[Class Title]
Introduction
A recent news about the United States lifting its arms ban in Vietnam have circulated on many major online news worldwide. Considered as a landmark occurrence in the bilateral relationship between the two countries, the lifting of the U.S. arms embargo towards Vietnam is seen by different news groups in many perspectives. It should be recalled that the United States and Vietnam had a turbulent relationship that originated when the United States intervened in the Vietnam War; a conflict that lasted for more than two decades, resulting to numerous loss of lives between the two countries. Despite American intervention, it can be recalled that the Communists won the war. The later established a revolutionary government; prompting the United States to cutoff its trading relationship with Vietnam; banning the trade of arms and military equipment. But during his visit in Hanoi, United States President, Barack Obama was quoted saying that he has fully lifted the United States arms embargo towards Vietnam. In a press conference video, Obama said that “the decision to lift the ban was not based on China” as what many would speculate (Ap & Rizzo). Rather, Obama said that the lifting of the ban was a way for the United States to show its desire to normalize its relationship with Vietnam. Such action by the United States’ president, however, can have several implications towards global and regional politics, most especially that the lifting of the ban coincided with China’s strengthening of its military presence in the region. With the ongoing states of enmity between China and Vietnam on territorial disputes in the region, the lifting of the arms embargo can be seen as a political maneuvering to strengthen military cooperation between Vietnam and the United States in order to balance China’s rising power in Southeast Asia. This news event was covered by major news organizations all over the world and can be considered as one of the major news headlines for the month of May, 2016. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how major new groups such as the CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera and the local Vietnam news daily, the VN Express International present their news and views on a similar event. Most often, media outlets can be observed as either downplaying or sensationalizing their news and such action can have major implications to the historiography of events.
Local News Reception of the Event
Local news organizations in Vietnam seem to be downplaying the lifting of the arms embargo. So far, local news organizations in Vietnam are not sensationalizing or paying close attention to the implication of the lifting of the arms ban, but rather focus on other things that Obama’s visit in Vietnam would ensue. One of Vietnam’s largest news daily, the VN Express, for instance, only gave a brief report regarding the issue. So far, what it did was just recapped the highlights of Obama’s speech as seen in the video coverage of the U.S. President’s speech regarding the lifting of the arms embargo. The VN Express quoted Obama word for word based on his actual press conference in Hanoi. However, prior to Obama’s visit, there were already speculations in the local news regarding the possible implications of the lifting of the arms embargo of the United States. After partially easing the weapons ban back in October of 2014, VN Express news correspondents, Murray Hiebert and Phuong Nguyen, have speculated that the lifting of the lethal arms ban will “add momentum to U.S.-Vietnam relations” (Hiebert & Nguyen). As observed, the removal of the ban is a form of cooperation between the two countries to rebalance Asia. Accordingly, “the linkage was made on the premise that Vietnam has an interest in seeking closer security cooperation with the United States in the face of China’s increasingly assertive posture in the South China Sea” (Hiebert & Nguyen). With the ban being lifted, Vietnam can now freely purchase state-of-the-art military equipment from the United States in order to boost its maritime security capabilities and the capabilities of its armed forces as a whole. VN News correspondents, however, is careful not to imply any negative news messages as it could trigger increased hostilities between Vietnam and China who are currently having territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Its brief take on the news implies that it does not want to reiterate the common speculations of the possible arms race against China now that the ban is lifted.
CNN’s Take on the News Event
A similar news event about the lifting of the United States arms embargo in Vietnam was covered by the American news giant, CNN. The online news article on the CNN featured a video of Obama speaking at a news conference in Hanoi (Ap & Rizzo). The video is then followed by a news article. What is remarkable though is that the news article that followed features stirring images of the Vietnam war. It appears that CNN correspondents, Ap and Rizzo, are sensationalizing the news by giving it, not only a historical background, but an opinionated take on the issue. The authors of the news article, for instance, mentioned China’s aggressive stance over the disputed territories in the South China Sea, which involves Vietnam and other Southeast Asian nations (Ap & Rizzo). Apparently, the CNN has a more opinionated approach in presenting a similar news as compared to the local news outlets of Vietnam. VN News, for instance, did not specifically mention the tension between Vietnam and China, but CNN directly implied the connection of the lifting of the arms embargo to the growing military tension in the region. CNN’s approach, however, can be considered as holistic. For those people who does not have a good background regarding the evolving relationship of Vietnam and the United States, the CNN news article provides a more detailed news coverage as compared to the news coverage provided by Vietnam’s VN News. Such approach, however, could trigger intense reactions, especially from veterans of the Vietnam war. By featuring glimpses of the dark past between the United States and Vietnam, the CNN style of reporting may trigger emotional responses, which could be the hidden agenda for the sensationalization of the news.
BBC’s Take on the Issue
BBC News is another major news company that has placed the lifting of the arms embargo by the United States towards Vietnam in its world news headlines. Just like CNN, BBC also implied the connection between the lifting of the arms embargo to Vietnam’s maritime dispute with China. But unlike CNN, BBC did not give a historical background of the relationship between the United States and Vietnam. Rather, the giant news group of the United Kingdom emphasized the trade barriers that could ensue despite the lifting of the ban. BBC, for instance, mentioned that the major reason why the United States enforced an arms ban on Vietnam in 1984 is because of the country’s poor human rights record. BBC also mentioned how Vietnam relied on Russian equipment for its military and defense capabilities. Such information, however, was not mentioned both in VN News and CNN. BBC News also emphasized that despite of the lifting of the arms embargo, purchasing of weapons from the United States will still require a lengthy and complicated process. BBC, for instance, quoted Obama’s statement that “any military contracts would still be subject to provisos on human rights”. In an opinionated view, BBC speculates that “given the Vietnamese government's poor human rights record,” the United States’ sale of arms towards Vietnam might hold up in Congress. Giving a deeper analysis, whoever made the BBC News article accurately indicated that the lifting of the arms embargo should be valued more for its symbolic significance rather than the actual sales of arms itself. Evidently, being able to purchase arms from the United States does not necessarily mean that Vietnam would be able to purchase arms right away. It does, however, show that the United States and Vietnam are having closer ties. This symbolic event has many implications. First, it would challenge the status quo of the players in the South China Sea. Secondly, it could mean that Vietnam will be loosening its dependence on Russia. With the United States already in the equation, Vietnam has more leeway and more chance of getting a better arms deal with Russia.
Al Jazeera’s Take on the Issue
Al Jazeera is a Doha based news company that gained world prominence over its coverage of war and conflicts in the Middle East. Being one of the most popular newsgroups in an international level, Al Jazeera has also featured the news about the lifting of the arms embargo of the United States towards Vietnam. There are statements, however, that are mentioned in the Al Jazeera that was not mentioned in any other news organizations that have covered the event. Al Jazeera, for instance, made a bold statement that Obama is “seeking to strike a balance with Vietnam as China tries to strengthen claims to the disputed territory in the South China Sea, one of the world's most important waterways”. This statement left little to the imagination of Al Jazeera’s readers and have erased any ambiguity about the United States’ intention on its action over Vietnam. Although such assumption is valid, Obama has not mentioned such statement. In fact, Obama vehemently denies that the lifting of the ban has anything to do with the United States’ policy over the region. Unless it was an editorial, Al Jazeera should have refrained from issuing such statement. Although it is quite obvious that the intention of the United States goes beyond the sale of arms per see, a news item should be objective and free of bias. The mention of Obama’s plans is uncalled for, most especially when such statement was not mentioned directly by Obama himself. Al Jazeera also mentioned that Vietnam can be a potential U.S. market of its technologies. The purchase of 100 units of Boeing aircraft by VietJet airlines that amounted to $11.3 billion, for instance, is mentioned by Al Jazeera in the news to emphasize the potential of Vietnam as a U.S. trade partner.
The Role of Media in Making History
As far as the delivery of news is concerned, it is the CNN that offers the most comprehensive news report among the four major news agencies mentioned above. Unlike the BBC, Al Jazeera and the local media, VN Express, CNN presented not only the facts of the event, but also the historical background and the possible implication of the event. It should be noted though that these four news agencies are all mediums of information. The term ‘media’ is a plural form of medium, which collectively refers to the means of journalism or mass communication. The media have a critical role in shaping history by the story they tell. Basing on the recent event about the lifting of the arms embargo of the United States on Vietnam, several media outlets are observed to have differing approaches of presenting their news. Although most presented facts, some peope are adding something to the story while others failed to mention some important elements of the story. Apparently, the media can manipulate history by going beyond the facts of the event that they cover. Today’s media have become even more powerful because of the modern communication technologies that are currently available. With the advent of the computer and the internet technology, today’s media can reach out to a global audience in just a matter of seconds. Similarly, events that happen even in the most remote portions of the globe can be easily reported through the use of modern communication technologies. As far as events are concerned, once it is done, it already becomes a part of history. In the broadest sense, everything that took place that is known to man is history. Knowledge about history, however, depends on the people who gather information and make a historiography or record of it. News events are historiography and those who write the news are historians in every sense of the word. A historiography is subject to the historian’s interpretation of the events that happened, which explains why new agencies have different takes on a single event.
Conclusion
A single event can be interpreted and presented in different ways by news organizations. One particular example is the lifting of the arms embargo that the United States have previously imposed on Vietnam. Some news agencies downplay the event by presenting only the obvious facts without providing relevant information to compensate the facts that were presented. Some news agencies, on the other hand, present not only the facts, but also the historical information or background of the event as well as present an opinionated information about the event. Worst of all, some news agencies alter facts and place words into the mouth of people that they quote so that they sensationalize and make their assumptions valid. Most often, during the collection of information, some of it is partly incorrect while some information is incomplete. Little lapses in the collection of information can accumulate and have an enormous impact on the integrity and truthfulness of the information as time passes by. A historiography can also include biases of the historian that collects facts and information. It is, thereby, important that news accounts are told in the most objective and unbiased manner. A responsible news agency should know that their written account of the news today will become the historiography of tomorrow. For the same reason, the collection and recording of events should be based only on facts and news articles should reflect only unbiased information about the event.
Works Cited
Al Jazeera. US lifts arms embargo on former foe Vietnam. May 2016. May 2016 <http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/lifts-arms-embargo-foe-vietnam-160523062331848.html>.
Ap, T., & Rizzo, J. Obama lifts U.S. arms ban on Vietnam. 2016. May 2016 <http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/23/politics/obama-vietnam-trip/>.
BBC News. Obama lifts US embargo on lethal arms sales to Vietnam. May 2016. May 2016 <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-36356695>.
Hiebert, M., & Nguyen, P. Fully lifting U.S. lethal arms ban will add momentum to U.S.-Vietnam relations. May 2016. May 2016 <http://e.vnexpress.net/news/opinion/fully-lifting-u-s-lethal-arms-ban-will-add-momentum-to-u-s-vietnam-relations-3405476.html>.
VN Express International. U.S. "fully lifts" Vietnam lethal arms ban. 2016. May 2016 <http://e.vnexpress.net/news/news/u-s-fully-lifts-vietnam-lethal-arms-ban-3407612.html>.
