Archive Dive- Essay

Christina Cisneros

Professor Anderson

English 330- Tuesday

8 September 2015

Information Worth Sharing

     Propaganda gathers ideas to trick people by convincing them that their actions is based from their own belief. Communication and media comes from many sources that provides us with information in various forms. Harold T. Johnson served in the House of Representatives (1959-1981) during the Vietnam Era (1961-1975). In a 1967 unprocessed letter from a patriotic citizen, Mrs. Tressa Rosecrantz wrote to Johnson about a phone call from a conscientious anti-war representative questioning Rosecrantz defense in supporting the American government. Rosecrantz informed herself about the war by reading books and newspapers on Vietnam to make an educational decision in supporting the U.S. government. Clips on television serves as an entertainment source of information in a positive, negative, or neutral fashion. During the Vietnam era, there was a battle in propaganda aside from the military war. One must identify the credibility of the source and to perceive the truth behind the lies.

     First, “Like “Us” or “Them”? Perceptions of the U.S. on the CBC-TV National News Services in the 1960,” Mallory Schwartz analyzed the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) television news on the U.S. foreign policy: Vietnam. Schwartz writes to us that the CBC-TV brought the vietnam war into the living rooms of English-speaking Canadians. In a 1963 tv news clip, reporter Dale Mont expressed a story in a neutral setting of the American efforts in training Vietnam troop. The news clips also viewed the american military aid dropping food resources and supplies in the village of Chan Wang. “Although such actions had potentially positive semantic connotations, Mont displayed no favour for the American forces, using only neutral and concrete language to describe their efforts”, as Schwartz addressed in his analysis(p.138). The clip of 1963 presented the U.S. in the Vietnam war in a natural viewing of military assistance.

     Equally important, in a 1964 CBC-TV clip transitioned to the U.S. military intervention; the audio language did not paired with the visual. The visual narrative shows an unpleasant war-like setting; the language narrative was negative; the music was tense, fast-paced, and scary. Schwartz explains, “while the visual narrative and the ominous music projected explicit and implicit American aggression, the language-base narrative did not even discuss the action shown” referring to the low-level of criticism the language paired with the visual (p.139). This clip of information provides viewers with a realistic visual setting of the war in Vietnam.  

     In any case, a 1965 CBC-TV clip shows content of an anti-war protest. Similar protest carried along through 1968 releveling chaos between police and protesters. Anti-war activists were not always presented positive. The information is “the combination of sativa, ridicule, and the reports use of negative language to describe the draft dodgers- especially through associations made with the Vietcong- made both them and their efforts appear comical”, Schwartz concludes as the CBC only criticized and was bias against those not in favor for the Americans involvement in the war (p.142). The CBC also featured stories about peace negotiations. Most of the language presented on CBC was neutral describing the actions and decisions of the U.S. government. The useful information of topic clips served as a pro-American message.

     Second in, “Another War in Vietnam–Propaganda”, Leslie Jacques tells us who were the sources of information in the forms of posters, newspapers, tv, and banners from the streets of Saigon. Posters and banners hang encouraging people to backup their soldiers in Saigon Front. Saigon is being overturn by the Viet Cong battling against the U.S. efforts in South Vietnam(LA Times). The U.S. and South Vietnamese government were heavily involved in a propaganda battle. One must read multiple sources of information in order to figure out the lies from the truth.

    In fact, the propaganda in newspapers from Saigon tells two different stories. Newspaper were seized when outspoken words targeted to retreat soldiers. Jacques notes President Nauyen Van Thieu and Members of Parliament ordered no more disclosure of information on military events and to engage no propaganda (LA Times). The South Vietnam legislatures only rely on the British Broadcasting Corp (BBC) and on the Voice of America to obtain truthful information. Information can be censor and one must be knowledgeable in identifying reliable resources.

     Furthermore, Jacques tells us Dang Due Ky was the director of the South Vietnam nationwide government-run tv station. Ky confesses that raw information must be cooked for the tv audience however he was responsible for the information that ended up being view by President Thieu. As a source of information, Ky told the truth that he thinks people ought to know(LA Times). The information presented by KY was the truth to persuade a side of knowledge. Naturally, propaganda is a relevant source of information after deducting 80 percent of the “make stuff up” story.

     Third, “U.S. Widens Vietnam Propaganda Aid”, Seth King writes to us the propaganda war between the U.S. and Viet Cong. The two sources of information presented was through leaflets and booklets.The U.S. government carried out leaflets encouraging South Vietnam people not to support their government in its fighting; the end results was death. At the same time, the Viet Cong used the other side of the leaflet announcing their success of an attack on the American billet in the city of Quinhon (NY Times). Both propaganda pieces serves as an information framework to gain knowledge of events and action taking place during the war. The U.S. govt was feeding South Vietnam with leaflets and booklets and at the same time, Viet Cong shared their side of the story on the same leaflets for their advantage. Obtaining both sides of the story is key in receiving information as being either accurate or not.

     Fourth, “A Study of Veteran Viewpoints on TV coverage of the Vietnam War”, Anthony Adams tells us to look deeper to find the truth of a message. As a result from the survey, there was a range in the accuracy presented in tv news items. Adams concludes that the higher educated veterans reported that the tv was the most realistic form in viewing the events during the war (p.251). Most important, the veterans agreed that the tv coverage influenced the viewers opinions about the war. Information is either truthful or misleading.

     Last, in a February 1971 advertisement for Vietnam veterans against the war a photo of a casket appeared in the Playboy Magazine. These veterans are recruiting other veterans and citizens who feel the same way; over 300,000 U.S. soldiers died as the U.S. continues to intervene. The Vietnam veterans were strongly passion about leaving the message stating, “And we don’t think that that’s worth it”, referring to the image of the picture: a dead U.S. soldier (p.65). Propaganda appears in magazines too and it’s the receiver’s responsibility to be well-informed to the issues happening around the world on a daily basis.

     Propaganda captures worldview information to turn one’s ideas in a convincing fashion. As a result, propaganda influences people’s behaviors. Bizz Johnson received many letters from the citizens of the U.S. of their concern in America’s involvement with the Vietnam War. Johnson replied tactful information to help support the American political decisions on this foreign issue. Schwartz concludes that the CBC-tv news brought viewers a non-persuading entertainment information on the warfare in Vietnam. Any relevant source of information builds powers of knowledge.  Jacques tells us the propaganda war in Saigon was a two-sided information battle as one must seek and beware of the truth behind all the lies. King writes to us another propaganda battle from leaflets and booklets. Finally Adams tells us the higher educated veterans are aware of the bias information sent by a particular source in making the public to be convince on a certain-sided argument. The more information one receives, the better understanding of knowing the reality of current events. Sources of information are ideas worth sharing.  

 

Works Cited

Adams, Anthony. “A Study of Veteran Viewpoints on TV  Coverage of the Vietnam War.” Journalism Quarterly. pg. 248-253. Web. 1 Sept 2015.

Jacques, Leslie. “Another War in Vietnam—Propaganda.” Los Angeles Times. 30 April 1972: k1. Web. 1 Sept 2015.

King, Seth. “U.S. Widens Vietnam Propaganda Aid.” New York Times. 17 Mar 1965: 4. Web. 1 Sept 2015.

Rosecrantz, Tressa. Letter to Congressman Harold T. Johnson. 17 May 1967. Broome Library     Harold T. Johnson Collection. Camarillo, CA. 25 August 2015.

Schwartz, Mallory. “Like “Us” or “Them”? perceptions of the United States on the CBC-TV National News Service in the 1960″. Journal of Canadian Studies. 44.3 (2010): pg 118-153. Web. 1 Sept 2015.

Unknown. Vietnam Veterans Against the War. 1971. PlayBoy Magazine. Vietnam War Era Ephemera Collection. By University Libraries University of Washington: Digital Collections. pg 65. Web.