Executive Summary
This dissertation analyzes how news media constructs the civil-military divide in the United States, examining sociolinguistic elements in reporting on military operations from 1972 to the Global War on Terror. It compares The New York Times and Stars and Stripes, finding significant differences in military representation influenced by public opinion and institutional perspectives. The study concludes that media discourses contribute to the divide between military and civilian institutions.
Why It Matters
This document is crucial for defense analysts as it reveals how media narratives shape public perception of the military and influence civil-military relations, impacting recruitment, support for operations, and policy.
Key Takeaways
- News media significantly contributes to the civil-military divide through varied representations of the US military, influenced by public opinion.
Source evidence · PDF page 2
My findings confirmed the existence of a large amount of representational productions of difference between the media sources but also a non-insignificant amount of overlap and intertextually. In the civilian/NYT data, these productions of difference or instances of overlap occurred in a varied pattern across the total time frame of the study in conjunction with societal views, public endorsements or objections to military action of the corresponding era.
- The military's self-representation (Stars and Stripes) remains consistently positive, while civilian media (The New York Times) varies based on societal views and specific military actions.
Source evidence · PDF page 194
Institutional narrative flight paths, so to speak, are emerging from the data –the military path is unwavering in its descriptive similarities while the civilian path is taking on a more twisted shape, nearing the military line when social conditions favor it, in this case a likeable president and common enemy but ready at a moment’s notice to twist away.
- Periods of national unity or perceived success, like Operation Desert Storm, can temporarily narrow the civil-military divide in media discourse.
Source evidence · PDF page 244
From this data, the Civil-Military Divide seems to be quite narrow during ODS as the relations between the institutions are overall harmonious. Instead of jarring difference in tone, emotion, stance, and position between the institutions, we see general alignment with only select nuanced divergence.
Strategic Relevance
Understanding media's role in shaping civil-military relations is strategically important for military leadership, policymakers, and public affairs, as it directly impacts public trust, recruitment, and the social contract between the armed forces and society.