Award Date
1-1-1997
Degree Type
Thesis
Degree Name
Master of Arts (MA)
Department
History
Number of Pages
177
Abstract
This thesis is based on a quantitative analysis of Time magazine's coverage of the Vietnam War. It demonstrates that Time held a pro-war bias in 1967, was neutral during 1968, and turned strongly against the war from 1969 through 1974. From mid-1969 on, some articles factually misrepresented what was happening in Vietnam in such a way as to promote the goals of the anti-war movement. If events admitted of both a pro-war and an anti-war interpretation Time published almost exclusively the anti-war view. By 1972, administration supporters had published a large body of verifiable evidence (summarized in chapter 3) demonstrating that progress was being made toward winning the war. Time reported on almost none of this evidence. Consequently, this thesis concludes that the previous authors who have written about the media's role in the war (Herbert Gans, Clarence Wyatt and Daniel Hallin) were incorrect: Time's heavily biased anti-war coverage did in fact hurt the war effort.
Keywords
Comparison; Interpretation; Magazine; Time; Time Magazine; Vietnam; War
Controlled Subject
Journalism
File Format
File Size
4239.36 KB
Degree Grantor
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Language
English
Permissions
If you are the rightful copyright holder of this dissertation or thesis and wish to have the full text removed from Digital Scholarship@UNLV, please submit a request to digitalscholarship@unlv.edu and include clear identification of the work, preferably with URL.
Repository Citation
Morokoff, David Scott, "The Vietnam War: A comparison of interpretations" (1997). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 3340.
http://dx.doi.org/10.25669/8z8w-no7z
Rights
IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
COinS