Table Of ContentTHE DRONES HAVE ARRIVED: PERCEPTIONS OF DRONE TECHNOLOGY IN
MAINSTEAM MEDIA
A Master’s Thesis
submitted to the Faculty of the
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
of Georgetown University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of
Master of Arts
in Communication, Culture and Technology
By
Cassady B. Sharp, B.A.
Washington, DC
August 20, 2012
Copyright 2012 by Cassady B. Sharp
All Rights Reserved
ii
THE DRONES HAVE ARRIVED: PERCEPTIONS OF DRONE TECHNOLOGY IN MAINSTREAM MEDIA
Cassady B. Sharp, B.A.
Thesis Advisor: D. Linda Garcia, Ph.D,.
ABSTRACT
New technologies accompany each war. The submarine dove during The Civil War,
tanks rolled through World War I, the atom bomb was dropped in World War II and Agent
Orange was diffused in Vietnam. Media often refer to today’s conflicts in Afghanistan and
Pakistan as “Obama’s Drone War.” Not only could drones shift the landscape of warfare, they
also have potential for public use. However, through what narrative do we learn about drones
and form opinions about them? We must analyze how much original reporting mainstream
media produces about drones and how much they regurgitate the narrative of U.S. government
and military.
Using grounded theory and summative content analysis and following the method of
Kathy Charmaz, this thesis analyzed mainstream media coverage regarding drones since
President Obama took office in 2009. I’ve concluded the narrative presented to the public
overwhelmingly associates this technology as a killing machine or an intrusive “eye in the sky”
while ignoring the non-violent potential. The relentless use of unnamed officials, the
discrepancies among information available to media sources and the recycling of unverified
information all indicate an unwillingness, and often inability, for U.S. journalists to properly
report what the American public needs to know. The lack of congressional involvement
contributes to an unchecked bloating of military power enjoyed by the executive branch and the
CIA. The absence of stories about drone operators as well as effected civilian populations leaves
iii
out critical information regarding not only the technology itself, but also how it may impact the
foreign image of the United States. A failure to properly represent nonviolent potential of the
technology outside of the military arena has resulted in headlines depicting drones as soulless
killing machines or intrusive eyes in the sky.
iv
This thesis is dedicated to those whose authentic interest in my topic provided me with the vigor
to keep going – my advisor D. Linda Garcia for telling me what I needed to hear, my family for
asking questions, my friends for sending me drone news and my father for always being there.
Many thanks,
Cassady B. Sharp
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………..…..1
CHAPTER I :DRONES AND WHY THEY MATTER………………………………….. .3
Drones and the Future of War……………………………………………………………....4
Virtual Debate……………………………………………………………………………….6
CHAPTER II: OUR VALIDATED EXPECTATIONS………………………………….....8
Timing……………………………………………………………………………………… 9
National Security………………………………………………………………..…………10
Press as a Watchdog……………………………………………………………...……….. 11
CHAPTER III: A COMPARISON OF WARS IN THE PAST CENTURY………………12
World War I………………………………………………………………………………..12
World War II…………………………………………………………………………….…14
Vietnam…………………………………………………………………………………….15
The Gulf War………………………………………………………………………………17
The War in Iraq………………………………………………………………………….…17
President Obama and the War on Terror…………………………………………………..17
Comparison…………………………………………………………………………………21
CHAPTER IV: CASE STUDY: THE STORY OF DRONES IN AMERICAN MEDIA…24
Data Collection…………………………………………………………………………...…24
What is grounded theory?......................................................................................................25
Data Categories……………………………………………………………………………..27
vi
Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………………….30
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION……………………………………………………..………47
Future Research…………………………………………………………………………….56
APPENDIXES……………………………………………………………………………...67
Appendix A: Letter to President Obama from Congressional Members……………………67
Appendix B: Interview with Josh Rushing…………………………………………………71
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………. …83
vii
INTRODUCTION
When I first told my 76-year-old grandfather, a Vietnam veteran, about my interest in
America’s use of military drones, unmanned aerial vehicles, he set a personal record for time
spent speaking on the telephone. A departure from our typical short-and-sweet updates, he
opened up with his own questions, concerns and opinions. Not only did he raise new questions
in my mind, he sparked fresh determination in my objective to thoroughly examine how
Americans perceive this new technology. In the past decade, drones have been utilized in the
gathering of intelligence leading to Osama Bin Laden’s assassination, contributed to straining
relations between the United States and Pakistan, aggravated disputes over a NATO supply
route, and killed more than 3000 individuals, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalists
(2012). However, they are capable of much more outside the military arena. The potential of
drones’ application in various arenas, including human rights and natural disaster efforts, may
depend on our perception of them, and as the saying goes, perception is reality.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan introduce a new age of warfare technology in the form
of unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones. Pilotless vehicles operated from a central control system
and typically used aerially, drones are relatively inexpensive for the U.S. military to
produce. With a manufacturing price of approximately $4.5 million, the small planes are
relatively inexpensive compared to the F-22 stealth fighter jet, which can cost up to $678
million. This means that for the cost of one F-22 fighter jet, the U.S. military could produce more
than 450 Predator drones. In addition to the comparative monetary advantage of using drones,
U.S. officials claim they save the lives of American soldiers. Today, the U.S. military uses
more than 7,000 unmanned aerial vehicles in six countries, particularly Afghanistan and
1
Pakistan. Most recently, the U.S. has launched drone operations in Yemen and Somalia. The
Air Force is currently training more drone pilots than fighter pilots (Singer, 2012).
Notwithstanding the perceived benefits, there are some misgivings about the use of
drones. For example, drones are not considered ground troops, and therefore the War Powers
Resolution of 1973 does not apply to the deployment of drones by the White House. The
resolution requires the White House to notify Congress of military action within 48 hours and
requires further authorization after 60 days. Media often refer to today’s conflicts in Afghanistan
and Pakistan as “Obama’s Drone War.” Not only could drones shift the landscape of warfare,
they also have potential for public use. However, through what narrative do we learn about
drones and form opinions about them? We must analyze how much original reporting
mainstream media produces about drones and how much they regurgitate the narrative of U.S.
government and military.
Using grounded theory and summative content analysis, this thesis analyzed mainstream
media coverage regarding drones since President Obama took office in 2009. Upon presenting a
scholarly argument for the transparency of government regarding military affairs as well as the
performance of the press in Chapters 1 and 2, I present my data and analysis. I end with my
conclusion that the narrative presented to the public overwhelmingly associates this technology
as a killing machine or an intrusive “eye in the sky” while ignoring the non-violent potential. In
my analysis and conclusion, I will unpack the factors that contribute to this prevailing depiction
of drones in the American mainstream media.
2
CHAPTER 1: DRONES AND WHY THEY MATTER
The first question we must ask is what exactly are drones and why should their use
matter to us? Drones are essentially a new weapon of war not unlike the tank or the machine
gun. They are unmanned systems in which the actual pilot of Predator drone, for instance, can
be sitting in a command station in Nevada while firing a missile on an identified target in a rural
region of Pakistan. Although the image of unmanned robotic planes flying above our heads
conjures up familiar images from a futuristic society in science fiction novels and films, the
technology itself is not as advanced. The 27-feet long plane can operate in the air and record live
video feed for up to 24 hours and contains three critical components: a rotating camera, a Global
Positioning System and a Hellfire missile. The aperture camera located in a rotating ball below
the nose of the plane is actually the most expensive part of the vehicle itself. The pilot operating
the drone uses what looks much like a videogame joystick to navigate the drone. In front of the
pilot is a GPS navigation screen as well as a live feed from the rotating camera. The technology
is not much more sophisticated than what drivers use in their cars everyday to navigate
unfamiliar places.
The use of drones has increased exponentially in the past decade with the Pentagon
owning less than 50 aerial drones in 1992 having more than 7000 today. In Afghanistan and
Pakistan, the U.S. Air Force most commonly deploys the Predator and Reaper drones more so
than manned aircrafts. In fact, Lockheed Martin, the research and development company
responsible for much of the U.S. military’s defense technology, manufactured its last F-22 last
3
Description:overwhelmingly associates this technology as a killing machine or an . Regardless of whether American lives are actually risked, drone strikes are
