Author Phil Knightly describes the media outlook employed to attract readership and increase circulation during the American Civil War:

?As the public?s hunger for war news mounted so did circulation. This meant ?serious money? and when no news was available editors chafed at the loss of income and pressed their correspondents harder.? (1)

As American Senator Hiram Johnson famously noted in 1917: "The first casualty when war comes, is truth".

During the Civil War, Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton reduced casualties in the account of General Ulysses S. Grant?s failure at Petersburg to about one third of their actual number. (2)

Was Stanton the first documented American government official to manipulate and or censor the infant media industry?

Knightly also noted that some more politically minded Northern generals had ?come to enjoy the publicity?. Gulf War veteran General ?Stormin? Norman Schwarzkopf enjoyed similar notoriety. The lucrative lecture circuit in the United States providing him with a comfortable retirement.

World War I also afforded Australian Keith Murdoch status. The newspaperman rose to become ?the kingmaker he always wanted to be?. (3)

Appointed chief censor for the Menzies Government in 1940, he looked for power to compel newspapers to publish statements he put out.

He resigned as Director-General of Information following protests by those he sought to control.

Our homegrown Australian media loves Anzac Day.

It makes heroes of our ageing veterans and rightly so. Yet why does the media ?dumb down? the historical perspective on the 6 o?clock news?

On Anzac Day 1997 I undertook the pilgrimage to Anzac Cove. Hostels in the Turkish towns of Ecebat and Çanakkale approached bursting point. I found myself bedded amongst a sea of sleeping bags on the exposed roof of one hostel.

I witnessed rituals common amongst many Aussie pilgrims: ?Khe Sanh? screamed in unison with Jimmy Barnes. One fist punching the air, with the other clenched around a stubby of VB followed the next day by a game of two-up.

The Turkish media preferred images of ?our boys? urinating in doorways of local shops.

Prior to this, many had sat silently watching a video of Peter Weir?s ?Gallipoli? starring a fresh-faced Mel Gibson.

A documentary followed. I learnt for the first time that Winston Churchill was the man responsible for the birth of Australia?s greatest legend.

As Minister for War he alone pushed the plan to invade Gallipoli imposing ?the Dardenelles adventure on a government that had no notion of how to carry the idea through?. (4)

C.W. Bean is revered as producing the foremost account of Australia?s World War I campaign. According to ?Gallipoli? author, Les Carlyon, Bean offered thoughts that ?reflected a considerable body of opinion?:

?Through a Churchill?s excess of imagination, a layman?s ignorance of artillery, and the fatal power of young enthusiasm to convince older and more cautious brains, the tragedy of Gallipoli was born?. (5)

For Churchill, the aim of out-flanking German forces from ?behind? also meant a far more economically attractive goal would be achieved: Turkish resources for British glory as the spoils of war.

In March 1917, commissioners investigating ?the Dardanelle?s adventure? released an interim report to Britain?s Asquith Government: ?The expedition had not succeeded but ?certain political advantages? had been secured?. (6)

Following this, The Times merely labelled Churchill ?a dangerous enthusiast?. (7)

Carlyon notes dryly that the fall of Singapore in 1942 proved that imperial planners still knew how to make a big mistake and that, as in 1915; Churchill didn?t care too much about Australia and New Zealand. (8)

In 2003, many believe little separates George W. Bush from Winston Churchill in these respects.

Yet first our minds must be won.

Often the most favoured method employed is to dehumanise the enemy and build fear of them. During the Civil War the American media sharpened its baby teeth on its own circulating reports that ?Confederate women had necklaces made from Yankee eyes, while the ?unholy Northerners? used heads of Confederate dead for footballs?. (9)

Personally I always preferred the calm observations of Sting to the rants of Peter Garrett. His 1985 Album ?Dream of The Blue Turtles? contained the track ?Russians??. The lyrics sat the singer squarely in between the figures of Nikita Krushchev and Ronald Reagan:

"Believe me when I say to you
I hope the Russians love their children too
We share the same biology
Regardless of ideology
What might save us me and you
Is that the Russians love their children too"
As the singer explained in 1985:
"Of course the Russians love their children, but I don't think we're meant to think that. If we're to consider them our enemies it would be easier if we thought of them as being unfeeling, robotic, insects almost. I'm not defending the Soviet model at all. I'm just saying that if we're going to save ourselves we have to learn about them and they about us. I don't know how they'll react. Maybe they'll think, 'Who the hell is he to even imply that we don't love our children!' That might piss them off. But really, the song's neither pro-Western nor pro-Soviet... it's pro-children." (10)
Of course it wasn?t the Russians who gave the order to fly four airliners into public buildings. Nor did they blow up scores of unsuspecting, innocent tourists in Bali nightclubs.

I don?t care to spend time questioning why a quirk of fate allowed me to cycle unharmed about Egyptian ruins.

I cannot explain or tolerate any terrorist act let alone what happened in New York and Bali.

People do bad things. Terror exists because of this and always has. It is part of human nature.

Yet it is not the whole part.

Travel afforded me the luxury of experiencing many countless acts of generosity at the hands of complete strangers. Many, whose names I never had the opportunity to learn, bestowed kindness upon me. This charity of spirit, very random and very unexpected in its nature, continues to reverberate through my consciousness.

So as Steve Liebman prowls across my television screen telling me the world has changed all thanks to terrorism I refuse to believe him.

What has changed is perspective.

The media, along with those behind it, influence that perspective heavily.

I refuse to feed daily on distorted information. I demand a balanced diet.

The world is still a big place. To those who dare it offers bigger adventures. It is always changing but it is not growing smaller.

I aim to continue to see it first hand armed with and protected by a balanced, informed view.

I refuse to buy into the culture of fear.

It?s amazing what goes through my head when filling in a survey.

What goes through yours?

S.T. McIntyre is a writer from Melbourne, Australia. He can be contacted at: mcintyre_sean@lycos.com

This article originally appeared on Vibewire.
ENDNOTES:

(1) Knightly, P., (2002), The First Casualty, From the Crimea to Kosovo: The War Correspondent as Hero, Propagandist and Myth Maker, Johns Hopkins University Press, p23

(2) Ibid., p27

(3) Carlyon, L., (2001), Gallipoli, MacMillan, p540

(4) Ibid., p541

(5) Carlyon, loc. cit.

(6) Ibid., p532

(7) Ibid

(8) Ibid., p533

(9) Knightly, loc.cit., p27

(10) Sting - official website, Album Spotlight - "The Dream Of The Blue Turtles", http://www.sting.com/discography/solo_discography/discdobt_songs.html, Accessed January 2003