Censorship and The Two Largest Attacks on The United States of America
The purpose of the news media is to provide accurate, unbiased information to its audience. However, during times of war and other disasters, the news media is subject to varying degrees of censorship. After the two largest attacks on American soil, Pearl Harbor and 9/11, media censorship was prominent. Although not a new phenomenon, the methods and reasons why censorship exists have evolved through the generations. Nonetheless, the suppression of information after Pearl Harbor and 9/11 was biased towards American ideology, thus harming the population’s understanding of the two events.
On December 7, 1941, Japan attacked the United States naval base in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Less than three months after the attack, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066 leading to the Japanese American internment camps. In the internment camps, the Japanese American prisoners were allowed to publish and distribute newspapers throughout camps in the United States. Although there was never an admission to censoring internment newspapers, the federal government supervised the publications from the camps. The internment newspapers went through pre-publication and post-publication reviewing. Furthermore, the United States Army employed only the most Americanized prisoners to operate the newspaper.
The pre-publication and post-publication reviewing of internment newspapers were the most common methods of supervising the Japanese American publications. Takeya Mizuno (2011) explains that pre and post-publication reviewing was an important tactic to maintain order within the internment camps. Moreover, the two-stage reviewing system assured there were no publications of mistreatment of prisoners within the internment camps (p. 124–125). The constant reviewing of publications obstructed the Japanese American’s right to communicate their experience within the internment camps freely. The absence of free communication led to a lack of knowledge within the general American population about the conditions Japanese Americans experienced.
Another method of censorship within Japanese American publications was the selective employment of their newspaper staff. According to Takeya Mizuno (2011), “Military officers often handpicked individuals who shared the same values with the administration… those who demonstrated proof of Americanization in their attitudes and deeds were selected” (p.127). By only choosing these individuals, the United States government ensured that the majority of camp publications aligned with the goals of the presidential administration. The administration needed the public’s support on everything from the internment camps to involvement in the war. Japanese American’s claiming that they were mistreatment within the internment camps may have swayed the public’s opinion on Roosevelt’s administration.
In hindsight, censorship after the attack on Pearl Harbor is quite evident. However, the censorship that occurred after the attacks on September 11, 2001, is considerably harder to recognize. The federal government never supervised newspapers or other forms of media as it did in 1942. Instead, journalists and news organizations self-censored their content so that it would align with the agenda of the executive branch. Nancy Snow (2005) states one reason for self-censorship was that “Major media owners are members of the political elite themselves and therefore share similar goals” (p.103). Furthermore, some journalists who went against the administration were let go by their employer.
In 2003, NBC News reporter Ashleigh Banfield gave a speech at Kansas State University. According to Snow (2005), during her speech, Banfield criticized American journalist’s for their “subjective complicity in covering the war in Iraq.” Although NBC did not immediately punish Banfield, the organization never renewed her contract (p.104). Additionally, Snow (2005) explains that news reporter Peter Arnett was also let go by NBC in 2003 after stating, during an interview, “Clearly, the American war planners misjudged the determination of the Iraqi forces” (p.104). The result of firing experienced journalists for expressing their beliefs is that it may have caused other journalist to self-censor their work out of fear of losing their job security.
Censorship after 9/11 is comparable to the censorship of Japanese American newspapers in the ’40s. The federal government controlled Japanese American’s publications by selecting the most Americanized individuals to run the internment newspapers. Likewise, major news organizations controlled their content by firing journalists who expressed a view of dissent towards American policy or media. The firing of journalist influenced news organization’s content by instilling the fear of job loss in American journalists, which led to self-censorship.
Ultimately, the self-censorship within news media led a decline of dissent. Like the censorship of Japanese American newspapers within internment camps, self-censorship after 9/11 resulted in a significant portion of the population to be ill-informed on the mistreatment and destruction caused by the United States.
Censorship, whether induced by the federal government or by oneself, harms the understanding of major events. As Nancy Snow (2005) states, “Censorship ends the free flow of information so essential for democracy and makes dissent less likely” (p.103). Without dissent, it becomes easy for individuals to blindly follow and agree with the actions of their leader or government. If the American public had information readily available regarding the treatment of Japanese Americans in the internment camps and the destruction of Afghan and Iraqi cities, the public’s opinion on how to react towards attacks on our country might significantly differ. For example, Murray Brewster (2001) explains how an uncensored view of dissent in media during the Vietnam War was a contributor to the downfall of the public’s support for the war. In conclusion, censorship has existed, both overtly and covertly, in The United States for generations. However, censorship will always harm the understanding of individuals by failing to allow both sides of a particular event or story to be expressed.
References
Brewster, M. (2001). Canadian forces officer warns against censoring war images. Toronto Star.
Mizuno, T. (2011). Censorship in a different name: Press “supervision” in wartime Japanese American camps 1942–1943. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(1), 121–141.
Snow, N. (2005). Truth and information consequences since 9/11. Peace Review, 17(1), 103–109.
