Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion

Abstract

As public opinion shifted so did image of war in news magazine photos. With a few words of introduction, combat photojournalist David Douglas Duncan presented his images of eight days in February, 1968; eight days that a group of U.S. Marines were under siege at Khe Sanh, Vietnam. For those who were there, Duncan wrote, life was, made richer by common sharing of everyday events: dividing equally can of fruit cocktail in a C-ration; tasting a few minutes more of life, helmet-to-helmet in a slit trench with a man who was a stranger before barrage began-then suddenly he was closer to you than your brother; watching Death roam again among you, and accepting His choice without too deep astonishment that you were once more spared.1 Even more powerful than Duncan's prose, however, were his photographs of eight days under fire. One look at these images may tell reader more about war than one wants to know.2 What public saw of war has been subject of some discussion. Prior to Tet offensive in February 1968, one author wrote, public was presented with images of a clean, effective technological with major emphasis on American combat operations and military equipment.3 After Tet offensive, news media focus radically to stories of chaos, confusion and near collapse.4 Now with doubts that war could be won, news media coverage shifted from combat stories to Vietnamization of war; i.e. stories that focused on such subjects as peace negotiations, actions of Vietnamese military forces and American withdrawal from conflict.5 The apparent shift in media coverage after Tet offensive might lead one to assume that a similar shift occurred in how conflict was captured in combat photography. At least one author, however, has speculated that photographs depicting tragedy and suffering in war were not made until there was a public outcry against conflict.6 Television networks, another person wrote, only became freer in depicting miseries of war after public mood had changed.7 Television's impact on American public is also a matter of some debate. As one author noted, It has become almost a truism... to say that television, by showing terrible truth of war, caused disillusionment of Americans with war.8 In contrast, another person wrote that combat scenes from Vietnam war appeared less real because, the physical size of television screen... still shows one a picture of men three inches tall shooting at other men three inches tall...9 The most grisly aspects of combat were not shown on television because they were not appropriate for news programs shown at dinner time.10 Television, in other words, was forced to sanitize combat photography because of audience considerations.11 One author has argued that magazine photography had a more lasting impression on American public than did images on television. In support of this position, author notes that of six images most remembered as symbols of war in Vietnam, four were originally published in news magazines.12 The dual possibility that news magazine photography could have had a lasting impression on American public and that image of war captured in combat photography may have changed as public opinion on war shifted raises an interesting question that is focus of this study. That question is: did image of war, as published in three leading news magazines, change at time that a shift in public support for war was being revealed in national public opinion polls? Method To answer this question, news photographs of Vietnam war published in three weekly news magazines, Time. Life and Newsweek magazines were content analyzed.14 These three magazines were selected because, as one author noted, they were the major national news magazines of their type based on subscription, circulation and reputation during Vietnam war. …