resulting protests against the Vietnam War, which included marches in the streets, may ultimately have had an effect on the decision-makers in Washington D.C., who eventually were forced to bring the war to a conclusion by withdrawing U.S. troops from Vietnam. Cronkite was a "trusted" authority on news by the American public, and Johnson said that when he lost Cronkite's confidence in the Vietnam War, he lost the country's.
Cronkite was critical of television because it did not cover events like the Vietnam War until after they had erupted into major crises with violence. It is Cronkite's feeling that the television medium is doing the right thing when it sacrifices some financial gain in favor of public responsibility. Television news also brought home the message that people could show strength through organization, follow their leaders in protest, and attract attention by throwing bricks through windows (Sanders 19-21).
Reed Irvine, a retired military officer, argues that report-ing the war by the press television is one of the reasons that the United States military operations in Vietnam did not succeed in keeping Vietnam from falling under communist domination. Irvine, holding a different position than Cronkite, seems to believe that a free press is not best for the country. Irvine notes that the support of the people can be won or lost by the efforts of the television news (Irvine 22-29).
However, Irvine's patriotic vitriol against the press fails to note that the United States was by far the superior military power, and yet was out-battled on the battle field. It would seem a bit simplistic to blame everything on the press. Perhaps there is some ineptness with the military or a lack of belief in the cause or some other Catch-22 type of factor operating that no one wants to admit, especially those in the military who had an active role in the Vietnam War.
The U.S. presence in Vietnam was an outgrowth of U.S. policie...