|
Method
This study will focus on three methods to determine answers
for the proposed research questions: Analysis of service doctrines,
analysis of service culture, and case study analysis of actual
military operations.
Analysis of Doctrine
A content analysis of military joint public affairs doctrines
using organizational systems theory which Fisher (1982) defines
as “the ‘all’ of a thing.” This theory
is interested in the dynamic properties of wholes and parts, relationships
and hierarchies. We also utilize networks within the organization
(Joint Information Bureaus) “to define and explain the patterns
of information flow within the organization” (Heath &
Bryant, 2000). Using a systematic approach to identify basic problems
with how Joint Information Bureaus operate and interact with the
media in a Department of Defense joint combat operation, a comparative
study was conducted using each of the military services’
joint public affairs doctrines. This required using the Department
of Defense Joint Publication 3-61 as a starting point, since this
publication is what each branch of the military base its unique
version upon, to perform the analysis.
The units of analysis were:
· Joint
Publication 3-61 Doctrine for Public Affairs Operations in Joint
Operations
· U. S. Army Field Manual 46-1 Public Affairs Operations
· Department of the Navy SECNAVINST 5720.44A Department
of the Navy Public Affairs Policy and Regulations
· Marine Corps Order (MCO) 5720.72 Procedures for Joint
Public Affairs Operations
· U. S. Air Force Document Doctrine (AFDD) 2-5.4 Public
Affairs Operations
The major issues are defined as those items each of the services
adopted from the Joint Publication regarding interaction with
the media in joint combat operations. For the purposes of analysis,
we determined that guidelines and policy should be the units of
measurement, because they directly relate to how the military
services handle media pools in a combat/exercise area.
(See Attachment)
Analysis of Service Culture
To analyze differences in the various service’s cultures,
content analysis of the respective service’s public affairs
guidance was used. Content analysis integrates data collection
and analytical techniques measuring the occurrence of identifiable
elements in a text or message (Keyton, 2001).
How this study chose its criteria. Culture is defined
as a system of shared values that definine what is important and
norms that define appropriate attitudes and behaviors for organizational
members telling them how to feel and behave (O’Reilly &
Chatman, 1996). Each of the chosen criteria guide and define how
public affairs members in their respective services formally and
informally accomplish their assigned tasks.
The materials used. In defining the individual criteria
from the services we used the operating manuals, directives, regulations
and instructions used by each of the service's public affairs
organizations. To define public affairs in the individual services
we used:
· Army Field Manual 46-1, Public Affairs
Operations
· Air Force Instruction 35-101, Air Force Public Affairs
Policies and Procedures
· Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5430.97, Assignment
of Public Affairs Responsibilities in the Department of the Navy
(www.chinfo.navy.mil, 2002)
Note: The Marines are a subsystem
of the Navy and use the same instruction. Additionally, during
wartime operations the Coast Guard also falls under the Navy and
is held to their directives. Normally, the Coast Guard falls under
the Department of Transportation. The Coast Guard is not an element
of the United States Armed Forces unless Congress ratifies an
act of war. In addition, respective members of each of the military
branches themselves defined other criteria, such as values and
vision.
The Criteria. O’Reilly and Chatman (1996) define
culture as “a system of shared values that define what is
important and norms that define appropriate attitudes and behaviors
for organizational members -- how to feel and behave” (p.
121). This study defined culture in JIBs by four criteria: values,
focus (or vision, as defined by the military services), mission
and network. These four criteria were chosen as they meet the
definition of culture. (See
Attachment)
Case Study Examination
Researcher Robert K. Yin defines the case study research method
as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon
within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon
and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources
of evidence are used (Yin, 1984, p. 23). The case study method
was used in this research because its findings often resonate
experientially or phenomenologically with a broad cross section
of readers and thus facilitate greater understanding of the phenomenon
in question (Feagin et al., 1991).
Intense reporting by the international news media has become one
of the realities of modern military operations. The deployment
of U.S. forces usually attracts large numbers of print and broadcast
journalists dedicated to providing their audiences with “near
real-time information” of varying accurateness and comprehensiveness.
Much work has been done to trace the origins of the continuing
tension between the military and the news media. This is because
the military and the news media often hold very different values
and pursue very different objectives. The following three case
studies illustrate the varying problems that can and have occurred
when JIBs do not facilitate the flow of information to the media.
The three cases were chosen for their military basis, the varying
problem areas that they demonstrate, and the chronological time
frame that they occurred.
Grenada 1983. In 1983, the United States executed a short-notice
military operation on Grenada, a tiny Caribbean island nation,
marking the adoption of the new military doctrine. The Reagan
administration sent an invasion force of 6,000 U.S. troops to
storm the island to return Grenada to the fold of capitalism (Stauber
& Rampton, 1995). Grenadian troops, outnumbered and outgunned,
offered little resistance. “Three days after the troops
landed, the fighting was essentially over” (Stauber &
Rampton, 1995).
Unlike the invasion of Normandy Beach during World War II, the
invasion of Grenada took place without the presence of journalists
to observe the action. Reagan ordered a complete press blackout
surrounding the Grenada invasion (Stauber & Rampton, 1995).
“By the time reporters were allowed on the scene, soldiers
were engaged in "mop-up" operations, and the American
public was treated to an antiseptic military victory minus any
scenes of killing, destruction or incompetence” (Stauber
& Rampton, 1995). Kirby (2001) explained, “The Pentagon
did not permit correspondents to join in the invasion force, because,
it said, their presence would jeopardize security and "complicate
the forces' logistical problems.” In fact, the military
refused to grant unrestricted access to Grenada until six days
after the initial invasion--by then, the operation was nearly
complete.”
After reporters protested the news blackout, the government proposed
creating a National Media Pool. “In future wars, a rotating
group of regular Pentagon correspondents would be on call to depart
at a moment's notice for U.S. surprise military operations”
(Stauber & Rampton, 1995). The pool system was designed to
provide them with timely, inside access to military operations
all the while, keeping them safe. “In practice, it was a
classic example of PR crisis management strategy- enabling the
military to take the initiative in controlling media coverage
by channeling reporters' movements through Pentagon designated
sources” (Stauber & Rampton, 1995).
Panama, December 1989. When American forces invaded Panama
to oust General Manuel Noriega in December 1989, the military
called the media-assigned pool reporters too late to allow them
to cover the decisive U.S. assaults. The heavy combat had ended
by the time reporters arrived. (Kirby, 2001)
Once again, the invasion was carried out with blinding swiftness.
The Pentagon held the National Media Pool captive on an air base
in Panama for the first five hours of the fighting. Members of
the media pool actually watched part of the invasion on CNN while
being treated to a dissertation on the history of the Panama Canal
Zone by an American diplomat (Media vs. military, 1998). Little
real information reached the American public outside of the Pentagon
pictures given to the journalists. At least 300 civilians died
in the attack and resulting crossfire, some burned alive in their
homes, in El Chorrillo, the neighborhood in Panama City where
General Noriega's headquarters were located (Stauber & Rampton,
1995).
Aside from the victims and Army film crews, however, no one was
allowed to observe the attack. The media dutifully reported the
Pentagon's claim that only 202 civilians and 50 Panamanian soldiers
died in the entire invasion, even though estimates from other
sources ranged as high as 4,000 civilian deaths. (Stauber &
Rampton, 1995)
Operation Restore Hope, 1992. In December 1992, a United
Nations peacekeeping force led by about 2,000 United States Marines
was sent to restore order, while international agencies attempted
the difficult task of resuming food distribution and other humanitarian
aid. It was the first time the United Nations had ever intervened
without permission in the affairs of an independent nation (Operation
Restore Hope). The December 9 beach scene in Somalia represented
the heart of every commander’s fears over the disturbance
of operational security (Ricks, 1993).
Many of the soldiers coming over the beach had these night vision
goggles that magnify whatever little light is out there and all
of a sudden, boom, they have these Klieg lights and it could have
been a dangerous situation. (Media vs. military, 1998)
The actual public affairs plan included more than 20 journalists
who spent several days with the Marines in preparation for the
operation. Those journalists in the active media pool actually
participated in the amphibious assault. (Ricks, 1993) “Once
ashore, efforts began to include the “outsiders,”
such as by arranging interviews with network anchors perched on
the roof of the local airport” (Ricks, 1993). The complete
media relations plan was flexible enough to include, when events
permitted, those journalists who were unable or unwilling to join
the Marines before coming ashore. (Ricks, 1993)
The media stressed afterwards that the military overreacted to
the possibility that they could have caused harm to the troops
coming ashore. The fact that none of the Marines were attacked
or injured was beyond the control of both the military and the
news media (Ricks, 1993). “Quite simply, the event was benign
only because no gunman decided to take advantage of the illuminated
target area containing both the U.S. Marines and the news media
whose coverage had helped to bring them there” (Ricks, 1993).
|