Master of Arts (MA)
Number of Pages
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.
Comparison; Interpretation; Magazine; Time; Time Magazine; Vietnam; War
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
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 email@example.com and include clear identification of the work, preferably with URL.
Morokoff, David Scott, "The Vietnam War: A comparison of interpretations" (1997). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 3340.