Newspaper 'hierarchy' of injury glamorises war | 6/1/2016 | Staff
Tanya9Tanya9 (Posted by) Level 3
Click For Photo:

British newspapers are routinely glamorising combat by creating a moral separation between combat and non-combat injuries, according to new research published in the journal Media, War and Conflict.

Academics from Anglia Ruskin University's Veterans and Families Institute for Military Social Research (VFI) examined the reporting of injuries sustained by British military personnel during the height of the UK's war in Afghanistan in 2009, and a comparison period in 2014, in all daily and Sunday UK national newspapers.

Representation - Personnel - Articles - Combat - Injuries

They found that representation of injured personnel differed substantially between articles reporting on combat and non-combat injuries, with wounds suffered in battle being framed as more 'heroic' than those sustained in other situations, such as during training or in road traffic accidents.

Newspapers tended to provide factual descriptions of non-combat injuries, but in reports of wounds suffered in battle, there was a tendency to add emotive terms, such as "horrific" or "harrowing," and provide more details and context.

Figures - Ministry - Defence - Personnel - Field

Figures from the Ministry of Defence show that 2,201 personnel were admitted to the Field Hospital at Camp Bastion between 2009 and 2014 with combat injuries. During the same period, 2,019 were admitted as a result of non-battle injuries, including crushing accidents, accidental small arms fire, slips, trips and falls, demonstrating the wide variety of injuries sustained by military personnel...
(Excerpt) Read more at:
Wake Up To Breaking News!
I love to post, but I never read the article!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Welcome to Long Room!

Where The World Finds Its News!