This book just does not cover the most important issues that arise from this controversial subject. The author goes on and on citing examples of how the press and the journalists were manipulated by the individuals who were responsible for supplying them with up to date military information. I agree that these arguments are supported well and hard to refute. But the main problem I have deals with the following: DURING THE COURSE OF THE ENTIRE BOOK HE SPENDS ONLY THREE PARAGRAPHS DISCUSSING THE TELEVISION MEDIA! His argument for this is that the television coverage only represented approximately 5% (This is from memory, and all that I know for sure was that it was very much less than what anyone might expect.) of the total coverage of the events of the war. That, to me, is just a cop out as anyone who knows anything about the Vietnam conflict also knows that it was called "The Television War." Since he manages to completely avoid probably the most important aspect of press coverage from the war with such an irrelevant and weak argument for skirting it, he is left with arguments for press manipulation that hold water as well as a bucket with no bottom

As a graduate student of history, I know that you cannot possibly write about every aspect of anything (especially the Vietnam War) in a book. If one were to write about everything on the Vietnam War, there would be a library full of volumes. Wyatt has chosen to focus on one aspect, one that has been ignored so often (which is why the previous reviewer can only cite one public avenue - television). Many books have been written on the role of television. The challenge to historians is to find something new, and Wyatt does a beautiful job of it. The intricacies he finds within the paper media are amazing, and his analysis never fails.

Wyatt is an incredible historian and an equally incredible man. I absolutely recommend this book.