View Poll Results: Is this type of study woth doing and would you take part?

Voters
18. You may not vote on this poll
  • Not worth doing!

    0 0%
  • Worth it, but I can't / won't be involved

    1 5.56%
  • Worth it and I'd be interested in hearing more

    9 50.00%
  • Count me in!

    8 44.44%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 57

Thread: Attitudes twards the media

  1. #1
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default Attitudes twards the media

    Hi Folks,

    In a recent post in the What is our message thread, I asked

    Do you know if anyone has actually studied this [anti-media bias amongst serving troops] (i.e. interviews, focus groups, etc.)? If someone has, I would really like to look at their data. If they haven't, I would like to set up a research project to do so.
    Well, so far nobody has posted, PM'd or emailed me about such studies.

    What I would be interested in knowing is this: If I put such a study together, do people here think that a) it is worth looking at and b) would you be willing to take part in it (anonymously)? Obviously, the study would have to be conducted online.

    Marc
    Last edited by marct; 04-06-2007 at 05:23 PM.
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  2. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Morning Calm
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Marc,

    What do you see the end purpose of such a study being?

  3. #3
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Jimbo,

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    What do you see the end purpose of such a study being?
    Good question, and I should have put it in the original post. Basically, I think that the study can be used to
    1. discover what problems serving soldiers may have with "the media", broadly construed.
    2. why they have these problems
    3. how can these problems be mitigated both inside the forces and inside the media;
    4. what could using "alternate media" ('net based media) do to either mitigate or sidestep problems with the mainstream media.
    Basically, it's exploratory research: I don't know what the specific problems are, although I have certainly seen a number of posts here that express a lot of anger. I want to find out what the problems are and,if possible, see if people have suggestions and ideas on how to fix them.

    BTW, I will also be trying to run a parallel study on problems that the Canadian Forces have with our media - same design but, possibly, different problems / answers.

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,188

    Default

    Whew! You like to work, don't you? Certainly you should proceed but talk about methodolgy pitfalls and raging variables to grapple with. Sounds like a good joint project for Stat/Anthro/Sociology Grad students....

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    47

    Default military-media studies

    I'm currently involved in such a study as part of my master's thesis. I've been interviewing students at CGSC to ascertain how field grade officers feel about the media and what role the media should play within the nation and when covering the military. It will be several months before I've finished research and written my conclusions. You are more than welcome to my findings when I'm finished. Feel free to contact me at any time.

  6. #6
    i pwnd ur ooda loop selil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Belly of the beast
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    Marct,

    "IF" you want some help....

    I think you'll have to do a couple of things to identify bias.

    1) How much, what kind, and where do serving military members get their media information.

    2) An interesting side lobe in the stats is likely going to be "other military members" as a source of media.

    3) They should rate different media formats (to assign bias scores) to particular venues and types of media.

    4) It might be interesting to look at particular reporters/celebrities and see if there is a consistent feeling toward a personality versus a medium.
    Sam Liles
    Selil Blog
    Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
    The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
    All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.

  7. #7
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default Some great input!

    Hi Folks,

    Quote Originally Posted by goesh View Post
    Whew! You like to work, don't you? Certainly you should proceed but talk about methodolgy pitfalls and raging variables to grapple with. Sounds like a good joint project for Stat/Anthro/Sociology Grad students....
    LOLOL One of the key things about doing Anthropology style research is that you have to be flexible in your methods, even if they tend to be mainly qualitative. I fully expect to bring some other people into this project to offer additional takes on how to interpret the results.

    There's a style of research called "participatory action research" that uses multiple methods and, at the same time, gets the people who participate in the study as "co-researchers". I fully expect to be using a variant of that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Menning View Post
    I'm currently involved in such a study as part of my master's thesis. I've been interviewing students at CGSC to ascertain how field grade officers feel about the media and what role the media should play within the nation and when covering the military. It will be several months before I've finished research and written my conclusions. You are more than welcome to my findings when I'm finished. Feel free to contact me at any time.
    Menning, thanks! I am really interested in seeing what you come up with. I hope that yo will be interested (after the thesis is completed ) in coming in on this one. I will be in contact with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by selil View Post
    "IF" you want some help....
    Always!

    Quote Originally Posted by selil View Post
    I think you'll have to do a couple of things to identify bias.

    1) How much, what kind, and where do serving military members get their media information.

    2) An interesting side lobe in the stats is likely going to be "other military members" as a source of media.

    3) They should rate different media formats (to assign bias scores) to particular venues and types of media.

    4) It might be interesting to look at particular reporters/celebrities and see if there is a consistent feeling toward a personality versus a medium.
    Some really good points here, Selil. I think the importance of rumour (#2), at least in the form of "I read an article in..." is probably crucial. It may not even be in that form, but could be in "synopsis pieces. Definitely something to explore.

    I also think you are on to something with the personality vs. medium is one to follow up on.

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  8. #8
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Rancho La Espada, Blanchard, OK
    Posts
    1,065

    Default Interesting study idea

    Marc--

    Why not go whole hog and do a comparative study of US/UK/Canadian/Australain military attitudes toward media. I suspect that RMC and the Canadian Defence Academy as well as the UK Defence Academy would be interested in funding such a project as would sponsors in the US and Australia.

    If I were doing this, my next step would be to draft a research proposal/design and shop it around. An American scholar who might find it interesting is Jim Grunig, Professor Emeritus of Communications and Public Relations at the University of Maryland.

    Let me know if and how I can help.

    John

  9. #9
    Council Member J Wolfsberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Marc,

    I think it would be very useful. For my two cents, I'd also ask if there is a particular incident they can recall that strongly influenced the attitude.
    John Wolfsberger, Jr.

    An unruffled person with some useful skills.

  10. #10
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,188

    Question

    -then there's relationships/cofactors to wrangle with like accounting for those surveyed who are primarily green zone troops V those non-green zone, correlating stressors to perception of bias like time in country, does that contribute to bias perception or not, it should by all accounts based on common observations being reported/detected, i.e. Ender's comments about some troops preferring to escort insurgents over journalists. Is there a decreased immunity to bias the longer one is in country or not? Who is reading the most news and why? What about a given unit's demographics? Will Iowa Guardsmen for instance be less or more biased than career NCOs and why? This is dissertation material on the statistical aspects alone - talk about walking through a mine field of variables. Run a general survey of those who have been in country V those who have not to build a data base, to generally qualify the assumption that bias exists. Surely to God there will be a 'bump' with those who have been in country.

  11. #11
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    44

    Default Perception Drivers

    I agree that this is going to be capturing perceptions only: that of course would be the point, the argument is that knowing how widespread certain perceptions are would be useful knowledge. I think I like the idea of asking about particular newsies, but it certainly makes sense to ask both where they get the majority of their news while at home and when deployed (and what kind of access to news they have had while deployed -- I suspect the answer to that will vary wildly.)

    Before the last post went up I was just wondering if it would be possible to ask open ended questions of that sort: did you have a particular first-hand encounter with the press that shaped your attitudes (positive or negative) that you would like to share? And, did you hear about someone else's encounter with the press, and did that story shape your attitudes (positive or negative? If so, would you like to share that story? (Probably need to tell them not to include names for that question.)

    Several years ago I did a survey of milblog writers. This was before the big bump in milblogs, and I didn't get enough respondents to really call it more than a series of personal corresponences, but several noted that what prompted their beginning a blog was the desire to correct what they believed was the misimpressions family and friends were getting from the press. You do hear/read that over and over from troops, that when they do get access to the coverage it seems disconnected from their own experience of the war, and some type of question needs to get at whether or not that attitude is really wide-spread (because obviously the blogging community is going to be somewhat self-selected on that score: you don't take that action step unless you're mighty unhappy. Now, a lot of people are that unhappy, the question is how representative they are.)

  12. #12
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi John,

    Quote Originally Posted by John T. Fishel View Post
    Why not go whole hog and do a comparative study of US/UK/Canadian/Australain military attitudes toward media. I suspect that RMC and the Canadian Defence Academy as well as the UK Defence Academy would be interested in funding such a project as would sponsors in the US and Australia.
    I'll be going to RMC on Tuesday to talk with them about possible collaboration, and I will certainly be talking this project up there (thanks again for the contact). I think that the idea of making this a multinational comparative study certainly has a lot of value.

    Quote Originally Posted by John T. Fishel View Post
    If I were doing this, my next step would be to draft a research proposal/design and shop it around. An American scholar who might find it interesting is Jim Grunig, Professor Emeritus of Communications and Public Relations at the University of Maryland.
    Right now, I'm in the very preliminary stages of putting a proposal together: basically finding out if the people in the field think it's worthwhile. Honestly, I feel that if there isn't a fair degree of support from the people in the field, then the research will suffer. I'll be trying to get a very rough draft of the proposal together over the next little bit - mainly research design, and I'll be posting it here for comments.

    Quote Originally Posted by John T. Fishel View Post
    Let me know if and how I can help.
    Input, comments, advice and contacts are always welcome ! Believe me, John, I will be asking for help from you on this one.

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  13. #13
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default Great Idea

    Marc,

    This area has intrigued and worried me sense Stan and I were dodging reporters in Goma.

    I put together a newsletter last year on media and media relations under the title Media is the Battlefield. My reasoning in do so was NOT the media is the battle rather that media is a factor on the battlefield one has to deal with like terrain or time. I sometimes get a chance to actively teach and this is one of the points I try and get across: that simple antipathy or open antagonism toward the media is a waste of mental effort. It is rather like hating mountains. Better to learn to walk and climb in the mountains. Better to learn to deal with the media from a centered/neutral view than from a position on either end of the love/hate scale.

    Another arena in the military that would be interested in this study would of course be the public affairs community. I would suggest starting at the top with DoD or perhaps the service chief PAOs.

    Best
    Tom

  14. #14
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi JW,

    Quote Originally Posted by J Wolfsberger View Post
    I think it would be very useful. For my two cents, I'd also ask if there is a particular incident they can recall that strongly influenced the attitude.
    Really good point - I will also want to ask about whether it was an "incident" or something that happened to one of their buddies, mentors, teachers or "Captain X" (the mythical "someone"). When I was doing my PhD fieldwork, I actually saw one of these "stories" happen. I knew the people involved and the exact details of what happened and watched the story grow and mutate until it was spread around North America. Within 4 months, he story had been stripped of all personal details and was being used as a "wonder tale".

    Quote Originally Posted by goesh View Post
    -then there's relationships/cofactors to wrangle with like accounting for those surveyed who are primarily green zone troops V those non-green zone, correlating stressors to perception of bias like time in country, does that contribute to bias perception or not, it should by all accounts based on common observations being reported/detected, i.e. Ender's comments about some troops preferring to escort insurgents over journalists. Is there a decreased immunity to bias the longer one is in country or not? Who is reading the most news and why? What about a given unit's demographics? Will Iowa Guardsmen for instance be less or more biased than career NCOs and why? This is dissertation material on the statistical aspects alone - talk about walking through a mine field of variables. Run a general survey of those who have been in country V those who have not to build a data base, to generally qualify the assumption that bias exists. Surely to God there will be a 'bump' with those who have been in country.
    Hi Goesh - hey mon, I'm not redoing my doctorate!!!!!

    Yeah, you are quite right about all of the things that could make a difference. Years ago, I read a book by Gregory Bateson where he defined information as a "difference that makes a difference". That had a profound effect on my thinking, and it has really influenced how I conduct research. The corollary, of course, is "who does it make a difference for"?

    I've been doing a lot of thinking about this for the past 24 hours or so (along with PMing and emails). A lot of the differences don't make much of a difference unless the situation is clearly defined. So that means that context and situation will be king. Loosely translated, I know that I have different perceptions of the same "thing" depending on when I am asked about it and what is going on in my life at the time, and I expect exactly the same thing to happen here. So, we could end up with questions like this for people who did time in the field with embedded reporters:
    • How much scuttlebutt do you hear about that reporter?
    • What types of things do you remember coming over the rumour mill?
    • Did they match what you had heard about them?
    • Did they ever get into a firefight situation when they were with you?
    • How did they react?,
    • etc.
    The reality is that I won't even know what questions to ask in a survey until I have some preliminary data, probably from focus groups and interviews. It has also been suggested that I should get out into the field myself so that I have a real feel for the situation and dynamics. Personally, I think that's a good idea (although my wife hates it).

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  15. #15
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Tom,

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Odom View Post
    I put together a newsletter last year on media and media relations under the title Media is the Battlefield. My reasoning in do so was NOT the media is the battle rather that media is a factor on the battlefield one has to deal with like terrain or time. I sometimes get a chance to actively teach and this is one of the points I try and get across: that simple antipathy or open antagonism toward the media is a waste of mental effort. It is rather like hating mountains. Better to learn to walk and climb in the mountains. Better to learn to deal with the media from a centered/neutral view than from a position on either end of the love/hate scale.
    I totally agree with your reasoning! I'd love to read your newsletter if it's available.

    In a lot of ways, I suspect that there will always be friction in democracies between the military and the media, just from their varying social roles. More and more, I am seeing this project as a way to find out where the "flash points" are between the two, which of them can be mitigated and which ones can't. I think that the entire discussion about personalities and events is probably crucial to this; at least that's what my gut is elling me right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Odom View Post
    Another arena in the military that would be interested in this study would of course be the public affairs community. I would suggest starting at the top with DoD or perhaps the service chief PAOs.
    When I can get a decent draft project proposal together on paper, I'll be posting it here for comments. Would you be willing to look it over?

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  16. #16
    Council Member pcmfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Despite how you feel about the average journalist's politics, they can be valuable tools on a number of fronts. How many military guys can get an interview with an insurgent group? Make friends with journalists and get some of this intel. We can also "use" journalists towards our IO efforts, if done carefully.

  17. #17
    Council Member Ender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    81

    Default

    I have reread what I wrote here in relation to the whole topic in general and I must admit that I am not an objective source on the matter. I may have been trying to kid myself but the truth is that I do have a very narrow view of the concept and that can't serve this debate very well at all. I am confident that calmer, sounder minds will prevail and I look forward to the finished products of the discussion.

  18. #18
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    44

    Default Media Military Relations

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    In a lot of ways, I suspect that there will always be friction in democracies between the military and the media, just from their varying social roles. More and more, I am seeing this project as a way to find out where the "flash points" are between the two, which of them can be mitigated and which ones can't.
    Keep in mind, there's a vast literature on the history of media-military relations. While in general you're correct, the institutions are going to be tugging at one another to some extent b/c of the nature of the institutions' roles, a relationship that had gone south after Vietnam really seemed to be healed to a lot of people with the institution of the embed program during the combat phase. Over the last four years the wheels have once again come off the wagon, and -- tragically, I'd argue -- the relationship looked at big picture has once again soured.

    Now, this isn't just true from the military side. The military as an institution (NOT individual soldiers or units) has seen its credibility with the press badly eroded over the last four years. (And, again, speaking as someone who has been and continues to be a very, very harsh critic of the press, things are not going to be entirely resolved unless the military comes to grips with the fact that there are some legitimate reasons for that to have happened.)

    As much as I think the idea of going after a cross-country study makes real sense, I think a major contribution would come from a study that also went after the perceptions of newsies who covered the war in a serious way. The primary difficulty, because organizations (one of the main problems in the coverage, IMHO) have often rotated so many people in for a turn or two who didn't have the background and were just there as sort of "relief pitchers" would be coming up with a careful definition of who's perceptions mattered, who you wanted to define in and who you wanted to define out among the journalists.

    For ex, I think there is a very serious, highly professionalized, Pentagon press corps. They cover a different slant of story than the folks actually in Baghdad do. But their perception of the military obviously matters. In or out? Some of the folks in Baghdad have been there for a very long time, or at least have done multiple tours there, but they're more foreign affairs folks than military beat/war correspondents. In or out? What about people who have nothing to do with covering war or the military typically but got sent in because no one else at their network was willing to go and SOMEBODY had to go in to give the Baghdad guy a break? And so on and so forth.

    But if you want to get at that idea of flash points, and in partiicular if you're looking for which ones are institutional and which ones are context-driven, coming out of behaviors/events that took place during this war and could be changed, I think you need to survey both "sides."

    The argument I make in my work is that there are some aspects of covering this war that are unique, that caught everyone off guard, but which aren't going away, and which therefore have to be grappled with. This would be another way of coming at that.

    The other thing is this: I've been a little concerned about how the resulting data might be seen, or used. The environment is now so charged, it's an issue you have to take into account. If you survey both, the findings can be presented exactly as MarkT phrased it above: a critical relationship has become unhealthy, this research is a step towards discovering why, and that's a necessary step towards discovering what can be done to heal that relationship.

  19. #19
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    44

    Default Here's How You Do It

    If you could get their support, you could go through Military Reporters and Editors, and use their mailing list -- that would miss some people, but it would be a start, and give you a right good list of names and addresses at the same time.

  20. #20
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default Some are perhaps trying to fix this !

    Hi Marc !

    I pondered over your request with a Saku on Ice (a wonderful Estonian beer ) when an American journalist that I've know for a while came in.

    He told me to check out Accuracy In Media. www.aim.org

    Their mission statement:
    Accuracy In Media is a non-profit, grassroots citizens watchdog of the news media that critiques botched and bungled news stories and sets the record straight on important issues that have received slanted coverage.
    Some good blogs and stories there. Sounds perhaps too promising, but figured you could use the help

    Here's a good short read:

    Why We Are Going to Iraq
    By Jeff Emanuel and Victoria Coates
    April 4, 2007

    In our writings here and elsewhere, the two of us have spent a great deal of time, ink, and energy discussing the Iraq war and attempting to convey stories about the mission that can't be found in the mainstream media. We've criticized the quality of the media's own reportage on events in the Middle East. We've pointed out episodes of anti-war bias, ignorance, and outright fabrications ad nauseam, all the while seeking to "correct the record" with a better reflection of events and developments as they actually are, rather than as they appear through the mainstream media's anti-war, anti-Bush prism.

    Why have we spent so much time and energy on this pursuit? Because the evidence we see suggests a very different picture of the situation on the ground in Iraq than the one which the media presents day in and day out.
    Regards, Stan

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •