War necessitates critical media, careful thought

April 1, 2009
By Luke Runyon
Staff Writer

Media coverage can be a fickle thing. Ever since the financial crisis has taken over the mainstream media, several other issues have been pushed to the periphery. The war in Iraq is one of those issues, but was recently the topic of a Political Art and the Public Sphere forum.

The series screened the movie “War Made Easy” last Monday and held an audience discussion afterwards, in conjunction with the ECCE Speaker Series.

The film focuses on the role of propaganda in convincing the public to favor a war option. Drawing parallels between the Vietnam War and the current war in Iraq, “War Made Easy” relied on news clips and the words of pundits to show the role of media in selling a war.

“Films tend to be provocative and good launching off points for discussion,” said facilitator and UIS professor Richard Gilman-Opalsky. This particular film “explains how different administrations, Democratic or Republican, try to convince people that going to war is a good thing,” said Gilman-Opalsky.

Drawing its information from Norman Soloman’s book sharing the same title, the movie blamed a variety of news sources for selling the Iraq war to the American people. Citing the idea of bringing peace to regions, Soloman said, “war becomes perpetual when used as a way to peace.”

After the credits rolled Gilman-Opalsky opened the floor for an open discussion of what was just seen in the movie.

Several students gave their personal opinions on the war in Iraq and the nature of war itself.

“I am an Iraq War veteran. The question being is raised is whether there is such a thing as unbiased reporting? Yes there is. It is up to us to go to different sources for our news,” said student Chase Byerline.

The subject of freedom caused many students to add their input.

“Are we really free now with all these media outlets feeding us the same information?” asked student Mat Harris.

At several parts of the discussion the passion of participants could be heard with many students listing family and friends who are explicitly affected by the current war. These heated sections of debate prompted Gilman-Opalsky to say, “None of this is bad and I hope that you feel tense at some point. A public sphere is meant to be animated.”

Criticism of the movie caused some to comment on its showing only one side of the war media. “[The war movement] isn’t monolithic. There is a strong history of dissidence,” said Gilman-Opalsky. “Propaganda makes the media into a tool to go to war.”

Wrapping up the discussion Gilman-Opalsky gave hope for the future of critical thinking.

“The best safeguard is coming together to think critically, to think collectively. We have to bounce ideas off each other,” said Gilman-Opalsky. “A more robust public sphere leads to less manipulation.”