To Protect and Serve: The “Guard Dog” Function of Journalism in Coverage of the Japanese-American Internment

Abstract

This monograph explores evolution of themes print media coverage of Japanese-Americans during period between Pearl Harbor and day Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066. Print journalists at first halfheartedly played celebrated of watchdog, some cases urging readers to be tolerant of Japanese-Americans. But their tolerance, and their time watchdog role, lasted only until government put finishing touches on its policy to deal with alleged activity, a policy which culminated internment. From that point on, print journalists assumed of dog, acting as government's sentry, patrolling for threats to official version of events that unfolded after Pearl Harbor (Donohue, Tichenor, & Olien, 1995). Donohue, Tichenor, and Olien outlined function as it relates to political reporting, but I argue that it is of particular relevance here. journalists act as sentries for who hold power and who ability to create their own security systems - this instance, federal government, local and state officials, and military. Guard dog reporting takes place external present a threat to local (p. 116). In writing favorably about groups, journalists tend to concentrate on individuals while accepting structure, a tendency seen clearly (and discussed more detail later) reporting on alleged Japanese-American threat to national security. Through their interaction with and dependence on local leaders for information, journalists are trained to suspect potential intruders, and sometimes, as is case here, sound alarm for reasons that group may initially be unable to understand. This inability arises when authority within power structure is divided or when part of power structure is made uncertain by an organized challenge. Along way, who lack power and influence receive little attention from journalists. How a journalist gathers information and writes stories is shaped by nature of structure being served and by whom label a threat. When there is consensus a community, guard dog sleeps, stirring only when an external threat to local leadership materializes. Conflict is reported in a constrained way and only on certain issues and under certain structural conditions (p. 116) - short, when there is conflict between dominant or power blocs (p. 120). Further, where different local conflicting interests, Donohue, Tichenor, and Olien argue, the media are more likely to reflect views ofthe more powerful groups (p. 116). Such protection highlights the functions of externally based conflict for reinforcement of local cohesion (p.117). Coverage emphasizes of addressing issues and correcting problems faced by community. The guard dog function rejects as unrealistic watchdog of press taught so many university journalism classes as a guiding principle for journalistic practice. The media are not autonomous; they operate as part of power structure; as such, they have neither inclination nor power to challenge those groups, unless they are already under challenge by other forces (Donohue, Tichenor, & Olien, p. 119). Unable to develop social policy or motivate political action, media are left to report on actions taken by groups. If, as case of alleged fifth column activity explored this monograph, these and agencies are concerned primarily with an external threat, that will be agenda of media... (p. 119). Questions from reporters that seem to challenge official view of an event or issue amount to role playing driven more by attacks from contending powers (p. 119) than by a journalist's desire to expose corruption or challenge action taken by a corporation or agency. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.