondly, the media is important in projecting the opera tions to the remotest part of the country and arousing nationalism and patriotic fervour in the nation. Thirdly, having a media team at each train of command down to the battalion level is of great help to project the activities of the armed forces through films and other means.The procedure evolved provide for regular operational briefings by the operational/intelligence staff at central office or by the concerned corps/divisional commanders. Fourthly, training selected service officers and men in media make up by running suitable courses for them on a regular basis and also media personnel need to understand the organisation, role, ethos and fighting capabilities of the armed forces and the characteristics of its various units is most beneficial (that is , media-military interface). Fifthly, limiting journalists access to a war can also work against the military.Galloway pointed to the Persian Gulf War as an example. When the war was over you had no proof of the efficacy of y our efforts and your soldiers efforts to take up on Capitol Hill at a very operose time when troop cuts, budget cuts, drawbacks are all under way, he said. Despite the constant strain and sometimes opposing goals of the military and the media, the militarys primary role is to support and defend the Constitution of the nation, the First Amendment of which is granting immunity of speech and of the press. Finally, having media-military interface there is hope for prompt and timely information in an age when news is increasingly being transmitted and used instantly, with TV news being broadcast on the hour, every hour (Krishna, 2000). How media limit the conduct of military operations The prospicientstanding conflict between the news medias need for access and the militarys need for hiding has continued during the war on terrorism, journalists agree. If anything, the tension between the two groups has gotten worse.For instance, during the war in Afghanistan, Pentagon senior spokesma n Bryan Whitman said the military understands reporters concerns but that the top priority must be troop safety. Ensuring that what we do with the news media in the Pentagon or in the field doesnt do anything to jeopardize the success of the operation or endanger the personnel that are participating in the military operation has to be equilibrise all the time with how much reporting can be taking place at any given moment, he said. (Wilcox Jr, 2002)But author and former war correspondent Joe Galloway, whose book We Were Soldiers Once and girlish documents the first major U. S. ground battle of the Vietnam War, said that Vietnam changed the mindset of the military because of the open and unrestricted reporting done by journalists. Most of the times, the military is uncoerced to learn, the journalists are not pointed out by Galloway as evidenced by the numerous invitations he has received from the military to speak about the subject. He has not received any invitations to speak to news organizations or journalism schools.The media is also believed by them reporting from the force field turn the people against the military and against the war. Galloway also adds that, while Vietnam remains a model for him in wrong of military/media relations, U. S. led military operations in Grenada and Panama were disastrous in terms of the medias powerfulness to cover those conflicts because of military restrictions. Also, keeping the media at a greater distance from combat operations than security requires would contribute to a procedureterly adversarial military-media relationship.This, in turn, would likely hurt the war effort in the long run by inviting relentlessly negative coverage and fanning public distrust. Furthermore, the media are a fact of military operations and here to stay as well as being vital to all republican governments seeking to discharge their duty to explain. Military avow of information during war time is also a major contributing factor t o propaganda, especially when the media go along with it without question.The military recognizes the values of media and information control very well. The military often manipulates the mainstream media, by restricting or managing what information is presented and hence what the public are told. For them it is paramount to control the media. This can involve all manner of activities, from organizing media sessions and daily press briefings, or through providing managed access to war zones, to even planting stories.Over time then, the way that the media covers conflicts degrades in quality, critique and objectiveness. As one military puts it, Information is the currency of victory. From a militarys perspective, information warfare is another front on which a battle must be fought. However, as well as needing to delude adversaries, in order to maintain public support, information to their own public must no discredit be managed as well. That makes sense from a military perspectiv e. Sometimes the public can be willing to sacrifice detailed knowledge.But that can also lead to unaccountability and when information that is presented has been managed, propaganda is often the result. Finally, the military have had to adapt since 1982 is the speed of reporting made possible by modern communications. Today, a reporter with a digital camera, a laptop and a satellite phone, all of which can fit in a day sack, can file stories minutes after events and even live if they have a bit more by way of equipment. Control is much more difficult if reporters dont need militarys help to file a story.Because they can act so quickly, and are expected to do so by their editors or newsrooms, military dont have the time to ponder at length our response to events, we must respond quickly whilst still, crucially, maintaining accuracy. For instance, this happened on TELIC 1 (Iraq) but, it was not a great success. Conclusion Throughout history, no matter the time or war, there has always been a conflict between the military and the media. The medias right to a free press conflicts with the militarys concern for operational security.It serves no reconstructive purpose, however, to ignore this conflict nor does it serve a purpose by adding to it. Therefore, it is time for the military to accept the media as part of the battlefield of the 21st century, and to understand and prepare for the media as it does for other battlefield elements. Commanders should ensure that their military man receive not only the equipment, but also the training to survive in adverse battlefield environments. The point here is to point out that no matter whether the military likes or dislikes the media, the media will be a part of the battlefield environment just as the weather.As is the case with inclement weather, the ruin the commander plans and prepares his or her troops, as well as themselves for the media, the better they and their troops will do when go about with a reporter. If w e are going to get this right, the military must not resort unnecessarily to secrecy or to lightly tarring independent journalists as disloyal. The media should not frivolously cry censorship. And each should work harder to understand the views and accommodate the needs of the other.