This investigation will focus on media in the Vietnam War and attempt to answer the question “What role did the American media play in the Vietnam War?”. In order to go in depth with this topic, there will be certain subtopics considered such as: the state that the Vietnam War was in prior to America’s engagement, what drove America’s choice to aid in the Vietnam War, and the changes in perspectives that Americans had on the United States government. Two of the sources that will be evaluated are Henry Kissinger’s personal work entitled “Ending the Vietnam War” and William M. Darley’s academic journal entitled “War policy, public support, and the media”.
- Kissinger, Henry. Ending the Vietnam war: a history of America’s involvement in and extrication from the Vietnam. London, Simon & Schuster, 2004.
- Darley, William M. “War policy, public support, and the media.” Parameters, 2005, Academic OneFile
The first source that was chosen for analysis is Ending the Vietnam War written in 2007 by Henry Kissinger, an American diplomat who became the Secretary of State under President Richard Nixon and the receiver of the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize for the Vietnam War accords. This source was created to inform with precise detail, the tragedy and large scale of the Vietnam War and the interactions of President Richard Nixon. This source is important for this investigation since it provides enough information on the events throughout the Vietnam War, all through the perspective of a former Secretary of State.
The second source that was chosen for analysis is “War policy, public support, and the media” written in 2005 by William M. Darley, a former colonel in the U.S. Army who served 31 years on active duty as a public affairs officer. The purpose of this source is to address the war policies of the United States through anecdotes related with media influence. This source is important for this investigation because it offers the reader the accounts of public opinions and press reportings found in America regarding the Vietnam War.
Henry Kissinger’s source would be valuable to historians exploring the ways media affected the Vietnam War because it provides the perspective of an eyewitness account on the situation. Another way the source would be useful for a historian exploring this topic is that it reveals the personality of Henry Kissinger himself. Although the source is from the perspective of an eyewitness account and reveals the personality of Henry Kissinger, the source is written with a view to later publication.
The secondary source written by Darley is valuable to historians exploring the ways media affected the Vietnam War because it is thoroughly researched as an academic journal, on the public perspectives of Americans. Another way the source would be useful for a historian exploring this topic is that it contains multiple points of analysis, being causes and effects. Although the source is thoroughly researched as an academic journal and contains analysis of causes and effects, the source is only an extract and does not focus on America specifically.
Section 2 – Investigation
I suspect that my investigation will find the American media to affect the Vietnam War in many ways for a large role. I suspect this because copious amounts of soldiers were selected through drafts.
Prior to America’s aid towards Southern Vietnam against Northern Vietnam attempt to spread communism, their decision to be involved in the Vietnam War faced many controversial points from Americans themselves. Many Americans found the Vietnam War to be an unethical war where America would only be participating in pointless murder, revealing how the circumstances in Vietnam didn’t phase the American government (Students For A Democratic Society). The idea of the Vietnam War being a pointless war for America to engage in consumed the minds of many Americans. Therefore, the American government and Americans weren’t on the same page which often led to protests against the governmental choices. There is little evidence that reveals a smooth relationship between the opinions of the general public and the reports of the editors (Darley, 124). This is significant because it strengthens the idea that Americans and the American government lacked communication. The publication tone of media coverage didn’t have much of an effect on Americans who already had different opinions in regards to the war, which was a decision of Lyndon B. Johnson. This is significant because it shows that although there was a lack of communication between the public and the media, the decision of Lyndon B. Johnson makes it apparent that there were efforts to connect ideas of the government with the Americans. However, in South Vietnam, the number of those who expressed confidence in the military policies and governmental choices increased from 61 percent to 74 percent. These factors reveal the growing confidence that Americans had as the Vietnam War progressed.
As the opinions of Americans were acknowledged, America gradually became more involved in the Vietnam War. To begin with, in March 1965, the first American forces to arrive in South Vietnam were 3,500 United States Marines. Therefore, it’s noted that the peak of involvement of the United States in the Vietnam War was in the 1960’s. When Richard Nixon became president of the United States on January 20th of 1969, the amount of American soldiers in Vietnam was around 549,500 (Kissinger, 15). This large number reveals the amount of aid that America provided towards South Vietnam. In the Vietnam era, there were about 1,800,000 soldiers drafted which made up 33% of the soldiers volunteering to fight in Vietnam as well as soldiers being threatened by the draft. This is significant because it shows how effective the draft was in gathering soldiers for America. Although there was plenty of aid given to Southern Vietnam, many Americans were frightful of America’s involvement. To cope with the situation, Lyndon B. Johnson stated, “Terrific dangers and troubles that we once called ‘foreign’ now constantly live among us. If American lives must end, and American treasure be spilled, in countries that we barely know, then that is the price that change has demanded of conviction and of our enduring covenant.” This is significant as it demonstrates Lyndon B. Johnson’s attempt to comfort America in a time where they are entering chaos. Also, in an attempt to bring about peace, it was ideal for the Paris Agreement to peacefully draw Americans together due to the end of hostilities.
In the midst of the Vietnam War, the experiences that American soldiers faced during the war were drastically different than their life back at home. At times, soldiers of the front lines of the war were advisors for the South Vietnamese by working with local civilians, working as a part of long range patrols, and even operations that hunted down enemy units. This is significant since it demonstrates how their lives in Vietnam were focused on providing aid to the locals who needed help against North Vietnam. In a letter to the United States Senate, Edward M. Kennedy writes “Yet another father of a soldier killed in Vietnam testified for unconditional amnesty. The same contradictory recommendations came in testimony from Vietnam veterans themselves”. The experience of the Vietnam War was also difficult for families as well, who faced the deaths of their children in some situations. Also, in article nine of the Agreement on the Cessation of Hostilities in Cambodia, it states “After the entry into force of the present Agreement, if the place of burial is known and the existence of graves has been established, the Cambodian shall, within a specified period, authorize the exhumation and removal of the bodies of deceased military personnel of the other party, including the bodies of prisoners of war or personnel deceased and buried on Cambodian territory.” The significance of this article is that it emphasizes the amount of corpses that had to be handled with, making the experiences that soldiers had, gory at times and not only helping the South Vietnamese locals. Thus, American soldiers had to adapt to the relatively new environment in Vietnam, and alter their lifestyle.
The experiences that American soldiers faced in the Vietnam War led to a devastating aftermath that involved many casualties. On the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, there are 58,178 names, many of which are young men. From ages 18 to 21, 30,096 out of the 58,178 died in their prime. These factors reveal how the aftermath of the Vietnam War was traumatizing towards many families, especially those whose loss involved a man in his prime. This led to many parents burying their children, young wives became widows, young siblings lose their idols, and some children lose their fathers. In Richard Nixon’s Address to the Nation on the War in Vietnam, he states “But I want to end it in a way which will increase the chance that their younger brothers and their sons will not have to fight in some future Vietnam someplace in the world. And I want to end the war for another reason. I want to end it so that the energy and dedication of you, our young people, now too often directed into bitter hatred against those responsible for the war, can be turned to the great challenges of peace”. By stating this in his speech, Nixon was able to make the aftermath of the Vietnam War less emotionally heavy than it actually was. He was able to get his point across that he wanted peace to be sustained even after the war to make all the families feel comforted. Therefore, the aftermath of the Vietnam War was so great, in the fact that the result was many casualties of both sides of the war and Nixon attempting to ease the emotions of those who lost a loved one.
Section 3 – Reflection
Throughout my research process, I found it challenging to gather information on the specific experiences that soldiers faced in the midst of war. I also found it difficult to research primary sources that came prior to the Vietnam War, such as the reactions of young Americans receiving a letter mentioning their draft. However, in order to compensate for this, I found primary sources from government officials of the United States. This was much easier to find as there were many speeches given prior to the United States engagement in the Vietnam War.
In order to ensure that I was able to provide a balanced perspective of my topic, I decided to focus on two main perspectives: the perspectives of Americans not engaged in the war, and the perspectives of Americans who were involved in the war such as the United States government and American soldiers. I believe I was effective in providing a balanced perspective to a moderate extent. This is because although I did focus on only two perspectives throughout my research, I found more evidence amongst the perspectives of those who were involved in the war rather than the perspectives of Americans not engaged in the war. My own bias did play a role in my investigation because before the investigation, I believed that Americans were completely against the Vietnam War and that the deaths of Americans in the war were due to ignorant choices made. This impacted the choosing of my sources since I selected books that contained primary sources from individuals who had experience in the Vietnam War. I found information that challenged these notions, as well as information that affirmed these notions.
After reflecting on my OPVL process, the steps that I took to determine the reliability of the sources consisted of ensuring the author’s credibility. I found this step to be relevant to my collection of sources because the sources all came from an author who had a background in either being a historian, being a part of the Vietnam War, or being an American during the time of the Vietnam War. Throughout my historical investigation process, I found gathering primary sources to be the most successful step. I found this to be the most successful step, because multiple amounts of primary sources revolved around this topic.