Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: American Civil War
In “Abraham Lincoln and the Fourth Estate: The White House and the Press during the American Civil War” Richard Carwardine discusses the incredible increase in the Press’ contribution to the American Civil War. Carwardine explains Abraham Lincoln’s role with the media and his use of newspapers as political weaponry from before the election and into his presidency. This topic is significant because it illustrates Abraham Lincoln’s intelligence and strengths as a president during the Civil War. The article gives insight to how Lincoln may have been as successful as he was during his presidency. Also, no previous political leader had had the task of managing an administration in a mass democracy where over a million of its citizens were recruited for the armed force.
Richard Carwardine’s article’s main idea is to focus on the issues of Abraham Lincoln’s use of press and media during the Civil War. The article specifically discusses Lincolns understanding of newspapers in political function, Lincoln’s relationship with editorial corps, and Lincolns use of newspapers as a political weap...
leading up to and surrounding President Abraham Lincoln’s death. The purpose of this book is to
There are numerous instances wherein the Generals are depicted as immature and frightened, and Lincoln as the strong pillar of faith. Williams portrays Lincoln in a very positive light, allowing the reader to realize the greatness of Lincoln, in his compassion, strategy, statesmanship and lack of ego. Williams has provided numerous instances wherein he provides ample support to his arguments and facts. In spite of the unnecessary detail and verbosity that Williams sometimes uses, there is no doubt that this book is a remarkable insight into Lincoln’s persona. Works Cited Dawson, Joseph G. III. -.
The American Civil War not only proved to be the country’s deadliest war but also precipitated one of the greatest constitutional crises in the history of the United States. President Lincoln is revered by many Americans today as a man of great moral principle who was responsible for both preventing the Union’s dissolution as well as helping to trigger the movement to abolish slavery. In retrospect, modern historians find it difficult to question the legitimacy of Lincoln’s actions as President. A more precise review of President Lincoln’s actions during the Civil War, however, reveals that many, if not the majority, of his actions were far from legitimate on constitutional and legal grounds. Moreover, his true political motives reveal his
In “The Presidency of Abraham Lincoln,” Phillip Shaw Paludan argues that even though Abraham Lincoln faced unparalleled challenges, Lincoln was America’s greatest president as he preserved the Union and freed the slaves. According to Paludan, Lincoln’s greatness exceeds that of all other American presidents as Lincoln’s presidential service was remarkable in both the obstacles he faced as well as the ways in which he overcame them. Before accepting the distinguished chair in Lincoln studies at the University of Illinois, Springfield, Paludan was a professor of history at the University of Kansas for over 30 years. Paludan has authored several books including Victims: A True Story of the Civil War and A People’s Contest: The Union and Civil
Endres, Kathleen L. "The Women's Press in the Civil War: A Portrait of Patriotism, Propaganda, and Prodding." Civil War History 30.1 (1984): 31-53. Project
Lincoln's use of executive authority during the civil war is many times illegal and unjust; although his issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation may seem justified, Lincoln blatantly abused his power regarding civil rights. He did things like institute an unfair draft, suspend Constitutional rights, allocate military spending without Congress, and institute emancipation. Although some may justify these actions, they stomped on the Constitution.
. .’, concludes James Oakes’ book with the aftermath of the Civil War and Lincoln’s assassination. Oakes discussed the respect Douglass gathered for Lincoln over the years and the affect his assassination had on both himself and America as a whole. Oakes even brushed over Douglass’ relationship with Andrew Johnson, the president succeeding Lincoln. Analyzing his experience with the new president, it was safe to say that Andrew Johnson had no consideration as to what Douglass and Lincoln previously fought for. Johnson did not have the same political skills as Lincoln did, and he did not retain the same view for America that Lincoln did. It was obvious that Douglass held Lincoln at a higher standard than Andrew Johnson, stating that he was a “progressive man, a humane man, an honorable man, and at heart an anti-slavery man” (p. 269). Oakes even gave his own stance on Andrew Jackson, “It was a legacy that Andrew Johnson could ever match. When all of Lincoln’s attributes were taken into consideration - his ascent from the obscurity to greatness, his congenial temperament, his moral courage - it was easy for Douglass to imagine how much better things would be ‘had Mr. Lincoln been living today’.” (p. 262). It is hard to imagine the pre-war Douglass to have said something like that as opposed to an older, much more reserved Douglass. With the abolishment of slavery, so came much discrimination. Without
Book Title: The American Civil War: A Handbook of Literature and Research. Contributors: Robin Higham - editor, Steven E. Woodworth - editor. Publisher: Greenwood Press. Place of Publication: Westport, CT. Publication Year: 1996
In his work, The Real Lincoln, economic historian Thomas J. DiLorenzo tells quite the different tale. Daring to criticize this beloved president, DiLorenzo defends his antithetical statements with several key points: Lincoln was more similar to a dictator than an American President. Arguing that the War Between the States was wholly unconstitutional, DiLorenzo corrects the popular misconception that Lincoln’s war was one of abolition. War was not necessary to end slavery, but it was necessary to fulfill Lincoln’s true agenda – to destroy the most significant check on the powers of the central government: the right of secession.1
During the early 1900’s and late 1800’s precipitated the first true form of American media. The daily newspapers have been a part of the United States for some time, but during 1880’s and 1890’s reports such as Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst began to transform the newspaper in order for it to become the first major stepping stone in mass media. These publishers, especially Hearst, took advantage of the American involvement in foreign affairs. Hearst convinced his audience that sinking of a U.S ship during the Spanish-American War obliged a military response. Although Hearst was not the initial cause of the war, there was proof that he had the power to distort information, images and options. By World War 1, the media involvement increase by a tremendous amount.
Dilorenzo, Thomas J.. The Real Lincoln: a new look at Abraham Lincoln, his agenda, and an unnecessary war. Roseville, Calif: Prima, 2002
Thomas J. DiLorenzo is an economics professor at Loyola College. He has written eleven books, and is very widely published in many magazines and journals. In his book, The Real Lincoln, a twist is placed on the traditional picture of Abraham Lincoln. One of the most famous men in American History, Lincoln was regarded as being many great things, but were these things an accurate depiction of who he really was? As DiLorenzo states, “In the eyes of many Americans, Lincoln remains the most important American political figure in history because the war between the states so fundamentally transformed the nature of American government” (2). Lincoln helped begin a transformation from a small national government to a larger, more centralized one. Perhaps one of the largest misconceptions about Lincoln was his stance on slavery. DiLorenzo goes in depth about this saying, “He (Lincoln) could have ended slavery just as dozens of other countries in the world did during the first sixty years of the nineteenth century, through compensated emancipation, but he never seriously attempted to do so” (9). These two major topics, along with many more, are examined from a different perspective in discovering the man Abraham Lincoln really was.
In Richard Hofstadter’s book “American Political Tradition” he describes twelve biographical portraits of American statesmen, breaking them from longstanding reputations and putting them under scrutiny. Shockingly, among these statesmen is Abraham Lincoln. Hofstadter criticizes both his legacy and his political intentions. Lincoln, a president nationally regarded as a “self-made” man, nicknamed “Honest Abe,” and generally well liked, is not typically heavily criticized (Hofstadter 121). Hofstadter believed his reputation of being “self-made” was simply just a myth that he used to advance his political career and to seize opportunities of advancement (122). Although Hofstadter believes Lincoln’s reputation is not as notable as history says
Abraham Lincoln (12 Feb. 1809-15 Apr. 1865) the 16th president (civilwar.org) of the United States of America was one of the main public persons that influence the civil war in many aspects. Even though the civil war may have been the last resource the nation had, it could be argue that Lincoln’s governments try its best to find a different solution. The civil war was a conflict that destroyed the nation; it perhaps could have been avoided if the second party had work for a solution. But it is true that maybe both parts could have looked out for the benefits of the people as a whole instead of their personal benefits. Lincoln principal positive effect on the civil war was actually before and during the war when Lincoln’s government had many attempts to prevent the confrontation, and when this one began he took the right decisions to win the war. One of the biggest effects on the civil war was the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, which gave the slaves their liberty. Many would agree is that Abraham’s Lincoln effect on the civil war was positive but Lincoln made many mistakes or misjudgments during the war as well. Perhaps the biggest mistake Lincoln did was underestimating the South what caused many unnecessary deaths. He also did had misjudgments that cause many causalities. Since the beginning of time humanity has fought for what they thought was right. In April 12 of 1861(civilwar.org) The US would begin a fight for civic and moral rights, a civil war that perhaps was the last option for a country to reunite its values. Abraham Lincoln was the president of the time and the person the influence the most the course the war took. I strongly believe that Lincoln’s decisions influence or had more positive effects on the country. Being the president at times like the civil war is without doubt it is one of the toughest jobs, and one way or another there is going to be correct and incorrect decisions but I can agree president Lincoln did what he thought it was the best at that moment.
In order to understand new media, one must first have a solid background of the old media. The old media traces its origins back to the “elite or partisan press [that] dominated American journalism in the early days of the republic” (Davis 29). With the advent of the penny press around 1833, the press changed its basic purpose and function from obtaining voters for its affiliated political party to making profit (Davis 29). With more available papers, individual companies competed with each other with “muckraking journalism”—investigative journalism exposing corruption—and “yellow journalism”—sensationalist journalism that completely disregarded the facts (Davis 30). The press continued to evolve its journalistic approaches and next shifted to “lapdog journalism,” r...