Jump to content

Usa Thread


Recommended Posts

Hillary wakes up...


>A decade ago the U.S. government attacked Al-Jazeera as a propagator of anti-American propaganda. Now Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is citing the network for fine news coverage — and tweaking the U.S. media in the process.


The Arab broadcaster says it's ready to take advantage of what it considers a major boost in its acceptance in the United States.


Clinton, on the week many U.S. television outlets were preoccupied by the spectacle of actor Charlie Sheen, suggested during testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that American networks were falling behind in the competition for information.


Al-Jazeera has been a leader in changing people's minds and attitudes, Clinton told lawmakers Wednesday.


"Like it or hate it, it is really effective," Clinton said. "In fact, viewership of Al-Jazeera is going up in the United States because it is real news."<



Link to comment
Share on other sites



p.s. Care to explain this?


<< In some ways one could argue that American vets in the Vietnam war fought on the side that had an unjust reason. >>



So South Vietnam was wrong to oppose a takeover by communist guerrillas supported openly supported by Hanoi?

The view by some that we should not have been there. That it was the South Vietnamese' war and not America's. Which was what the anti war movement was saying and it seems their view of it is what is now accepted as being the "correct" one.

I'm not saying its my view but in my history classes about the war (and it was before my time), the commonly held belief by the professors and the book was that it was not our war to fight.

My brother was in it so I would not like to think he fought for a wrong cause. He did his duty like any soldier for his country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Viet Nam first started up, the US gov and news media sold it quite well to the US people.

Even in the late 60's, most of "us" were "for" the war and thought it was our patriotic duty to serve if called upon and many enlisted.

As the war continued on, this spin the US gov and news media had put on the war started to fall apart.

In the 70's the protests were well underway. I remember it all too well.


Fast forward to the present, the US in two wars as I type this out, but a very different day. The US gov and news media has for the most part kept the spin in place and the average Joe in the USA feels helpless to stop the two wars, IMO.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

During World War II, FDR would not allow photos of dead GIs until near the end. Bad for morale ... Only photos of enemy dead and suffering allied civilians could be shown.


In the VN War journalists had a free hand to go anywhere and film anything. Almost anyone could be a journalist. The evening television news brought you the war almost live, and there were a instances where a family saw their father-son-husband-brother killed on screen before they had even been notified of his death. Very bad for morale and one of the main reasons the public turned against the war...


The government learned its lesson. War news is heavily controlled nowadays and journalists are restricted in where they can go and what they can film.


The feds - and politicians - realise the power of the press in influencing opinion.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...