text:
Observational learning
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Social learning (disambiguation).
Observational learning is learning that occurs through observing the behavior of others. It is a form of social learning which takes various forms, based on various processes. In humans, this form of learning seems to not need reinforcement to occur, but instead, requires a social model such as a parent, sibling, friend, or teacher with surroundings. Particularly in childhood, a model is someone of authority or higher status in an environment. In animals, observational learning is often based on classical conditioning, in which an instinctive behavior is elicited by observing the behavior of another (e.g. mobbing in birds), but other processes may be involved as well.[1]
Contents
[hide]
1 Human observational learning
2 Stages
3 Effect on behavior
3.1 Age difference
3.2 Observational causal learning
3.3 Comparisons with imitation
3.4 Apprenticeship
3.5 Learning without imitation
3.6 Peer model influences
4 Cultural variation
4.1 Indigenous communities of the Americas
5 Other human and animal behavior experiments
5.1 Learning in fish
5.2 Social learning in pigeons
5.3 Acquiring foraging niches
5.4 Social learning in crows
5.5 Propagation of animal culture
5.6 Hummingbird experiment
5.7 Bottlenose dolphin
5.8 Rhesus monkey
5.9 Light box experiment
5.10 Swimming skill performance
6 Neuroscience
7 See also
8 References
9 Further reading on animal social learning
Human observational learning[edit]
Many behaviors that a learner observes, remembers, and imitates are actions that models display and display modeling, even though the model may not intentionally try to instill a particular behavior. A child may learn to swear, smack, smoke, and deem other inappropriate behavior acceptable through poor modeling. Bandura claims that children continually learn desirable and undesirable behavior through observational learning. Observational learning suggests that an individual's environment, cognition, and behavior all incorporate and ultimately determine how the individual functions and models.[2]
Through observational learning, individual behaviors can spread across a culture through a process called diffusion chain. This basically occurs when an individual first learns a behavior by observing another individual and that individual serves as a model through whom other individuals learn the behavior, and so on.[3]
Culture plays a role in whether observational learning is the dominant learning style in a person or community. Some cultures expect children to actively participate in their communities and are therefore exposed to different trades and roles on a daily basis.[4] This exposure allows children to observe and learn the different skills and practices that are valued in their communities.[5]
Albert Bandura, who is known for the classic Bobo doll experiment, identified this basic form of learning in 1961. The importance of observational learning lies in helping individuals, especially children, acquire new responses by observing others' behavior.
Bobo doll
Albert Bandura states that people’s behavior could be determined by their environment. Observational learning occurs through observing negative and positive behaviors. Bandura believes in reciprocal determinism in which the environment can influence people’s behavior and vice versa. For instance, the Bobo doll experiment shows that model, in a determined environment, affects children’s behavior. In this experiment Bandura demonstrates that one group of children placed in an aggressive environment would act the same way, while the control group and the other group of children placed in a passive role model environment hardly shows any type of aggression.[6]
In communities where children's primary mode of learning is through observation, the children are rarely separated from adult activities. This incorporation into the adult world at an early age allows children to use observational learning skills in multiple spheres of life. This learning through observation requires keen attentive abilities. Culturally, they learn that their participation and contributions are valued in their communities. This teaches children that it is their duty, as members of the community, to observe others' contributions so they gradually become involved and participate further in the community.[7]
Stages[edit]
Bandura's social cognitive learning theory states that there are four stages involved in observational learning:[8]
Attention: Observers cannot learn unless they pay attention to what's happening around them. This process is influenced by characteristics of the model, such as how much one likes or identifies with the model, and by characteristics of the observer, such as the observer's expectations or level of emotional arousal.
Retention/Memory: Observers must not only recognize the observed behavior but also remember it at some later time. This process depends on the observer's ability to code or structure the information in an easily remembered form or to mentally or physically rehearse the model's actions.
Initiation/Motor: Observers must be physically and/intellectually capable of producing the act. In many cases the observer possesses the necessary responses. But sometimes, reproducing the model's actions may involve skills the observer has not yet acquired. It is one thing to carefully watch a circus juggler, but it is quite another to go home and repeat those acts.
Motivation: Coaches also give pep talks, recognizing the importance of motivational processes to learning.
Bandura clearly distinguishes between learning and performance. Unless motivated, a person does not produce learned behavior. This motivation can come from external reinforcement, such as the experimenter's promise of reward in some of Bandura's studies, or the bribe of a parent. Or it can come from vicarious reinforcement, based on the observation that models are rewarded. High-status models can affect performance through motivation. For example, girls aged 11 to 14 performed better on a motor performance task when they thought it was demonstrated by a high-status cheerleader than by a low-status model.[9]
Some have even added a step between attention and retention involving encoding a behavior.
Observational learning leads to a change in an individual's behavior along three dimensions:
An individual thinks about a situation in a different way and may have incentive to react to it.
The change is a result of a person's direct experiences as opposed to being in-born.
For the most part, the change an individual has made is permanent.[10]
Effect on behavior[edit]
Learning to play Djembe.
According to Bandura's social cognitive learning theory, observational learning can affect behavior in many ways, with both positive and negative consequences. It can teach completely new behaviors, for one. It can also increase or decrease the frequency of behaviors that have previously been learned. Observational learning can even encourage behaviors that were previously forbidden (for example, the violent behavior towards the Bobo doll that children imitated in Albert Bandura's study). Observational learning can also influence behaviors that are similar to, but not identical to, the ones being modeled. For example, seeing a model excel at playing the piano may motivate an observer to play the saxophone.
Age difference[edit]
Albert Bandura stressed that developing children learn from different social models, meaning that no two children are exposed to exactly the same modeling influence. From infancy to adolescence, they are exposed to various social models. A 2013 study found that a toddlers' previous social familiarity with a model was not always necessary for learning and that they were also able to learn from observing a stranger demonstrating or modeling a new action to another stranger.[11]
It was once believed that babies could not imitate actions until the latter half of the first year. However a number of studies now report that infants as young as seven days can imitate simple facial expressions. By the latter half of their first year, 9-month-old babies can imitate actions hours after they first see them. As they continue to develop, toddlers around age two can acquire important personal and social skills by imitating a social model.
Deferred imitation is an important developmental milestone in a two-year-old, in which children not only construct symbolic representations, but can also remember information.[12] Unlike toddlers, children of elementary school age are less likely to rely on imagination to represent an experience. Instead, they can verbally describe the model's behavior.[13] Since this form of learning does not need reinforcement, it is more likely to occur regularly.
As age increases, age-related observational learning motor skills may decrease in athletes and golfers.[14] Younger and skilled golfers have higher observational learning compared to older golfers and less skilled golfers.
Observational causal learning[edit]
Humans use observational Moleen causal learning to watch other people’s actions and use the information gained to find out how something works and how we can do it ourselves.
A study of 25-month-old infants found that they can learn causal relations from observing human interventions. They also learn by observing normal actions not created by intentional human action.[15]
Comparisons with imitation[edit]
Observational learning is presumed to have occurred when an organism copies an improbable action or action outcome that it has observed and the matching behavior cannot be explained by an alternative mechanism. Psychologists have been particularly interested in the form of observational learning known as imitation and in how to distinguish imitation from other processes. To successfully make this distinction, one must separate the degree to which behavioral similarity results from (a) predisposed behavior, (b) increased motivation resulting from the presence of another animal, (c) attention drawn to a place or object, (d) learning about the way the environment works, as distinguished from what we think of as (e) imitation (the copying of the demonstrated behavior).[16]
Observational learning differs from imitative learning in that it does not require a duplication of the behavior exhibited by the model. For example, the learner may observe an unwanted behavior and the subsequent consequences, and thus learn to refrain from that behavior. For example, Riopelle (1960) found that monkeys did better with observational learning if they saw the "tutor" monkey make a mistake before making the right choice.[17] Heyes (1993) distinguished imitation and non-imitative social learning in the following way: imitation occurs when animals learn about behavior from observing conspecifics, whereas non-imitative social learning occurs when animals learn about the environment from observing others.[18]
Not all imitation and learning through observing is the same, and they often differ in the degree to which they take on an active or passive form. John Dewey describes an important distinction between two different forms of imitation: imitation as an end in itself and imitation with a purpose.[19] Imitation as an end is more akin to mimicry, in which a person copies another's act to repeat that action again. This kind of imitation is often observed in animals. Imitation with a purpose utilizes the imitative act as a means to accomplish something more significant. Whereas the more passive form of imitation as an end has been documented in some European American communities, the other kind of more active, purposeful imitation has been documented in other communities around the world.
Observation may take on a more active form in children's learning in multiple Indigenous American communities. Ethnographic anthropological studies in Yucatec Mayan and Quechua Peruvian communities provide evidence that the home or community-centered economic systems of these cultures allow children to witness first-hand, activities that are meaningful to their own livelihoods and the overall well-being of the community.[20] These children have the opportunity to observe activities that are relevant within the context of that community, which gives them a reason to sharpen their attention to the practical knowledge they are exposed to. This does not mean that they have to observe the activities even though they are present. The children often make an active decision to stay in attendance while a community activity is taking place to observe and learn.[20] This decision underscores the significance of this learning style in many indigenous American communities. It goes far beyond learning mundane tasks through rote imitation; it is central to children's gradual transformation into informed members of their communities' unique practices. There was also a study, done with children, that concluded that Imitated behavior can be recalled and used in another situation or the same.[21]
Apprenticeship[edit]
Apprenticeship can involve both observational learning and modelling. Apprentices gain their skills in part through working with masters in their profession and through observing and evaluating the work of their fellow apprentices.Examples include renaissance inventor/painter Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo, before succeeding in their profession they were apprentices.[22]
Learning without imitation[edit]
Michael Tomasello described various ways of observational learning without the process of imitation in animals[23] (ethology): Exposure- Individuals learn about their environment with a close proximity to other individuals that have more experience. For example, a young dolphin learning the location of a plethora of fish by staying near its mother.
Stimulus enhancement – Individuals become interested in an object from watching others interact with it.[24] Increased interest in an object may result in object manipulation, which facilitates new object-related behaviors by trial-and-error learning. For example, a young killer whale might become interested in playing with a sea lion pup after watching other whales toss the sea lion pup around. After playing with the pup, the killer whale may develop foraging behaviors appropriate to such prey. In this case, the killer whale did not learn to prey on sea lions by observing other whales do so, but rather the killer whale became intrigued after observing other whales play with the pup. After the killer whale became interested, then its interactions with the sea lion resulted in behaviors that provoked future foraging efforts.
Goal emulation – Individuals are enticed by the end result of an observed behavior and attempt the same outcome but with a different method. For example, Haggerty (1909) devised an experiment in which a monkey climbed up the side of a cage, stuck its arm into a wooden chute, and pulled a rope in the chute to release food. Another monkey was provided an opportunity to obtain the food after watching a monkey go through this process on four separate occasions. The monkey performed a different method and finally succeeded after trial and error.[25]
Peer model influences[edit]
Observational learning is very beneficial when there are positive, reinforcing peer models involved. Although individuals go through four different stages for observational learning: attention; retention ; production; and motivation, this does not simply mean that when an individual's attention is captured that it automatically sets the process in that exact order. One of the most important ongoing stages for observational learning, especially among children, is motivation and positive reinforcement[citation needed].
Performance is enhanced when children are positively instructed on how they can improve a situation and where children actively participate alongside a more skilled person. Examples of this are scaffolding and guided participation. Scaffolding refers to an expert responding contingently to a novice so the novice gradually increases their understanding of a problem. Guided participation refers to an expert actively engaging in a situation with a novice so the novice participates with or observes the adult to understand how to resolve a problem.[26]
Cultural variation[edit]
Cultural variation can be seen by the extent of information learned or absorbed by children in non-Western cultures through learning by observation. Cultural variation is not restricted only to ethnicity and nationality, but rather, extends to the specific practices within communities. In learning by observation, children use observation to learn without verbal requests for further information, or without direct instruction. For example, children from Mexican heritage families tend to learn and make better use of information observed during classroom demonstration then children of European heritage.[27][28] Children of European heritage experience the type of learning that separates them from their family and community activities. They instead participate in lessons and other exercises in special settings such as school.[29] Cultural backgrounds differ from each other in which children display certain characteristics in regards to learning an activity. Another example is seen in the immersion of children in some Indigenous communities of the Americas into the adult world and the effects it has on observational learning and the ability to complete multiple tasks simultaneously.[7] This might be due to children in these communities having the opportunity to see a task being completed by their elders or peers and then trying to emulate the task. In doing so they learn to value observation and the skill-building it affords them because of the value it holds within their community.[5] This type of observation is not passive, but reflects the child's intent to participate or learn within a community.[4]
Observational learning can be seen taking place in many domains of Indigenous communities. The classroom setting is one significant example, and it functions differently for Indigenous communities compared to what is commonly present in Western schooling. The emphasis of keen observation in favor of supporting participation in ongoing activities strives to aid children to learn the important tools and ways of their community.[27] Engaging in shared endeavors – with both the experienced and inexperienced – allows for the experienced to understand what the inexperienced need in order to grow in regards to the assessment of observational learning.[27] The involvement of the inexperienced, or the children in this matter, can either be furthered by the children’s learning or advancing into the activity performed by the assessment of observational learning.[28] Indigenous communities rely on observational learning as a way for their children to be a part of ongoing activities in the community (Tharp, 2006).
Although learning in the Indigenous American communities is not always the central focus when participating in an activity,[28] studies have shown that attention in intentional observation differs from accidental observation. Intentional participation is “keen observation and listening in anticipation of, or in the process of engaging in endeavors”. This means that when they have the intention of participating in an event, their attention is more focused on the details, compared to when they are accidentally observing.
Observational learning can be an active process in many Indigenous American communities. The learner must take initiative to attend to activities going on around them. Children in these communities also take initiative to contribute their knowledge in ways that will benefit their community. For example, in many Indigenous American cultures, children perform household chores without being instructed to do so by adults. Instead, they observe a need for their contributions, understand their role in their community, and take initiative to accomplish the tasks they have observed others doing.[30] The learner's intrinsic motivations play an important role in the child's understanding and construction of meaning in these educational experiences. The independence and responsibility associated with observational learning in many Indigenous American communities are significant reasons why this method of learning involves more than just watching and imitating. A learner must be actively engaged with their demonstrations and experiences in order to fully comprehend and apply the knowledge they obtain.[31]
Indigenous communities of the Americas[edit]
Mayan villagers
Children from indigenous heritage communities of the Americas often learn through observation, a strategy that can carry over into adulthood. The heightened value towards observation allows children to multi-task and actively engage in simultaneous activities. The exposure to an uncensored adult lifestyle allows children to observe and learn the skills and practices that are valued in their communities.[5] Children observe elders, parents, and siblings complete tasks and learn to participate in them. They are seen as contributors and learn to observe multiple tasks being completed at once and can learn to complete a task, while still engaging with other community members without being distracted.
Indigenous communities provide more opportunities to incorporate children in everyday life.[32] This can be seen in some Mayan communities where children are given full access to community events, which allows observational learning to occur more often.[32] Other children in Mazahua, Mexico are known to intensely observe ongoing activities.[32] In native northern Canadian and indigenous Mayan communities, children often learn as third-party observers from stories and conversations by others.[33] Most young Mayan children are carried on their mother's back, allowing them to observe their mother's work and see the world as their mother sees it.[34] Often, children in Indigenous American communities assume the majority of the responsibility for their learning. Additionally, children find their own approaches to learning.[35] Children are often allowed to learn without restrictions and with minimal guidance. They are encouraged to participate in the community even if they do not how to do the work. They are self-motivated to learn and finish their chores.[36] These children act as a second set of eyes and ears for their parents updating them about the community.[37]
Children aged 6 to 8 in an indigenous heritage community in Guadalajara, Mexico participated in hard work, such as cooking or running errands, to benefit the whole family, while those in the city of Guadalajara rarely did so. These children participated more in adult regulated activities and had little time to play, while those from the indigenous-heritage community had more time to play and initiate in their own after-school activities and had a higher sense of belonging to their community.[38]
Within certain indigenous communities people do not typically seek out explanation beyond basic observation. This is because they are competent in learning through astute observation. In a Guatemalan footloom factory amateur adult weavers observed skilled weavers over the course of weeks without questioning or being given explanations; the amateur weaver moved at their own pace and began when they felt confident.[32] The framework of learning how to weave through observation can serve as a model that groups within a society use as a reference to guide their actions in particular domains of life.[39] Communities that participate in observational learning promote tolerance and mutual understand of those coming from different cultural backgrounds.[40]
Other human and animal behavior experiments[edit]
When an animal is given a task to complete, they are almost always more successful after observing another animal doing the same task before them. Experiments have been conducted on several different species with the same effect: animals can learn behaviors from peers. However, there is a need to distinguish the propagation of behavior and the stability of behavior. Research has shown that social learning can spread a behavior, but there are more factors regarding how a behavior carries across generations of an animal culture.[41]
Learning in fish[edit]
Experiments with ninespine sticklebacks showed that individuals will use social learning to locate food.[41]
Social learning in pigeons[edit]
Pigeon
A study in 1996 at the University of Kentucky used a foraging device to test social learning in pigeons. A pigeon could access the food reward by either pecking at a treadle or stepping on it. Significant correspondence was found between the methods of how the observers accessed their food and the methods the initial model used in accessing the food.[42]
Acquiring foraging niches[edit]
Studies have been conducted at the University of Oslo and University of Saskatchewan regarding the possibility of social learning in birds, delineating the difference between cultural and genetic acquisition.[43] Strong evidence already exists for mate choice, bird song, predator recognition, and foraging.
Researchers cross-fostered eggs between nests of blue tits and great tits and observed the resulting behavior through audio-visual recording. Tits raised in the foster family learned their foster family's foraging sites early. This shift—from the sites the tits would among their own kind and the sites they learned from the foster parents—lasted for life. What young birds learn from foster parents, they eventually transmitted to their own offspring. This suggests cultural transmissions of foraging behavior over generations in the wild.[44]
Social learning in crows[edit]
The University of Washington studied this phenomenon with crows, acknowledging the evolutionary tradeoff between acquiring costly information firsthand and learning that information socially with less cost to the individual but at the risk of inaccuracy. The experimenters exposed wild crows to a unique “dangerous face” mask as they trapped, banded, and released 7-15 birds at five different study places around Seattle, WA. An immediate scolding response to the mask after trapping by previously captured crows illustrates that the individual crow learned the danger of that mask. There was a scolding from crows that were captured that had not been captured initially. That response indicates conditioning from the mob of birds that assembled during the capture.
Horizontal social learning (learning from peers) is consistent with the lone crows that recognized the dangerous face without ever being captured. Children of captured crow parents were conditioned to scold the dangerous mask, which demonstrates vertical social learning (learning from parents). The crows that were captured directly had the most precise discrimination between dangerous and neutral masks than the crows that learned from the experience of their peers. The ability of crows to learn doubled the frequency of scolding, which spread at least 1.2 km from where the experiment started to over a 5-year period at one site.[45]
Propagation of animal culture[edit]
Researchers at the Département d’Etudes Cognitives, Institut Jean Nicod, Ecole Normale Supérieure acknowledged a difficulty with research in social learning. To count acquired behavior as cultural, two conditions need must be met: the behavior must spread in a social group, and that behavior must be stable across generations. Research has provided evidence that imitation may play a role in the propagation of a behavior, but these researchers believe the fidelity of this evidence is not sufficient to prove stability of animal culture.
Other factors like ecological availability, reward-based factors, content-based factors, and source-based factors might explain the stability of animal culture in a wild rather than just imitation. As an example of ecological availability, chimps may learn how to fish for ants with a stick from their peers, but that behavior is also influenced by the particular type of ants as well as the condition. A behavior may be learned socially, but the fact that it was learned socially does not necessarily mean it will last. The fact that the behavior is rewarding has a role in cultural stability as well. The ability for socially-learned behaviors to stabilize across generations is also mitigated by the complexity of the behavior. Different individuals of a species, like crows, vary in their ability to use a complex tool. Finally, a behavior’s stability in animal culture depends on the context in which they learn a behavior. If a behavior has already been adopted by a majority, then the behavior is more likely to carry across generations out of a need for conforming.
Animals are able to acquire behaviors from social learning, but whether or not that behavior carries across generations requires more investigation.[46]
Hummingbird experiment[edit]
Experiments with hummingbirds provided one example of apparent observational learning in a non-human organism. Hummingbirds were divided into two groups. Birds in one group were exposed to the feeding of a knowledgeable "tutor" bird; hummingbirds in the other group did not have this exposure. In subsequent tests the birds that had seen a tutor were more efficient feeders than the others.[47]
Bottlenose dolphin[edit]
Herman (2002) suggested that bottlenose dolphins produce goal-emulated behaviors rather than imitative ones. A dolphin that watches a model place a ball in a basket might place the ball in the basket when asked to mimic the behavior, but it may do so in a different manner seen.[48]
Rhesus monkey[edit]
Kinnaman (1902) reported that one rhesus monkey learned to pull a plug from a box with its teeth to obtain food after watching another monkey succeed at this task.[49]
Fredman (2012) also performed an experiment on observational behavior. In experiment 1, human-raised monkeys observed a familiar human model open a foraging box using a tool in one of two alternate ways: levering or poking. In experiment 2, mother-raised monkeys viewed similar techniques demonstrated by monkey models. A control group in each population saw no model. In both experiments, independent coders detected which technique experimental subjects had seen, thus confirming social learning. Further analyses examined copying at three levels of resolution.
The human-raised monkeys exhibited the greatest learning with the specific tool use technique they saw. Only monkeys who saw the levering model used the lever technique, by contrast with controls and those who witnessed poking. Mother-reared monkeys instead typically ignored the tool and exhibited fidelity at a lower level, tending only to re-create whichever result the model had achieved by either levering or poking.
Nevertheless, this level of social learning was associated with significantly greater levels of success in monkeys witnessing a model than in controls, an effect absent in the human-reared population. Results in both populations are consistent with a process of canalization of the repertoire in the direction of the approach witnessed, producing a narrower, socially shaped behavioral profile than among controls who saw no model.[50]
Light box experiment[edit]
Pinkham and Jaswal (2011) did an experiment to see if a child would learn how to turn on a light box by watching a parent. They found that children who saw a parent use their head to turn on the light box tended to do the task in that manner, while children who had not seen the parent used their hands instead.[51]
Swimming skill performance[edit]
When adequate practice and appropriate feedback follow demonstrations, increased skill performance and learning occurs. Lewis (1974) did a study[52] of children who had a fear of swimming and observed how modelling and going over swimming practices affected their overall performance. The experiment spanned nine days, and included many steps. The children were first assessed on their anxiety and swimming skills. Then they were placed into one of three conditional groups and exposed to these conditions over a few days.
At the end of each day, all children participated in a group lesson. The first group was a control group where the children watched a short cartoon video unrelated to swimming. The second group was a peer mastery group, which watched a short video of similar-aged children who had very good task performances and high confidence. Lastly, the third group was a peer coping group, whose subjects watched a video of similar-aged children who progressed from low task performances and low confidence statements to high task performances and high confidence statements.
The day following the exposures to each condition, the children were reassessed. Finally, the children were also assessed a few days later for a follow up assessment. Upon reassessment, it was shown that the two model groups who watched videos of children similar in age had successful rates on the skills assessed because they perceived the models as informational and motivational.
Neuroscience[edit]
Recent research in neuroscience has implicated mirror neurons as a neurophysiological basis for observational learning.[53] These specialized visuomotor neurons fire action potentials when an individual performs a motor task and also fire when an individual passively observes another individual performing the same motor task.[54] In observational motor learning, the process begins with a visual presentation of another individual performing a motor task, this acts as a model. The learner then needs to transform the observed visual information into internal motor commands that will allow them to perform the motor task, this is known as visuomotor transformation.[55] Mirror neuron networks provide a mechanism for visuo-motor and motor-visual transformation and interaction. Similar networks of mirror neurons have also been implicated in social learning, motor cognition and social cognition.[56]
See also[edit]
Cognitive imitation
Inference
Machine learning
Educational psychology
Educational technology
Imitation
Hypercorrection
Social learning theory
Social learning tools
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Shettleworth, S. J. "Cognition, Evolution, and Behavior", 2010 (2nd ed.) New York:Oxford,
Jump up ^ Bandura, A. (1971) "Psychological Modelling".New York: Lieber-Antherton
Jump up ^ Schacter, Gilbert, & Wegner, D. L., D.T., & D. M. (2011). Psychology. Worth Publishers. p. 295. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
^ Jump up to: a b Garton, A. F. (2007). Learning through collaboration: Is there a multicultural perspective?. AIP. pp. 195–216.
^ Jump up to: a b c Hughes, Claire (2011). Hughes, Claire. (2011) Social Understanding and Social Lives. New York, Ny: Psychology Press.
Jump up ^ "Most Human Behavior is learned Through Modeling".
^ Jump up to: a b Fleer, M. (2003). "Early Childhood Education as an Evolving 'Community of Practice' or as Lived 'Social Reproduction': researching the 'taken-for-granted'" (PDF). Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. 4 (1): 64–79. doi:10.2304/ciec.2003.4.1.7.
Jump up ^ Bandura, Albert. "Observational Learning." Learning and Memory. Ed. John H. Byrne. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 482-484. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 6 Oct. 2014. Document URL http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3407100173&v=2.1&u=cuny_hunter&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=06f2484b425a0c9f9606dff1b2a86c18
Jump up ^ Weiss, Maureen R.; Ebbeck, Vicki; Rose, Debra J. (1992). ""Show and tell" in the gymnasium revisited: Developmental differences in modeling and verbal rehearsal effects on motor skill learning and performance". Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 63 (3): 292–301. doi:10.1080/02701367.1992.10608745. PMID 1513960.
Jump up ^ Weiss, Maureen et al. (1998). Observational Learning and the Fearful Child: Influence of Peer Models on Swimming Skill Performance and Psychological Responses. 380-394
Jump up ^ Shimpi, Priya M.; Akhtar, Nameera; Moore, Chris (2013). "Toddlers' Imitative Learning in Interactive and Observational Contexts: The Role of Age and Familiarity of the Model". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 116 (2): 309–23. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2013.06.008. PMID 23896415.
Jump up ^ Meltzoff, A (1988). "Infants imitation after 1-week delay: Long -Term memory for novel acts and multiple stimuli". Developmental Psychology. 24 (4): 470–476. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.24.4.470. PMC 4137879  . PMID 25147404.
Jump up ^ Bandura, A. (1989). Social Cognitive Theory. In R. Vasta (ED.), Annals of child Development: Vol. 6. Theories of child development: Revised formulation and current issue (pp.1-60). Greenwich, CT : JAI Press
Jump up ^ Law, Barbi; Hall, Craig (2009). "The Relationships Among Skill Level, Age, and Golfers' Observational Learning Use". Sport Psychologist. 23 (1): 42.
Jump up ^ Meltzoff, A. N.; Waismeyer, A.; Gopnik, A. (2012). "Learning about causes from people: Observational causal learning in 24-month-old infants". Developmental Psychology. 48 (5): 1215–1228. doi:10.1037/a0027440. PMC 3649070  . PMID 22369335.
Jump up ^ Zentall, Thomas R (2012). "Perspectives On Observational Learning In Animals". Journal of Comparative Psychology. 126 (2): 114–128. doi:10.1037/a0025381.
Jump up ^ Riopelle, A.J. (1960). "Observational learning of a position habit by monkeys". Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology. 53 (5): 426–428. doi:10.1037/h0046480.
Jump up ^ Heyes, C. M. (1993). "Imitation, culture and cognition". Animal Behaviour. 46 (5): 999–1010. doi:10.1006/anbe.1993.1281.
Jump up ^ Dewey, John (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: Macmillan Co.
^ Jump up to: a b Gaskins, Paradise. The Anthropology of Learning in Childhood. Alta Mira Press. pp. Chapter 5.
Jump up ^ McLaughlin, L. J.; Brinley, J. F. (1973). "Age and observational learning of a multiple-classification task". Developmental Psychology. 9 (1): 9–15. doi:10.1037/h0035069.
Jump up ^ Groenendijk, Talita; Janssen, Tanja; Rijlaarsdam, Gert; Huub Van, Den Bergh (2013). "Learning to Be Creative. The Effects of Observational Learning on Students' Design Products and Processes". Learning and Instruction. 28: 35–47. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.001.
Jump up ^ Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 248 pp.
Jump up ^ Spence, K. W. (1937). "Experimental studies of learning and higher mental processes in infra-human primates". Psychological Bulletin. 34 (10): 806–850. doi:10.1037/h0061498.
Jump up ^ Haggerty, M. E. (1909). "Imitation in monkeys". Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology. 19 (4): 337–455. doi:10.1002/cne.920190402.
Jump up ^ Schaffer, David et al. (2010). Developmental Psychology, Childhood and Adolescence. 284
^ Jump up to: a b c Cole, M. "Culture and early childhood learning" (PDF). Retrieved 15 November 2012.
^ Jump up to: a b c Mejia-Arauz, R.; Rogoff, B.; Paradise, R. (2005). "Cultural variation in children's observation during a demonstration". International Journal of Behavioral Development. 29 (4): 282–291. doi:10.1177/01650250544000062.
Jump up ^ Rogoff, Barbara. "Cultural Variation in Children's Attention and Learning." N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. PsycINFO. Web.
Jump up ^ Coppens, A., Alcala, L., Mejia-Arauz, R., Rogoff, B. (2014). "Children's Initiative in Family Household Work in Mexico". Human Development. 57 (2–3): 116–130. doi:10.1159/000356768. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Jump up ^ Gaskins, Suzanne. "Open attention as a cultural tool for observational learning" (PDF). Kellogg Institute for International Studies University of Notre Dame. Retrieved 7 May 2014.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Rogoff, Barbara; Paradise, R.; Arauz, R.; Correa-Chavez, M. (2003). "Firsthand learning through intent participation". Annual Review of Psychology. 54: 175–203. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145118. PMID 12499516.
Jump up ^ Rogoff, Barbara; Paradise, Ruth; Correa-Chavez, M; Arauz, R (2003). "Firsthand Learning through Intent Participation". Annual Review of Psychology. 54: 175–203. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145118. PMID 12499516.
Jump up ^ Modiano,, Nancy (1973). Indian education in the Chiapas Highlands. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. pp. 33–40. ISBN 0030842379.
Jump up ^ Paradise, Ruth; Rogoff, Rogoff (2009). "Side By Side: Learning By Observing and Pitching In" (PDF). Ethos. 37 (1): 102–138.
Jump up ^ Gaskins, Suzanne (Nov 1, 2000). "Children's Daily Activities in a Mayan Village: A Culturally Grounded Description". Cross-Cultural Research. 34: 375–389. doi:10.1177/10693971000340040 (inactive 2017-11-29).
Jump up ^ Rogoff, Barbara; Mosier, Christine; Misty, Jayanthi; Göncü, Artin (Jan 1, 1989). "Toddlers' Guided Participation in Cultural Activity". Cultural Dynamics. 2: 209–237. doi:10.1177/092137408900200205.
Jump up ^ Children's Initiative in Contributions to Family Work in Indigenous-Heritage and Cosmopolitan Communities in Mexico. (2014). 57(2-3).
Jump up ^ Gee, J.; Green, J (1998). "Discourse analysis, learning and social practice: A methodological study". Review of Research and Education.
Jump up ^ Often, children in Indigenous American communities find their own approach to learning and assume most of the responsibility for their learning.
^ Jump up to: a b Frith, Chris D., and Uta Frith. "Mechanisms Of Social Cognition." Annual Review Of Psychology 2012; 63.: 287-313
Jump up ^ Zentall, T. R.; Sutton, J. E.; Sherburne, L. M. (1996). "True imitative learning in pigeons". Psychological Science. 7 (6): 343–346. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00386.x.
Jump up ^ Slagsvold, Tore (2011). "Social learning in birds and its role in shaping a foraging niche" (PDF). Retrieved Jan 18, 2016.
Jump up ^ Slagsvold, T.; Wiebe, K. L. (2011). "Social learning in birds and its role in shaping a foraging niche". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 366 (1567): 969–977. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0343. PMC 3049099  . PMID 21357219.
Jump up ^ Cornell, H. N., Marzluff, J. M., & Pecoraro, S. (2012). Social learning spreads knowledge about dangerous humans among american crows. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,
Jump up ^ Claidiere, N.; Sperber, D. (2010). "Imitation explains the propagation, not the stability of animal culture". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 277 (1681): 651–659. doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.1615.
Jump up ^ Altshuler, D.; Nunn, A. (2001). "Obeservational learning in hummingbirds". The Auk. 118 (3): 795–799. doi:10.2307/4089948.
Jump up ^ Herman, L. M. (2002). Vocal, social, and self-imitation by bottlenosed dolphins. In K. Dautenhahn & C. Nehaniv (Eds.), Imitation in animals and artifacts (pp. 63–108). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jump up ^ Kinnaman, A. J. (1902). "Mental life of two Macacus rhesus monkeys in captivity". The American Journal of Psychology. 13 (2): 173–218. doi:10.2307/1412738. JSTOR 1412738.
Jump up ^ Fredman, Tamar; Whiten, Andrew (2008). "Observational Learning from Tool using Models by Human-Reared and Mother-Reared Capuchin Monkeys (Cebus Apella)". Animal Cognition. 11 (2): 295–309. doi:10.1007/s10071-007-0117-0. PMID 17968602.
Jump up ^ Pinkham, A.M.; Jaswal, V.K. (2011). "Watch and learn? Infants privilege efficiency over pedagogy during imitative learning". Infancy. 16 (5): 535–544. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7078.2010.00059.x.
Jump up ^ Weiss, Maureen et al. (1998). Observational Learning and the Fearful Child: Influence of Peer Models n Swimming Skill Performance and Psychological Responses. 380–394
Jump up ^ Lago-Rodríguez, A.; Cheeran, B.; Koch, G.; Hortobagy, T.; Fernandez-del-Olmo, M. (2014). "The role of mirror neurons in observational motor learning: an integrative review". European Journal of Human Movement. 32: 82–103.
Jump up ^ Rizzolatti, G.; Fogassi, L. (2014). "The mirror mechanism: recent findings and perspectives". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 369 (1644): 20130420. doi:10.1098/rstb.2013.0420. PMC 4006191  . PMID 24778385.
Jump up ^ Jeannerod, M.; Arbib, M. A.; Rizzolatti, G.; Sakata, H. (1995). "Grasping objects: the cortical mechanisms of visuomotor transformation". Trends in Neurosciences. 18 (7): 314–320. doi:10.1016/0166-2236(95)93921-j.
Jump up ^ Uddin, L. Q.; Iacoboni, M.; Lange, C.; Keenan, J. P. (2007). "The self and social cognition: the role of cortical midline structures and mirror neurons". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 11 (4): 153–157. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.01.001. PMID 17300981.
Further reading on animal social learning[edit]
Galef, B.G.; Laland, K.N. (2005). "Social learning in animals: Empirical studies and theoretical models". BioScience. 55 (6): 489–499. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0489:sliaes]2.0.co;2.
Zentall, T.R. (2006). Imitation: Definitions, evidence, and mechanisms. Animal Cognition, 9 335–353. (A thorough review of different types of social learning) Full text
[hide]
v
t
e
Learning
Simple non-associative learning
Habituation
Sensitization
Associative learning
Operant conditioning
Classical conditioning
Imprinting
Observational learning
Insight learning
Deductive reasoning
Inductive reasoning
Abductive reasoning
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Observational_learning&oldid=812637924"
Categories:
Social learning theory
Behavioral concepts
Learning
Animal cognition
Hidden categories:
CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list
Pages with DOIs inactive since 2017
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from January 2016
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
Čeština
Deutsch
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Bahasa Melayu
Português
Русский
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 29 November 2017, at 00:37.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: href class title

values:
/wiki/Social_learning_(disambiguation)
mw-redirect mw-disambig
Social learning (disambiguation)

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: b

attrs: href title

values: /wiki/Friend mw-redirect Friend

value: sup

value: p

values: Edit section: Human observational learning

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/Child_Integration
mw-redirect
Child Integration

values: Edit section: Observational causal learning

values: Edit section: Comparisons with imitation

values: Child development of the indigenous peoples of the Americas

values: Edit section: Learning without imitation

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (January 2016)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values: Edit section: Indigenous communities of the Americas

values: Learning by Observing and Pitching In (page does not exist)

values: Edit section: Other human and animal behavior experiments

values: Edit section: Social learning in pigeons

values: Edit section: Propagation of animal culture

values:
/wiki/Bottlenose_dolphins
mw-redirect
Bottlenose dolphins

values:
/wiki/Rhesus_monkey
mw-redirect
Rhesus monkey

values: Edit section: Swimming skill performance

values: Category:CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2304%2Fciec.2003.4.1.7

values:
/wiki/PubMed_Identifier
mw-redirect
PubMed Identifier

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1513960

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jecp.2013.06.008

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23896415

attrs: alt src title width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25147404

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1037%2Fa0027440

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22369335

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1037%2Fa0025381

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1037%2Fh0046480

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1006%2Fanbe.1993.1281

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1037%2Fh0035069

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1037%2Fh0061498

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1002%2Fcne.920190402

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1159%2F000356768

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12499516

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1098%2Frstb.2010.0343

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21357219

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1098%2Frspb.2009.1615

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F4089948

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F1412738

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/1412738

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17968602

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1098%2Frstb.2013.0420

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24778385

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.tics.2007.01.001

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17300981

values: Edit section: Further reading on animal social learning

values:
/wiki/Insight_learning
mw-redirect
Insight learning

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Pages with DOIs inactive since 2017

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from January 2016

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Observational_learning
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: Имитационное научение – Russian

values: Опсервационо учење – Serbian

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Observational_learning rootpage-Observational_learning skin-vector action-view


text:
Who's Gonna Save My Soul
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul"
Single by Gnarls Barkley
from the album The Odd Couple
B-side
"Mystery Man"
Released
September 4, 2008
Format
CD single, DVD single
Recorded
2008
Genre
Alternative hip hop, soul, R&B
Length
3:17
Label
Warner Music
Songwriter(s)
Danger Mouse
Cee-Lo Green
Producer(s)
Danger Mouse
Gnarls Barkley singles chronology
"Going On"
(2008) "Who's Gonna Save My Soul"
(2008)
"Going On"
(2008) "Who's Gonna Save My Soul"
(2008)
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" is the third and final single taken from hip-hop duo Gnarls Barkley's second studio album, The Odd Couple, released in late 2008. The song's official music video was directed by Chris Milk and was released on July 25, 2008.[1] The video featured work by character animator Keith Sintay.[2][3] The single was only released physically in America, in a special limited edition CD + DVD single package.[4]
Contents
[hide]
1 Track listing
2 Music video
3 Reception
4 Critical reception
5 References
6 External links
Track listing[edit]
[4]
Disc 1 - CD
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" (Original Mix)
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" (MTV Live 52 Version)
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" (Demo Version)
"Mystery Man"
"Neighbors" (Live From The 40 Watt)
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" (Instrumental)
Disc 2 - DVD
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" (Video)
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" (Subtitled Version)
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" (MTV Live 52 Version)
"Mystery Man"
"A Little Better" (MTV Live 52 Version)
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul" (Making Of The Video)
"Neighbors" (Live From The 40 Watt)
Music video[edit]
A couple sits at a booth in a diner, while the woman (Friday Night Lights star Aasha Davis) breaks up with her boyfriend (Saturday Night Live writer and The Lonely Island band member Jorma Taccone). After receiving the plate he requested from the waitress, the man stabs himself in the chest, and pulls out his heart, places it on the plate and gives it to the woman. He explains that his heart "is actually [hers] now," that he will never be able to get over her, and says "from now on every girl that I meet will be meticulously compared to the false memory of what you and I once 'had.'" The woman offers to return it after keeping it temporarily for a "shitty day" or when she needs to move something heavy, but the man insists that he is now "heartless" and thus will passively/aggressively ruin all his future relationships. The heart then comes to life, growing arms, legs and a mouth, and begins to sing the lyrics to the song on the counters of the diner using a piece of broccoli as a microphone before finally stabbing itself with a knife and pulling the man's head out of its body. The head looks around, staring off into space. The scene cuts back to the man staring out the window as the woman speaks. The woman finally asks, "Are you even listening to me?" The man simply replies "No." Cee-Lo and Danger Mouse also made cameos as chefs in the diner.
Reception[edit]
The song found popular acclaim: Entertainment Weekly put the video on its "Must List" and Rolling Stone on its "Hot List" in August 2008.[5][6] On December 3, 2008, the video was nominated for the Grammy Award for Best Short Form Music Video. Sintay won a 2009 D&AD Yellow Pencil Award for Music Video Animation.[3]
Critical reception[edit]
Billboard magazine said of the single, "Cee-Lo scorches the vocal hook--"Who's gonna save my soul now?"—and it stops the moderately paced dance cut dead in its tracks."[7] The magazine also said it "might be his finest performance to date."[8] Entertainment Weekly called the song "dolefully paced: and "nearly dirgelike,"[9] while People called it "a gritty, gospel-infused plea."[10] Performing Songwriter praised the song as "a stark song with plucked strings and bass so heavy and distant it could be a psychic echo."[11] USA Today said of the single, "Nobody lays bare their broken heart more painfully or more plaintively than Cee-Lo," and named the tune its "Pick of the Week" in late January 2009.[12] It was featured in the closing scene of the final episode of the first season of the AMC original series Breaking Bad[13] and Detroit 1-8-7 in its 17th episode.
References[edit]
Jump up ^ 7/23/08. "Who's Gonna Save My Soul | Gnarls Barkley | Music Video". MTV. Retrieved 2012-03-15.
Jump up ^ "Keith Sintay Animation". Keithsintay.com. Retrieved 2012-03-15.
^ Jump up to: a b http://awards.dandad.org/2009/categories/musv/music-videos/20421/whos-gonna-save-my-soul
^ Jump up to: a b "Images for Gnarls Barkley - Who's Gonna Save My Soul". Discogs.com. Retrieved 2012-03-15.
Jump up ^ No byline (August 8, 2008), "The MUST LIST". Entertainment Weekly. (1005):74
Jump up ^ No byline (August 21, 2008), "HOT LIST". Rolling Stone. (1059):22
Jump up ^ Martens, Todd (July 14, 2007), "CRAZY TRAIN". Billboard. 119 (28):16-18
Jump up ^ Vrabel, Jeff (March 22, 2008), "THE DARK SIDE OF GNARLS". Billboard. 120 (12):19-21
Jump up ^ Greenblatt, Leah (March 28, 2008), "Less'Crazy'". Entertainment Weekly (984):65
Jump up ^ Arnold, Chuck (April 14, 2008), "Gnarls Barkley". People. 69 (14):41
Jump up ^ No byline (May 2008), "The Odd Couple". Performing Songwriter. 15 (109):28
Jump up ^ Jones, Steve (January 27, 2009), "Pick of the week". USA Today
Jump up ^ Second Gnarls Barkley Disc Due April 8
External links[edit]
Lyrics of this song at MetroLyrics
[hide]
v
t
e
Gnarls Barkley
CeeLo Green
Danger Mouse
Studio albums
St. Elsewhere
The Odd Couple
Singles
"Crazy"
"Smiley Faces"
"Who Cares?/Gone Daddy Gone"
"Run (I'm a Natural Disaster)"
"Going On"
"Who's Gonna Save My Soul"
Related articles
Discography
Dot Hacker
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Who%27s_Gonna_Save_My_Soul&oldid=751041041"
Categories:
2008 singles
Gnarls Barkley songs
Song recordings produced by Danger Mouse (musician)
Music videos directed by Chris Milk
Soul ballads
2008 songs
Songs written by CeeLo Green
Warner Music Group singles
Songs written by Danger Mouse (musician)
Hidden categories:
Articles with hAudio microformats
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Português
Edit links
This page was last edited on 23 November 2016, at 00:38.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: th

attrs: colspan class style

value: tr

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: Gnarls Barkley Who's Gonna Save My Soul.jpg

attrs: href class

value: td

attrs: colspan style

value: i

value: span

values: width: 33%; text-align: center; vertical-align: top; padding: .2em .1em .2em 0;

values: width: 33%; text-align: center; vertical-align: top; padding:.2em .1em;

values: width: 33%; text-align: center; vertical-align: top; padding: .2em 0 .2em .1em;

values: background: transparent; width: 100%; min-width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse;

values: width:33%; padding:.2em .1em .2em 0; text-align: center;

values: width:33%; padding:.2em .1em; text-align: center;

values: width:33%; padding:.2em 0 .2em .1em; text-align: center;

values:
/wiki/Cee-Lo_Green
mw-redirect
Cee-Lo Green

values:
/wiki/AMC_(TV_network)
mw-redirect
AMC (TV network)

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.keithsintay.com

values:
Gnarls_Barkley
fn org
font-size:114%;margin:0 4em

values:
navbox-abovebelow
2
background: #EEEEEE;

values:
row
navbox-group
width:1%;background: #EEEEEE;

values: nowraplinks vcard hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Song recordings produced by Danger Mouse (musician)

values: Category:Music videos directed by Chris Milk

values: Category:Songs written by Danger Mouse (musician)

values: Category:Articles with hAudio microformats

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Who%27s_Gonna_Save_My_Soul
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Who_s_Gonna_Save_My_Soul rootpage-Who_s_Gonna_Save_My_Soul skin-vector action-view


text:
United States news media and the Vietnam War
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The role of media in outbreaks of news played a vital role in dramatic shifts of opinion during the Vietnam War. In the beginning of the war, the U.S. media was not interested in covering stories out of Vietnam with only the most breaking news covered. After the death of civilians against President Ngo Dinh Diem of Vietnam, the U.S. media began to take more interest in the war. Journalists began arriving in Vietnam to be the first to cover any stories that emerged.
As the war went on, the U.S. media began to change its main source of information. Journalists began to focus more on research, interviews and analytical essays to obtain information instead of press conferences, official news releases and reports of official proceedings. With an increase in American households that obtained a television set, more and more citizens were able to keep up with the war. Although it was useful to have all information acquired during the war, the media played a huge role in what the American people saw and believed. Journalists that visited Vietnam during the war were not interested in the culture of Vietnam or any aspect of the way of life practiced in that area. Instead, they only focused on the negative and reinforced the American people with the worst of Vietnam. The media played the information to look like Vietnam was in the wrong and the only one at fault.
The United States government was painting one picture of the war, while the media was painting another. The government made the war to look more glorious and optimistic than reality. Once media's view on the war was accessible to citizens, they began to see a difference in the way the war was being portrayed. The media allowed the audience to see the reality of the war and what was going on politically. US citizens felt betrayed by their government for painting a wrongful picture of the war. The people felt they weren't being told the full truth, which ultimately led to an increase in public pressure to end the war.
Vietnam War
Contents
[hide]
1 Early days, 1960–1965
1.1 Ap Bac
1.2 Buddhist Crisis
1.3 Problems
2 Escalation, 1965–1967
3 The Tet Offensive, 1968
4 Withdrawal, 1969–1973
4.1 Changes
4.2 Last years
5 References
Early days, 1960–1965[edit]
Before the 1960s, The U.S. media had no interest in Vietnam. American journalists followed events only when breaking news happened in the region. Those who covered the beginning of the war in Vietnam were reporting only the rise of communism in the country. The official agencies that handled the press in Vietnam during the early years had little control over what the reporters wrote. The French colonial government set up a system of censorship, but correspondents who traveled to Singapore or Hong Kong said what they wanted.[1] American reporters who went to Vietnam at the beginning of the 1960s were reporting the story, while the government in America was telling them to get on the field.[citation needed]
During this period, what was published in the news reflected what America was most preoccupied with: communism and the Cold War. If one asks instead how the United States got into Vietnam, attention must be paid to the enormous strength of the Cold War consensus in the early 1960s shared by journalists and policymakers alike and to the great power of the administration to control the agenda and the framing of foreign affairs reporting.[2]
The first editorial about the rise of communism in Vietnam was published by The New York Times in January 1955. In the same way after the United States threw its weight behind Ngo Dinh Diem, who became South Vietnam’s president in 1955, journals in the United States ignored the new leader's despotic tendencies and instead highlighted his anticommunism.[1] The death of civilians in a coup against President Diem at the end of 1960 started to change how Vietnam was viewed by the media. As a result, the New York Times sent the first reporter to Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam. This was followed by other journalists arriving from Reuters, AFP, Time and Newsweek. The basic policy governing how the US mission in Saigon handled these reporters reflected the way the administration of President John F. Kennedy conceived of the American role in the war. Under that framework, the Americans' role in South Vietnam was only to render advice and support in that nation’s war against the Communists.[3]
Ap Bac[edit]
In January 1963, South Vietnamese forces engaged the communists at the Battle of Ap Bac. The reporting of what became a debacle for the South Vietnamese military and the condemnation heaped upon it by the Western press became a cause célèbre at the time.[4] Both the US mission and Washington condemned the reports and questioned the motives of the correspondents involved. The Kennedy administration then went on the offensive, bombarding news editors in the US with complaints concerning the accuracy of the reporting of the Saigon press corporations. The chain of events led to the interesting conundrum of American periodicals attacking the accuracy of their own on-the-spot reporters.[5] The correspondents, however, did not question the black-and-white assumptions of the time that the war was a part of the larger struggle between the free world and totalitarianism or whether the war was beyond America's ability to win. They perceived their issues with the Saigon government as a conflict over tactics, not principles; Diem's government and military were hindering a positive solution to the problem. According to the reporters, the solution was for the US to get rid of Diem or take over direct control of the war itself.[6]
Although the US mission was irate over the reporting of the battle, even the U.S. Public Information Office (PIO) in Saigon had to admit, from partial information on an emotional subject, the reporting was "two-thirds accurate" and that the correspondents had done quite respectably.[7] Ap Bac and the controversy surrounding it, however, marked a permanent divide in the relations between the official U.S. position and the news media in Vietnam. Before the battle, the media had criticized Diem and argued for more U.S. control of the war, but they were still agreeable to the position of the diplomats and the U.S. military assistance command. After it, correspondents became steadily more convinced that they (and, by extension, the American people) were being lied to and withdrew, embittered, into their own community.[8]
Buddhist Crisis[edit]
This situation was only exacerbated during the Buddhist Crisis of May 1963, when the Diem government considered the foreign press as its enemy and was unwilling to communicate its side of the story effectively.[9] While the top levels of the U.S. mission in Saigon were inordinately closemouthed around reporters during this period, others, especially those who disagreed with the policy of supporting Diem, were not. They leaked information from discussions with Diem to the press, embarrassing him and thwarting the embassy's vigorous efforts to win and end to the anti-Buddhist repressions.[10] Once again, however, despite occasional factual errors and conflict between the press and the embassy, most of the news commentaries were reasonably accurate. The U.S. Army's official history of military-media relations reported that "Although marred at times by rhetoric and mistaken facts, they often probed to the heart of the crisis."[11] During the Buddhist Crisis the number of correspondents in South Vietnam swelled from an original nucleus of eight to a contingent of over 60.
By 1964 the leadership of both the U.S. and South Vietnam had changed hands. President John F. Kennedy had been felled by an assassin's bullets and Diem had been murdered during a U.S.-backed military coup. Instead of paving the way for political stability, however, Diem's demise only unleashed a maelstrom of political unrest. Coup followed coup as South Vietnamese generals vied for power. There were seven governments in Saigon during 1964 - three between 16 August and 3 September alone. The war in South Vietnam ground on and the communists were making serious headway. Following the recommendations of an internal report, the new U.S. headquarters, the Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV), made the decision that since news correspondents were "thoroughly knowledgeable" about the war, its Joint United States Public Affairs Office (JUSPAO) would attempt to woo reporters by providing them with "up to date, factual information on current operations and policies."[12]
Problems[edit]
Although Operation Candor was a welcome relief for correspondents, it did not halt the media's dubiousness concerning the efficacy of the Saigon government or further American involvement with it. Reporters had also become quite aware that all sides (the South Vietnamese and American governments, the U.S. mission, MACV, the Buddhists, and the communists) were trying to manipulate them.[13] It did not help matters that JUSPAO was also MACV's propaganda arm, a fact that was well known to news correspondents. The American public was also dissatisfied with the course of events in Vietnam. A January 1965 Gallup poll indicated that two out of three Americans agreed that the country would never form a stable government and that four out of five Americans felt that the communists were winning. Few, however, wanted a unilateral U.S. withdrawal and 50 percent believed that the U.S. was obliged to defend independent nations from communist aggression.[14]
At this early stage of the war (and continuing to its end) the South Vietnamese people themselves were viewed by the media with the condescension, contempt, and disdain that characterized the American attitude toward them. The media exhibited the "Cold War myopia, ethnocentrism, cultural bias, and racism embedded in American ideology."[15] American journalists arrived in Vietnam with almost no knowledge of its culture, history, society, or language, nor did they attempt to learn. This was due in part to the short 6-12 month period most newspeople spent on rotation in South Vietnam, providing little incentive for reporters to learn the language.[16] Although the U.S. Department of Defense offered a brief introductory course for journalists on the history and culture of Vietnam, few attended it.[17] Meanwhile, none of the networks trained their correspondents to understand military matters.[16] Although the "pacification" of South Vietnam's villages was the continuously touted supreme goal of the Saigon government, the U.S. Mission, MACV, and the media, there was little real discussion within the media as to why it was so difficult to convince the Vietnamese peasantry to join the side of the Saigon government.
As for the armed forces of the North Vietnamese and National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam (NLF), American readers rarely encountered the argument that the communists were waging a war of reunification rather than "a campaign to further the interests of a communist conspiracy masterminded by the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union."[18] The domino theory was utilized to justify the American intervention in order to prevent regional domination by China, overlooking centuries of hostility between the Vietnamese and the Chinese.[18] Throughout the war communist troops were continuously portrayed as "brutal, cruel, fanatic, sinister, untrustworthy, and warlike". Most depictions of [them] employed hateful imagery or reinforced racial stereotypes of the era associated with Asians."[19] Asian stereotypes extended to the American soldiers' view of their South Vietnamese allies too;[20] most effectively never met a South Vietnamese soldier or really knew the farmer and peasant in the field.[21] The media went so far as to follow the lead of the American military by refusing to refer to communist forces by their correct titles. NLF forces were referred to by the term Viet Cong (despite its wide usage, "Viet Cong", which means "Vietnamese Communist", is considered pejorative [22]) and northern troops of the People's Army of Vietnam as the North Vietnamese Army, or NVA.
Escalation, 1965–1967[edit]
From 40 in 1964, the press corps in South Vietnam had grown to 282 by January 1966. By August that number had jumped to 419. Of the 282 at the beginning of the year, only 110 were Americans. 67 were South Vietnamese, 26 Japanese, 24 British, 13 Korean, 11 French, and seven German. Of the Americans present, 72 were more than thirty-one years old, and 60 of them were over the age of thirty-six. The same was true of the 143 non-Americans.[23] Correspondents with valid accreditations had to show their credentials in order to receive a card that gave them access to military transportation and facilities. All other correspondents had to present a letter from their editors stating that they represented a bona-fide news-gathering organization which would take responsibility for their conduct. Freelance correspondents were required to produce a letter from one of their clients affirming that agency's willingness to purchase their work.[24]
The U.S. Mission and MACV also installed an "information czar", the U.S. Mission's Minister-Counselor for Public Affairs, Barry Zorthian, to advise Westmoreland on public affairs matters and who had theoretical responsibility under the ambassador for the development of all information policy. He maintained liaison between the embassy, MACV, and the press; publicized information to refute erroneous and misleading news stories; and sought to assist the Saigon correspondents in covering the side of the war most favorable to the policies of the U.S. government.[25] Zorthian possessed both experience with the media and a great deal of patience and tact while maintaining reasonably good relations with the press corps. Media correspondents were invited to attend nightly MACV briefings covering the day's events that became known as the Five O'Clock Follies, most correspondents considering these briefings to be a waste of time.[26] The Saigon bureau chiefs were also often invited to closed sessions at which presentations would be made by a briefing officer, the CIA station chief, or an official from the embassy who would present background or off-the-record information on upcoming military operations or Vietnamese political events.[27]
According to Daniel Hallin, the dramatic structure of the uncensored "living room war" as reported during 1965–1967 remained simple and traditional: "the forces of good were locked in battle once again with the forces of evil. What began to change in 1967 ... was the conviction that the forces of good would inevitably prevail."[28] During late 1967 MACV had also begun to disregard the decision it had made at the Honolulu Conference that the military should leave the justification of the war to elected officials in Washington. The military found itself drawn progressively into politics, to the point that it had become as involved in "selling" the war to the American public as the political appointees it served.[29] This change would have far-reaching detrimental effects.
The Tet Offensive, 1968[edit]
An American man and woman watching footage of the Vietnam War on television in their living room, February 1968
By 1968, America had officially been at war with Vietnam for four years, but U.S. involvement in Vietnamese affairs went back as far as the early 1950s, when France required aid from the U.S., as well as South Vietnam, essentially a puppet state of the U.S., in maintaining control over French Indochina, and public support of the war had begun to wane. In January 1968, Vietcong troops launched a surprise attack in South Vietnam, known as the Tet Offensive; one of the points of attack was the U.S. embassy at Saigon.[30] Though U.S. troops were able to fend off the Vietcong and ultimately prevailed militarily, this attack signaled a turning point in both U.S. troop morale and in public trust of the government's reports on the progress of the war, as many Americans had no idea that the Vietcong were capable of infiltrating American and South Vietnamese headquarters the way that they did. Many Americans were unaware of the extent of the brutality involved in the war, but the Tet Offensive changed that, and American television cameras were available firsthand to record footage of the bombing of cities and the execution of prisoners of war.[31]
Although admittance to North Vietnam by western correspondents was difficult, it was possible, especially when the authorities, who heavily oversaw and restricted any such visit saw an advantage in the situation. During a bombing halt in September 1967, Harrison E. Salisbury of the New York Times became the first correspondent from a major US newspaper to go to North Vietnam. His reporting of the bombing damage to civilian targets forced the Pentagon to admit that accidents and "collateral damage" had occurred during the bombing campaign. For his effort, Salisbury received heavy condemnation and criticism from his peers, the administration, and the Pentagon.[32] Other correspondents who later made the journey to North Vietnam included Mary McCarthy, Anthony Lewis, and Michael McLear from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and R. K. Karanjia from India, and Agence France Presse maintained a bureau there throughout the war.[33]
The highly dangerous task of reporting with the NLF and North Vietnamese forces in the South was left to Wilfred Burchett, an Australian who had begun reporting on the war in 1963. He freelanced for the Japanese Mainichi group, the British communist daily The Morning Star, and the American National Guardian. Burchett made no pretense of his communist sympathies, but his reporting of communist schools, arsenals, hospitals, administrative structure, and logistics made what Phillip Knightley called "intriguing reading."[33] Because he reported from the Communist side, Burchett was regarded by many in Australia as a traitor and was persona non grata with the Australian government, but he also possessed extraordinary information.[34] He was later joined by Madeleine Riffaud, of the French communist newspaper L'Humanité.
Perhaps the most famous image of the Tet Offensive, a photo that was taken by Eddie Adams, was the photograph that depicted a Vietnamese man being executed by the Southern Vietnamese General, General Nguyen Ngoc Loan. The photo shows the moment of death for the young man.[35] Adams won a prize for his iconic photo, which was said to be more influential than the video that was released of the same execution. The impact that the photos had on the American public was astounding. Support for the war plummeted, and though two hundred thousand troops were requested at the beginning of the Offensive, the request was denied.[36] Adams had another photo published that, while not making as big as an impact as his other photo, was certainly gruesome. The image depicted a soldier, who appears to be a child, dead and lying on the side of the road, with a group of civilians looking down at the body. It was published on May 5, 1968.[37]
The media's role in bringing a strikingly different depiction of the war into American homes than the government had done signaled a shift in where the American public lay its trust, increasingly toward media reports about the war and increasingly away from federal reports about the war. Many researchers now agree that "across the political spectrum, the relation between the media and the government during Vietnam was in fact one of conflict: the media contradicted the more positive view of the war officials sought to project, and for better or for worse it was the journalists' view that prevailed with the public, whose disenchantment forced an end to American involvement."[38]
Withdrawal, 1969–1973[edit]
Many Americans felt betrayed by the government for withholding or deliberately manipulating information about the progress of the war, and once they saw on their televisions and read in their newspapers firsthand a less optimistic version of the war than the government had painted, public pressure to withdraw American power from Vietnam mounted until the government yielded and began to withdraw troops under Nixon in July 1969 (though the last troops would not be withdrawn until 1973).[39] Additionally, a study authorized by the Trilateral Commission in 1975 to examine the "governability" of American democracy found that "the most notable new source of national power in 1970, as compared to 1950, was the national media," suggesting also that there was "considerable evidence to suggest that the development of television journalism contributed to the undermining of governmental authority." [40] Although this report was commissioned on the heels of the messy conflict of the war itself, the sentiment that the development of new journalistic media such as television supplanted governmental authority in attaining the support of the American public during the Vietnam War has been accepted and upheld by many scholars through present day.[41]
On 3 November 1969 President Richard M. Nixon made a televised speech laying out his policy toward Vietnam. He promised to continue to support the South Vietnamese government (through Vietnamization) and held out a plan for the withdrawal of American combat troops. This "silent majority" speech, not the Tet Offensive, marked the real watershed of the American involvement. In it, Nixon permanently altered the nature of the issue. "No longer was the question whether the United States was going to get out, but rather how and how fast."[42] Nixon's policy toward the media was to reduce as far as possible the American public's interest in and knowledge of the war in Vietnam. He began by sharply limiting the press's access to information within Vietnam itself.
Changes[edit]
The peace talks in Paris, the viability of South Vietnam, of its military and its government, and its effect on American disengagement, became the prime stories during this period for the news media. The reportage of the Tet/Khe Sanh period had been unique, and after it was over reportage settled back into its normal routines. According to Clarence Wyatt, the American disengagement was:
like watching a film running backward. American troops were leaving, until there were only a handful of advisers left. The communists were once again on the advance, spreading their influence closer and closer to the major cities. The South Vietnamese military was once again on the defensive, and the leadership of the nation was isolated and increasingly paranoid ... Nixon's goal, like Kennedy's, was for the press to have nothing to report.[43]
One of Ronald Haeberle's photos taken at My Lai which helped expose the massacre four years after it occurred
The gradual dissipation of American support for the war was apparent in changes in the source of news stories. The traditional sources - press conferences, official news releases, and reports of official proceedings were less utilized than ever before. Reporters were doing more research, conducting more interviews, and publishing more analytical essays.[44] There was also an increase in the number of American homes that acquired a television set which led to a rise in people gaining their knowledge of the war from television. The media never became "acutely critical ... but more sober, and more skeptical[45] It did not, however, examine or reexamine its basic assumptions about the nature of the war it had helped to propagate.[46] Never, for example, did historian Daniel Hallin hear an American correspondent or commentator utter the word imperialism in connection with the U.S. commitment on television. On those rare occasions when the underlying reasons for the American intervention were explicitly questioned, journalists continued to defend the honorableness of American motives.[47]
Television's image of the war, however, had been permanently altered: the "guts and glory" image of the pre-Tet period was gone forever.[48] For the most part, television remained a follower rather than a leader. According to Daniel Hallin, It was not until the collapse of consensus was well under way that coverage began to turn around; and when it did turn, it only turned so far. The later years of Vietnam were "a remarkable testimony to the restraining power of the routines and ideology of objective journalism ... 'advocacy journalism' made no real inroads into network television."[49]
As the American commitment waned there was an increasing media emphasis on Vietnamization, the South Vietnamese government, and casualties - both American and Vietnamese. There was also increasing coverage of the collapse of morale, interracial tensions, drug abuse, and disciplinary problems among American troops. These stories increased in number as U.S. soldiers "began to worry about being the last casualty in the lame-duck war."[50] The U.S. military resented the attention and at first refused to believe that the problems were as bad as correspondents portrayed them. The media demonstrated, however, "that the best reporters, by virtue of their many contacts, had a better grasp of the war's unmanageable human element than the policy makers supposedly in control."[51]
The next "big story" to come out of Vietnam occurred in May 1969 with the Battle of Hamburger Hill (Dong Ap Bia or Hill 937). The high number of American casualties (70 dead and 372 wounded) produced an unusual burst of explicit questioning of military tactics from correspondents in the field and from Congressmen in Washington.[52] After the battle's conclusion, major battles of attrition involving American ground forces became rare - as did commentaries from correspondents like those surrounding Hamburger Hill.[53]
News from two fronts: American soldier reading Stars and Stripes, the official U.S. armed forces newspaper, while in Cambodia
Tensions between the news media and the Nixon administration only increased as the war dragged on. In September and October 1969, members of the administration openly discussed methods by which the media could be coerced into docility. Possible methods included Internal Revenue Service audits, Justice Department antitrust lawsuits against major television networks and newspapers that could be accused of monopolistic business practices, and the monitoring incidents of "unfairness" by television broadcasters that would be turned over to the Federal Communications Commission for possible legal action.[54]
Last years[edit]
As the war lengthened and the withdrawals continued, the two sides became more and more antagonistic toward one another and they battled constantly over the issues of combat refusals and the drug and morale problems of American troops. Fatigue with the war and each other have been cited for this escalating antagonism.[55] Although MACV officially remained dedicated to providing evenly balanced public affairs information, the situation was exacerbated by the manpower drawdowns at the Public Affairs Office itself.
The Easter Offensive of 1972, a conventional North Vietnamese invasion of South Vietnam was generally depicted by MACV and Washington as a "true test" of the policy of Vietnamization. It was also readily apparent to the media that American airpower had saved the day. The press reported heavily on the "mixed" capabilities of the South Vietnamese defense and on the retaliatory U.S. bombing effort in North Vietnam, Operation Linebacker.[56] Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird declined to criticize the negative reporting of the press, which he described as "generally balanced."[57]
By the end of 1971 the number of accredited American correspondents had declined to fewer than 200. By September 1973 that number had dwindled to only 59. As the war became more and more a South Vietnamese affair, the Saigon government tried to silence unofficial news sources, tightening its information guidelines and stringently punishing any who violated them. Even as the Easter Offensive waned, President Nguyễn Văn Thiệu passed a martial law decree that made circulating news or images "detrimental to the national security" a criminal offense.[58]
With the breakdown of peace negotiations with Hanoi, President Nixon launched Operation Linebacker II, an extensive aerial campaign by B-52 bombers and tactical aircraft that began on 16 December 1972. Nixon, in an effort to conceal the fact that the talks had broken down, ordered that the public explanation for the bombing be linked to "a possible enemy offensive in the South."[59] With no information flowing from the White House, the Pentagon, or MACV, North Vietnam's propaganda was all that correspondents had to go on and it was extensively reported by the media. The American people, however, were unconvinced. According to a Harris poll, fewer than 50 percent agreed that it was "inhuman and immoral for the U.S. to have bombed Hanoi's civilian center" and an impressive 71 percent believed "what we did in bombing Hanoi was no worse than what the communists have done in the Vietnam War."[60] Following the campaign Hanoi returned to the negotiating table and (after some wrangling with the Saigon government) the Paris Peace Accords were signed on 27 January 1973. For the United States, the Vietnam War was over.
References[edit]
^ Jump up to: a b William M. Hammond, Reporting Vietnam: Media & Military at War (United States of America: University Press of Kansas, 1998),1
Jump up ^ Daniel C. Hallin, The Uncensored War: The Media and Vietnam (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), 9
Jump up ^ William M. Hammond, Reporting Vietnam: Media & Military at War (United States of America: University Press of Kansas, 1998), 2
Jump up ^ Landers, p. 43. See also Wyatt, pgs. 105-110.
Jump up ^ Knightly, pgs. 416 & 417.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 35.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 36.
Jump up ^ Douglas Kinnard, The War Managers. Hanover NH: University Press of New England, 1977, pgs 126 & 127. See also Wyatt, p. 109.
Jump up ^ Diem's beliefs and accusations against the press, however, had little basis in fact. Of 33 stories with Vietnam datelines appearing in the New York Times in the four months preceding the crisis, only three could have been said to have dealt primarily with South Vietnamese politics. None dealt with the non-communist opposition to the Diem regime. These four months were typical. Hallin, Uncensored War, p. 45.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 44.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 46.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 75.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 102.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 124.
Jump up ^ Landers, p. 228.
^ Jump up to: a b Venanzi
Jump up ^ Landers, p. 236.
^ Jump up to: a b Landers, p. 254.
Jump up ^ Landers, p. 256.
Jump up ^ Bowden, p. 175.
Jump up ^ Bowden, p. 177.
Jump up ^ Leslie
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 197. These numbers, however, were deceiving. Fully half of those accredited were not reporters but were instead technicians, secretaries, drivers, translators, and wives.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 234.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, p. 5.
Jump up ^ Knightley
Jump up ^ Ron Stienmann, Inside Television's First War. Columbia MO: University of Missouri Press, 2002, p. 33.
Jump up ^ Hallin, Uncensored War, p. 158.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1962–1968, p. 387.
Jump up ^ "55c. The Tet Offensive." http://www.ushistory.org/us/55c/asp
Jump up ^ Moise, Edwin. "The Tet Offensive and its Aftermath." http://www.clemson.edu/caah/history/Faculty/Pages/EdMoise/viet8.html
Jump up ^ Knightley, p. 457 & 458.
^ Jump up to: a b Knightley, p. 458.
Jump up ^ Bowden, p. 187.
Jump up ^ [1]
Jump up ^ http://www.ushistory.org/us/55c.asp
Jump up ^ http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102112403
Jump up ^ Hallin, Daniel. The Uncensored War: the Media and Vietnam.
Jump up ^ "Vietnam War Timeline." http://history1900s.about.com/od/vietnamwar/a/vietnamtimeline.htm
Jump up ^ Hallin, Daniel. "The Media, the War in Vietnam, and Political Support: a Critique of the Thesis of an Oppositional Media."
Jump up ^ Hallin, Daniel. The Uncensored War: the Media and Vietnam, 3.
Jump up ^ Wyatt, p. 192.
Jump up ^ Wyatt, pgs. 198 & 199.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, p. 102.
Jump up ^ Hallin, Media Conference.
Jump up ^ Hallin, Uncensored War, p. 210.
Jump up ^ Hallin, Uncensored War, p. 208.
Jump up ^ Hallin, Uncensored War, p. 174.
Jump up ^ Hallin, Uncensored War, p. 163.
Jump up ^ Hallin, Uncensored War, p. 179.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, p. 215.
Jump up ^ Samuel Zaffiri, Hamburger Hill. Novato CA: Presidio Press, 1988, p. 272.
Jump up ^ Landers, pgs. 191 & 102.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, pgs. 161 & 231.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, p. 141.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, pgs. 525-589.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, p. 548.
Jump up ^ Wyatt, p. 206.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, p. 603.
Jump up ^ Hammond, 1968–1973, p. 610.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_news_media_and_the_Vietnam_War&oldid=815631915"
Categories:
Vietnam War and the media
Hidden categories:
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from August 2013
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Cymraeg
Edit links
This page was last edited on 16 December 2017, at 01:29.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

values:
/wiki/U.S._media
mw-redirect
U.S. media

attrs: class style

attrs: role tabindex class

values: button 0 togglelink

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (August 2013)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Agence_France_Presse
mw-redirect
Agence France Presse

values:
/wiki/Buddhist_Crisis
mw-redirect
Buddhist Crisis

values:
/wiki/People%27s_Republic_of_China
mw-redirect
People's Republic of China

values:
/wiki/R._K._Karanjia
mw-redirect
R. K. Karanjia

values:
/wiki/Richard_M._Nixon
mw-redirect
Richard M. Nixon

values:
/wiki/My_Lai_massacre
mw-redirect
My Lai massacre

values:
nofollow
external free
http://www.ushistory.org/us/55c/asp

values:
nofollow
external free
http://www.ushistory.org/us/55c.asp

values: -moz-column-width: 25em; -webkit-column-width: 25em; column-width: 25em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from August 2013

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: Cyfryngau'r Unol Daleithiau a Rhyfel Fietnam – Welsh

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-United_States_news_media_and_the_Vietnam_War rootpage-United_States_news_media_and_the_Vietnam_War skin-vector action-view