From Newsreels to Real-Time War: how War journalism has changed

Undoubtedly,  media has had to adapt gradually  to the changes that have taken place in society throughout history. One of the most attractive fields in journalism, and related to all these changes, is the so- called War Journalism, which is that type of journalism in which the professional is responsible for covering a specific military event.
Throughout history there have been many wars (since the Grecian societies), so it’s very complex to talk about the role of journalists in all of them, so I will be brief.

For example, Spain is a good reference for the so-called "newsreels." After the Spanish Civil War, in which 2 sides fought (the so-called "National" and "Republican"), it was born in the Península Ibérica  a new regime: the dictatorship, which came from the hand of Francisco Franco. In this totalitarian regime, the freedom of the press was greatly restricted , so Franco created his own media to inform people of their ideas, actions ...: the NODO (1942).
Nowadays, this newsreel, which showed to Spanish population a “different side” of the country, and also of the world, is remembered with some sectors of the population with affect.                              
20 years after the creation of the NODO, and a little  bit far from Spain, and after the World War II, the  Vietnam War began, specifically in 1964. In this case, the paper of the media was very important. They played a crucial paper, cause thanks to them, people could notice the torture and punishment suffered by the prisoners of both sides.
In this case, we can’t talk about the media as mere newsreels; they were the so-called War TV.
 More than one person and two may wonder why the media at that time were War TV and not newsreels.
The reason is simple: this bloody war that left behind thousands of dead people , and even more prisoners, was televised. Obviously, at that time the media infrastructure was not as advanced as today, so this transmission was not in real time. One of the bloodiest conflicts of this War was televised in August 1965 when the CBS
 "...showed the thatched roofs Marines lighting of the village of Cam Ne with Zippo lighters, andincluded critical commentary on the Treatment of the villagers "
Although this war was devastating to the human race, for journalism gave some positive points: medias’ paper was more important. Journalists had more freedom to do their job. In other conflicts such as World War II, or the Civil War, censorship had not allowed the recording of certain images; in this case they televised them. Media knew very good what were the issues that "sold" in the United States (the conflict in its more cruel view)  so the most cruel and shocking images were the most repeated in TVs.

With the change of century (XXI),people thought that the number of conflicts would be reduced considerably, but the general thought was denied in 2003, when troops from various countries, commanded by the Americans and British invaded Iraq. In this case, the media coverage was very controversial. Unlike the TV War in Vietnam, one could speak of a " Live War". Viewer observed, with greater temporal immediacy than in Vietnam, the U.S. offensive on the Iraqi. In this conflict there wasn’t  censorship, so the work of journalists was more extensive. Thanks to the media, in this case, we witnessed acts of war. One could  say that we were almost eye-witnesses of the facts, because the images and testimonies were captured very close to the areas of the conflict, which seemed to be happening in our own living room.
If in this case the role of the press can be defined as indispensable in the case of the so-called Arab Spring was a basis. As the director of Al Jazeera said, without the presence of the media, it could have been a genocide in Tahrir Square, sponsored by the Egyptian government to silence all those people who stood up against Regime.
Although there were so many years between Irak and the Arab Spring (9 in particular), the media coverage itself was different, and even better. In this case one could speak of a Real-Time War, largely due to the great efforts made by the media to give the audience a faithful account of what was beginning to occur in these countries. The “taking” of  Tahrir Square was broadcast by Al Jazeera, and through this channel, the international community became concerned about what was going on, becoming a news source this place.
Not only the media played an important role in this case, the so-called social networks were also a key factor. This sort of revolution started in Facebook, where a young man began to mobilize people to became against the regime. Perhaps this young man would never have expected this “chain reaction” of the Egyptians, and the inhabitants of countries that were and are in similar situations.
With this brief analysis, one can realize about the importance of the press, and specially  the importance of  war press, because thanks to it, we aren’t ignorant about what happens beyond the borders of our country.