Phil Taylor's papers
|
BACK TO : War, Film & History
Mass Politics on the Western Front by Steve Badsey 
A new era of mass politics At the dawn of the 20th century, Britain entered a new era of mass politics, begun in the 1880s by the extension of the vote to a majority of men - although women could not vote until 1918, and then only if they were aged 30 and above - and continued by educational reforms including the requirement for all children to attend school. The first British daily newspaper to achieve mass circulation was the Daily Mail, which appeared in 1896; deliberately priced at ha'penny, or half the price of most newspapers, this was owned by the Canadian-born Alfred Harmsworth (later Lord Northcliffe). In 1908 Harmsworth also bought The Times, which was seen as the mouthpiece of the British governing class. By 1914, Northcliffe's newspapers accounted for about half the total daily sales in London alone. Northcliffe's success ushered in the era of the 'press baron' in British politics, including his brother Lord Rothermere, and fellow Canadian Sir Max Aitkin (later Lord Beaverbrook), owner of the Daily Express. Most adults in Britain had access to either a national or local daily newspaper, and even in small country villages pages from the local newspaper would be pinned up on public noticeboards to be read. 'Only as the war continued did the government start to extend its grip on propaganda and public opinion...' With no opinion polls or other ways of judging public opinion, politicians paid exaggerated respect to newspapers and their owners, learning to give interviews and to exert influence behind the scenes. David Lloyd George, in particular, as one of the new breed of populist politicians, associated himself closely with these newspaper owners and editors and they played a part in his becoming Prime Minister in December 1916. Despite many myths after the war, there was in 1914 no fully developed British government organisation or plan for propaganda or the manipulation of public opinion. Just as with the army recruiting drives, so the posters, newspaper proclamations and claims of German 'atrocities' were the product of a complex mix of spontaneous action, national and local politics, and business initiatives. Only as the war continued did the government start to extend its grip on propaganda and public opinion, as on many other aspects of society. The perceived importance of the press barons in maintaining or manipulating support for the war reached its logical conclusion in 1918 with Northcliffe's appointment to the new post of Director of Propaganda in Enemy Countries, and Beaverbrook's as head of the equally new Ministry of Information. Eye Witness Some newspapers were critical of Kitchener's call for volunteers © British generals had also learned before World War One to treat the press and its owners with respect, although always with a certain disdain for war reporters. In particular, the involvement of the military correspondent of The Times, Lieutenant Colonel (Retired) Charles à Court Repington, in army politics both before and during the war became notorious. The experience of earlier wars had convinced most governments and military authorities that unrestricted newspaper reporting was an unacceptable security risk. In the strict interpretation of military regulations, virtually any contact with the press by a member of the armed forces was an offence. Lord Kitchener, the newly appointed Secretary of State for War in 1914, was also personally hostile to the press. 'Newspaper publicity was also critical to Kitchener's call for volunteers for the army.' On the outbreak of World War One the government invoked the new Official Secrets Act and Defence of the Realm Act (DORA) to impose press censorship, and sought to ban all war reporting. Instead the Army delegated a serving officer, Lieutenant Colonel Ernest Swinton, as its official reporter, under the byline 'Eye Witness'. Other reporters were left to cover the opening months of the war as best they could without official support, although in practice senior officers often dealt with the press, and letters or comments from soldiers to newspapers were tolerated. Newspaper publicity was also critical of Kitchener's call for volunteers for the army. The power of the national press (London-based except for the Manchester Guardian) was so great that as long as it avoided outright confrontation with the government, it was left to be largely self-regulating. The policy of most national newspapers was that of the governing class itself: to support the war effort, but to reserve the right to criticise government policies. The government paid much less attention to the regional or local press, which was largely free to write what it wanted. In particular the habit continued, established in earlier wars, of soldiers' letters being passed on to local newspapers for publication. War correspondents appointed The Central Office GHQ © In 1915, Kitchener yielded to political pressure by allowing newspaper reporters onto the Western Front, and the first six war correspondents were appointed to GHQ in France. Writing under a pool system for publication in the national press, wearing uniform, heavily controlled by army escort officers and official briefings, with multiple layers of censorship in France and Britain, and subject to the policies of their own newspapers, these men were never in a position to criticise the conduct of military operations, or even to report them very accurately. Whatever their own opinions, like most soldiers they were minor players trapped in a complicated hierarchical structure. The most famous of them, particularly Philip Gibbs of the Daily Chronicle, earned the respect of both politicians and generals for their insights, often delivered behind the scenes. But like their employers and the army itself, they saw their job as part of the war effort. '...cameras were forbidden on the Western Front, but a few soldiers carried them and took photographs which later appeared in local newspapers.' The same improvements in lenses, chemistry and metallurgy that made the artillery of World War One possible also provided for a new generation of lightweight cameras, starting in 1897 with the Pocket Kodak. The Daily Mirror in 1904 became the first newspaper to make regular use of half-tone photographs, which dominated its front page and set a new fashion in mass circulation newspapers. Again, in strict military regulations, cameras were forbidden on the Western Front, but a few soldiers carried them and took photographs which later appeared in local newspapers. Photography also had obvious military applications, and some photographs taken by the survey companies of the Royal Engineers on the Western Front were also released to the press. The first two official press photographers to be attached to GHQ arrived in early 1916. Like the war correspondents, they wore uniform and were subject to much the same restrictions, although the nature of their work meant that they frequently got into the front lines. Later in the war the Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders also appointed their own photographers on the Western Front. These photographs were offered for sale to newspapers, where they supplemented the older tradition of line drawings and engravings. Official war artists were also appointed during the course of the war. The 'flea pit' A captured trench on the Somme, a battle originally believed to be an immediate success © Radio broadcasting did not begin until after World War One (by the BBC in 1922), but newspapers were not the only source of information available to most people. Before and during the war the most popular form of entertainment was the cinema, with most people going to the 'flea pit' two or three times a week. Although most people went to the cinema for entertainment, the first newsreels appeared in 1911 and proved very popular. Although most films were silent and shot in black and white on hand-cranked cameras, they were shown tinted and with music or sound effects as an accompaniment, sometimes supplemented by inspirational speeches. '...newsreel films were shown both in Britain and to the troops in France.' The first two official cine-cameramen (experienced newsreel cameramen, wearing uniform) were attached to GHQ in late 1915; again followed by cameramen for the Dominions. Their newsreel films were shown both in Britain and to the troops in France. As commander of the British forces in France, Sir Douglas Haig personally avoided direct contact with the press, and only rarely gave interviews, but maintained close connections through his staff with supportive newspaper owners and editors. Haig also understood that public opinion was a critical aspect of the war effort. A month before the start of the Battle of the Somme, Haig personally briefed the war correspondents at GHQ on the line that he wished them to take, stressing the need for public determination and patience. For the battle itself, the cine-cameramen and photographers were paired off, one pair covering action to the north of the British line, the other pair to the south, while the Royal Engineers took photographs from a position in the centre. The reporters were escorted to watch events from a safe observation post - from which they could in fact see very little - and then briefed on what GHQ believed had happened. At first, they were no more aware than Haig himself of the extent of the first day's disaster, and dutifully reported a British victory. The film taken was made into a full-length documentary, The Battle of the Somme, which broke box-office records The true nature of war It is genuinely hard to be sure what most people in Britain knew about the Western Front and battles like the Somme from the media of the day. The newspapers and their reporters offered a wide range of styles and opinions - as they still do - but often walked a difficult line between patriotic support for the war and a desire to convey its terrible nature. The government itself deliberately promoted its official films and photographs as displaying the true nature of war to the public. It is equally hard to be sure how much difference official representation made to popular support at home or in France while the war was being fought - or to attitudes after the war was won. What is certain is that mass media left unique war records for the present age to interpret. |