Examining the Myths of the Vietnam War

SESSION 12

The Culpability of the Media

[There has been some editing to make the speech easier to read and understand.]

Charles Wiley: I did not go to Vietnam while in the Service. I was in Vietnam as a reporter in 1962 and 1964. I was fortunate enough to land back there the day before it began, so I covered the entire Tet Offensive in 1968. I went over again about a week after the Easter Offensive started in 1972. I've also been back since.

On the home front, I spent a lot of time covering antiwar activities and was involved in some of the things that were done to support our GIs -- which is one of the subjects I am going to cover today.

It is great to be back in Boston. I haven't spoken here for quite a while -- but I have some very fond memories of Boston. Of course, I am a lot older -- but fortunately, I haven't lost any of my short-term memory. It is nice to be back in Boston . I haven't been here for a long time, but I do have some great memories of having been in Boston in the past. Of course, I am older -- but fortunately I have not lost any of my short-term memory.

All right folks, I need a little help out there. I know it's early -- but think about it.

By the way, I said that at a retirement home a short time ago and also prodded the crowd, because there were a couple of people that didn't get it. A guy stood up in the back and explained: "The reason they didn't get it is because they don't remember that you just said that."

I want to start out by talking, very quickly, about the news media and what it is all about. I think a lot of people underestimate its unbelievable power. The news media is the most powerful force in our society; the most powerful force in our country. It has more power than the Presidency, than Congress, State government, whatever. The news media decides what you think about. It decides what you think about, what you talk to your friends and your fellow workers about. It decides what problems we are going to try to solve -- and the order in which we try to solve them. If you don't believe that, just keep track of what's in the papers from November through August of any given year --and then let's see what the people who are running for office talk about in September and October. I don't care whether it's local, state or national. It is rare that any political figure ever brings up new subjects. They simply pick up on the subjects that the media has decided are the issues that we, as a people, are going to take on. And, the media often decide more than that. They set, very frequently, the framework within which we hold the public discussion about those subjects. They decide, by and large, what the premises are that we use to attack the problems. And, I might add, very frequently the premises that they offer are incorrect.

Another thing that should always be said when you are talking about the news media is to point out that there are two totally different types of reporters out there -- and they are as different as night and day. I don't think that there is enough recognition of this fact, even by the critics of the media, and that is where the problem is. They may dress the same; they may look the same; they may have gone to the same journalism school and sat in the same classrooms; they may even be working for the same newspaper, television or radio station. But their message is totally different. One group is what we call objective reporters. Usually older, they learned their profession in the old days or from old-timers They see their job as that of gathering information and passing it on to the public without adding their opinions into the mix; that is what an objective reporter is all about. Then, we have advocate journalists – and, in one sense, they are not really journalists at all. They are propagandists -- and have a totally different aim. Their opinion often becomes the centerpiece of their articles. So, you can have two pieces side by side with no way of knowing, in most cases, which one was written by an objective journalist and which one was written by an advocate journalist.

You can describe the difference between the two with a single word for each. Objective journalists are trying to inform you. They are trying to bring you information. Advocate journalists are trying to influence you. What they are doing, in effect, is trying to pull your strings. They are trying to get you to support the people and the causes that they support -- and to be against the people and the causes that they are against. And, this country cannot stand for that much longer.

Wesley Pruden, at the Washington