Protests are a part of America. In the late 1700s, we rallied against taxation without representation. In the 60s and 70s it was the Vietnam War. MTSU's School of Journalism & Strategic Media Professor Dr. Larry Burriss puts it in perspective.
Dr. Burriss' editorial:
June 13th may not garner as much attention as it did in 1971, but the publication of the first installment of the Pentagon Papers on that Sunday has some overlooked, but significant parallels to events today.
Recall, the Pentagon Papers were a short series of news stories first published by The New York Times, and detailing U.S. decision-making in Vietnam. Many of the papers were classified "top secret," and the government claimed their publication would seriously damage American national security.
The Justice Department was able to temporarily stop publication of the documents, but the Supreme Court, only a little more than two weeks later, ruled against the government, and said the release of the papers would cause little, if any, damage to the nation's security.
But here's something interesting: for years before the publication, officials in the Departments of State and Defense had been insisting we were winning the war. There were continual references to the "light at the end of the tunnel."
In some ways, the media, including television and Hollywood, worked with the government in promoting a positive view of the war. Television specials showed amazing new equipment, or old equipment put to new uses, and interviews with warriors who could have come straight from central casting.
Movies such as The Green Berets, while not necessarily glorifying the war, put a positive spin on our efforts in Southeast Asia.
News stories, however, some from the battlefield itself, were telling a much different story. And these stories were often termed inaccurate, incomplete or deliberately misleading, what officials today would call "fake news." There were also sporadic calls to prosecute reporters for treason, and in some cases, calls for perhaps government control of the news.
Of course, the truth eventually prevailed, but during this time both sides refused to talk with each other. There was little civil debate, and too often discussion and dialogue turned acrimonious.
I guess I'm amazed at how little has changed, particularly as it relates to civil discourse and polite discussion.
I'm Larry Burriss.
