The Press and Indian Removal
Whether a mainstream press organization remains objective or lends itself to partisan ideologies, news reporting has always managed to shape the opinions of the general public. Throughout history, the news written and reported in mainstream publications have come from a culturally biased perspective, and do not favor the needs and issues regarding an oppressed minority group. The plight of cultures that are oppressed can often go much deeper than oppression itself. The press has failed in many cases to properly inform the public with news related to the tragedy that has plagued many cultures in the world, especially those affected by the outcome of wars involving the United States. These failures are evident not only in wars abroad, but wars at home, such as Indian removal, the war on drugs, and more recently the war on terrorism. Although the agenda of the modern press differs in certain ways from the press of the 1820s and 30s, during the time of Indian removal, there are many similarities to be evaluated. Since the invention of the Gutenberg printing press to the vast publications and news programs of the modern media, the concept of what is or isn't "newsworthy" tends to leave out vital components of information crucial
Images of dead Iraqi troops and wounded Iraqi civilians, including children burned and bloodied from bomb attacks, are kept to the barest minimum. The only thing we can be sure of is that the information released though the mainstream press only part of the truth and in some cases is filled with misconceptions. In the 1820s and 1830s, the press helped the nation justify its forced removal of thousands of Indians to reservations west of the Mississippi River by reporting that Native Americans were a "vanishing race" and that relocation west was their only hope for survival. The media plays a tremendous role in shaping opinions in any nation which enjoys a free press. While journalists embed themselves among the fighting, the media displays a one-sided account of the bigger picture. Besides the obvious fact that the media is multi-billion dollar business, today's government has stepped in and put regulations on what can and cannot be reported. We are informed about individuals or groups who take up arms against us, and told and shown images of "evil villains" who wish to do us harm. This idea grew from the widespread belief that stronger, more civilized races were meant to dominate weaker, more primitive ones. Journalists were not hired to follow the Native Americans along the Trail of Tears, and they are not hired today to report on the atrocities taking place in Iraq. Accounts of individual Indians were rare unless they included reports of violence or hostility. We are rarely shown the repercussions of our military actions in third-world countries we destroy with our superior war tactics. The few stories that chronicled the great tragedies that accompanied their removal were as much political attacks on the Andrew Jackson administration as they were commentaries about the injustice associated with Indian removal. These views, while set afar from the racist standpoint of many anti-Indian writers, served many of the same purposes in separating the Indians from the white majority by emphasizing the weaknesses of the culture and making it impossible for Indians to receive fair and equal treatment in the south. The abuse of this freedom has led to the disease of ignorance spread throughout the United States.
Common topics in this essay:
Indians Christianized,
,
Saddam Hussein,
President Jackson,
Iraq Pentagon,
Iraq Images,
Anglo-Saxon Protestant,
Andrew Jackson,
Native Americans,
indian removal,
Trail Tears,
modern media,
mainstream publications,
indian removal war,
removal war,
military forces,
mainstream press,
human suffering,
modern press,
war iraq,
iraqi civilians,
|
Acceptance Essays
