It too is out for an overall profit. This move can be called gigantism and "in its present form the benefits are obvious to those it favors "growth, wealth, influence and prestige.""(Hohenberg, 1968, p. 43).
When Pearl Harbor was bombed, the media covered it and exploited "the day that will live in infamy."" It rallied American support behind the government and for the entrance of American troops into the war. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centers, the media once again covered and exploited it, creating patriotism and unity against anti-Americans before reversing its role.
The media and the public viewpoint shifted once between these two attacks on America. The Vietnam War had very little support on the home front from the American public. What the press brought to the dinner table brought out the opposition to the war. "One of the key errors was the lack of a declaration of war which could have rallied the American public behind the military, and given the U.S. a clear reason for involvement in Vietnam.""(Dudley & Bender, 1990, p. 53).
Though, in the beginning of the war, most Americans did back Washington's Vietnam policy. The government made it look as a Communist guerrilla movement that used terror and coercion to force the South Vietnamese into submission. But as the reporting started moving away from the basic political, economic and military realities of the war because these weren't spectacular, the primary battlefield shifted to the media. Reporters usually lacked experience and understanding of Asian politics. Therefore they resorted to what came naturally, looking for the most sensational angle. (Dudley & Bender, 1990, p. 76-77) .
News stories that entered the Vietnam era homes, included those of American soldiers burning villages and cutting ears off dead Viet Cong. That was the media's version. The reality of the burning village was a deserted village used for Marine training exercises.
