Even if wartime press controls have not been authorized by the
Constitution and have not been used well in American history, are they necessary at
times? Arguments have been made that journalists are a menace to military operations
and the safety of soldiers. ¹ Some legal scholars have maintained that some government-
imposed restraints are reasonable and should be allowed because they make sense. ² Although journalists might be an additional hazard and burden for the armed forces,
their presence is only one of many challenges and their coverage serves vital functions.
The Marines did a relatively good job of working with the press in the Gulf War
because they adopted the attitude that coping with the media is necessary. "We didn't
view the news media as a group of people we were supposed to schmooze," said Chief
Warrant Officer Eric Carlson. "We regarded them as an environmental feature of the
battlefield, kind of like the rain. If it rains, you operate wet." ³ The military can use
its skills in logistics to accommodate reporters in a combat zone, and reporters should
be able to take the risk of being harmed in battle, as they have done in all the nation's
wars, if they choose to do so.

Of particular concern to those who insist on worrying about the press is the
existence of rapid and realistic mass communication that apparently annihilates the
ability of the military to carry out operations with adequate secrecy and public support.
How can combat be conducted and media audiences retain their composure when
intense, instantaneous images of the battlefield are being beamed around the world?
Any evaluation of such questions requires an examination of how officials and jour-
nalists shape perceptions of war. Political and military leaders can, of course, be ex-
pected to deceive the enemy, the public, and often themselves. Not as well understood,
however, is the role of the mass communication. Although sometimes accused of
aiding the enemy or becoming advocates, media professionals actually assist authorities
in a variety of ways, including keeping them informed and conveying their propaganda
and disinformation. The mass media can be an ally in making war and, sadly, can
even make armed conflict appear entertaining. ⁴ When officials attempt involuntary
suppression and the doctoring of information, they alienate journalists and undermine
the credibility of all concerned. Such actions violate democratic principles and can be
seen as avoidable if the realities of war are taken into account.

Twentieth-century developments in communication helped to destabilize a number of
oppressive regimes around the world; ⁵ but technological advancements were also of

-197-