www.historyisnowmagazine.com
Propaganda and Censorship in Britain During World War 2
Propaganda and censorship have long been a tool used during war - and particularly with the advent of the printing press and electronic means of communication. Here, Amy Chandler looks at their role during World War Two in Britain.
A British World War II propaganda poster related to the 1940 Battle of Britain.
The way that society today consumes news and information is ever changing with the influx of social media and less direct channels of information through podcasts and a plethora of broadcasters all vying for attention in a saturated market. Many of these information sources have different validation processes or have multiple eyes on ensuring that information is correct and up-to-date. Recently, there have been cases of advanced technology like artificial intelligence (AI) manipulating images, videos and voices that spreads false information. The war against misinformation is rife, but during the Second World War (WW2) Britain was fighting not just Germany and its allies, but the war on keeping secrets from enemy hands. The rules of censorship were strict and the process to approve news reports was lengthy under the principle of ‘self enforcement’. This policy issued newspapers with topic guidelines that adhered to censorship and reporters submitted stories for review. (1) These stories went under rigorous review and redacted under the official policy, for example redacting weather reports, location of military manoeuvres and any other information that could be used to infiltrate British operations. Only approved reports would be stamped with an official stamp with changes marked in blue pencil and stories that were deemed unacceptable and not ‘Passed for censorship’ were liable for prosecution. In some instances the Ministry of Information (MOI) applied retrospective censorship to news outlets, for example the arrival of British Expeditionary Force in France, 1939, which caused crisis in Government and disgruntlement with the Press. (1) This article will explore how the British Government used wartime propaganda to boost morale and how important censorship was in ensuring military victory. Ministry of InformationIn the face of war across Europe, the British Government passed the Emergency Powers (Defence) Act (1939) that granted the Government power to take any necessary actions in wartime, which extended to controlling many areas of society, such as rationing and blackouts. (2) These defence regulations superseded the usual channels and processes that controlled law making and existing rules. The outbreak of war changed the way society ran and in turn created a higher level of extended control to achieve order. Britain is generally presented as a liberal country with freedom of speech a necessity in society. However when in the throws of war the need to control what information was broadcasted was not easy. During wartime the MOI was a “servant of all Government Departments” where the majority of all departments needed to “use publicity campaigns to tell the public what they would like them to do and why.” (3) During wartime, these campaigns were integral to Britain’s survival and operations. In a Parliamentary debate in 1944, raised the issue of what to do when too many departments wanted to publicise a message or campaign and how to ensure the public were not overwhelmed by mixed messages. The MOI was dedicated to co-ordinating important messages to the public and prioritise the most urgent campaigns. Many members of Parliament were concerned about a “free-for-all competition” within Government vying for the “attention of the public, and for the very limited advertising space available in the Press.” (3) This concern suggested the complex workings that carried out behind the scene of wartime Government through ensuring that all of society was receiving the publicity campaigns. Publicity campaigns worked closely with the Public Relations Officers and experts in advertising with many messages relying greatly on regional offices to ensure that every region was receiving the appropriate information.Aside from radio, film, posters and other forms of propaganda the MOI also published a large number of books and pamphlets that one Member of Parliament (MP) described as “a new technique in publishing.” (3) This new invention referred to official war books that were like no other publication that sought to present in print and in picture a “conspectus of the many sides of Britain’s war achievements.” (3) These books had great success nationally with homes sales of 23,000,000 copies and similar success in USA with the book, Combined Operations selling 350,000 copies in one year and translated in 12 languages. (3) Despite the success of these publications, the process to producing such material was lengthy, vast and complex with multiple departments working in collaboration to write, proofread, check and re-examine. The MOI also self-published many books but decided to publish twice as many books with private publishers to keep up with the amount of information being produced. Not all attempts were successful and early attempts at distributing propaganda and information were forced with pamphlets tucked inside books and on one occasion the MOI underwent a copyright dispute.The MOI also employed other forms of media outlets such as film to circulate their public notices and propaganda. In 1943, the Ministry’s film division produced 160 films in English. However many members of the public titled these films “dreary” documentaries. Even in the midst of war, the MOI were already planning and preparing films to circulate across liberated Europe. These films were ready to be sent and shown to each country as they were liberated that displayed the role Britain played in the war since “Goebbels’ blanket of darkness spread over their heads.” (3) In conjunction with films displaying Britain’s pivotal role, the MOI also intended to circulate a number of British made entertainment and feature films. For example in 1944, France received a batch of French films from Britain, as well as several films translated into 15 languages that by 1944 were awaiting distribution. The British Government’s relationship with the film industry was in a mutual beneficial partnership where the MOI commissioned several feature length films in return to help the production of 38 commercial films. (3) It appears in many of these cases that Britain was more occupied with how they looked and their reputation to Europe to ensure its efforts were not forgotten after 1945. In many ways, this was also a way for Britain to assert dominance and reclaim a political standing in Europe after a period of political and economic crisis, fragmented and re-drawn borders and alliances on an international stage. Keeping up the war effortWhile Europe was at war, the bleak reality of life was unavoidable therefore propaganda was designed to maintain morale and influence opinions abroad. At home propaganda was aimed to encourage public responsibility and a feeling of directly contributing to Britain’s fight, focusing on rationing, blackouts, secrecy and recruiting women into the workforce. One poster in particular commissioned by the National Savings Committee in 1943 titled Squander Bug aimed at discouraging wasteful or personal spending. (4) The poster depicted a series of scenes where a woman went shopping and the squander bug encouraged her to buy products that were too expensive or unnecessary, all while the bug took pleasure in the detriment the overspending had on the war effort. The poster was aimed at women and encouraged the public to either save or invest money into the war effort. The artist of the poster, Phillip Boydell, created a bug covered with swatstikas, the Nazi German symbol, to associate wasteful spending and ‘squandering’ money to helping the enemy rather than Britain. The poster’s slogan reads ‘Don’t take the squander bug when you go shopping.’ (4) This is another way that Britain found a way to visualise Nazi Germany to the British public instead of fighting an invisible enemy. The squander bug symbolised the enemy on a smaller scale, potentially suggesting that the enemy was inside the walls waiting to take advantage.Another poster issued titled, Dig for Victory (1939 - 1945) emphasised the importance of home grown fruit and vegetables to aid production of food all year round, while rationing was introduced in January 1940. This poster was brightly coloured and depicted a trug abundant with a range of fresh vegetables and fruits, such as carrots, cabbage, courgettes, onions, peas and tomatoes. By the outbreak of war, 70% of food was imported from abroad that relied on key shipping routes that could easily become attacked or blocked. (4) Interestingly, fruit and vegetables were never rationed despite the short supply network, while sugar, meat, fats and diary products were under rationing. By 1943, over a million of fruit and vegetables were grown across Britain. The poster was successful in encouraging the public to take control of food production, however it may have also been partly to the scarcity of products and long ration queues that worked as a deciding factor in why many grew their own vegetables.Women were not the only ones targeted by propaganda, men were also targeted by an anti-gossip notice designed by Harold Foster called ‘Keep mum she’s not so dumb’ (1941). (4) This particular campaign by the MOI alerted the public to the threat of enemy spies and the danger of gossiping within social settings. In this poster, a woman in an evening dress surrounded by men in military uniform gossiping and drinking suggested that anyone could be listening even if they appeared inconsequential. Many of these posters worked on stereotypes and gender roles to promote their propaganda. It was a form of control that did not necessarily stifle freedom of speech, but was a constant reminder that relied on feelings of accountability. Other posters included salvaging and mending clothes, recruiting women to munitions factories and emphasising Britain’s allies with political undertones.Despite the MOI’s intention to use propaganda to boost morale and ensure the public adhered to playing their part within the war effort, there were several cases of increase in crime such as breeches in the blackouts and bending the rules. During the Blitz (1940-1941) where Nazi Germany’s Luftwaffe bombed the East End of London and other major cities across Britain provided new opportunities for looting. Historians acknowledged that the Blitz created a determination to maintain the war effort through ‘Blitz Spirit’. But in a period of upheaval and turmoil, it is difficult to ascertain whether many carried on because they had no choice. On one occasion looters used a bombing raid as an opportunity to raid a house in Dover and when the resident returned they discovered their home had been stripped even down to the carpets and pipes. While this case suggested uncontained thievery, it also paints a picture of desperation when items were heavily sought after and rationed. By 1940, 4,584 looting cases were prosecuted in the Central Criminal Court (Old Bailey) in London, while others used bombings as cover-up for murder. The rational thought seemed not to exist for some looters and on one occasion a women stole a pair of shoes from a shop window because “if those shoes were just left there, somebody will steal them”. (5)Another report questioned the motive as to why someone would steal a sink in the Yorkshire Evening Post. Wartime propaganda may have depicted a community that worked together to keep up the war effort, but it hid the darker aspects of society that flourished under such chaos. (5) Radio Hamburg & German PropagandaBritish broadcasters and reporters weren’t the only ones that the MOI had to worry about, one in particular was William Joyce also known as Lord Haw Haw, who rose to popularity as a personality broadcasting German propaganda to British audiences. His radio broadcasts recorded 50% of the British public through Radio Hamburg. Joyce was a firm supporter of the Nazis and travelled to Germany in August 1939 with a British passport, which he lied to obtain claiming he was a British citizen when he was in fact Irish. When in Germany he collaborated with the German Propaganda Ministry with regular radio broadcasts in September 1939. He commonly issued threats and misinformation towards Britain in a bid to undermine morale. It is interesting that while the MOI tried their best to censor and streamline exactly the information and propaganda that the British public consumed, many still listened to Joyce’s broadcasts. (6)Some historians have suggested that this deliberate decision by Britain ensured that they didn’t ruin their reputation as a trusted news source by lashing out at enemy stations. The BBC was advised to continue to report truthfully and accurately but to withhold any information that would cause distress, for example omitting the number of casualties while still reporting incidents. However, the question should be asked was the BBC lulling the British public into a false sense of security instead of reporting the stark realities abroad? If Britain banned such a broadcast, many would have found other ways to listen. The only solution was for the BBC to direct attention back to its broadcasts in the form of entertaining content rather than dreary reports. But the question has to be asked, why did so many members of the British public tune into listen in the early years of the war? Joyce didn’t just spread propaganda but also attempted to undermine key political figures such as Prime Minister, Winston Churchill. The British public craved in many ways entertainment as an escape from the dreary news and uncertainty. When asked about why they listened, some British listeners found the broadcasts entertaining and wondered if what Joyce was reporting had a slither of truth. Eventually, Joyce was captured and trialled when Germany surrendered in 1945.One example of detrimental censorship was the Hallsville School bombing in Canning Town, East End, where it was reported only 77 civilians were killed despite eye witnesses claiming it was closer to the 600 mark. (7) The British Government denied the claim due to not having sufficient evidence to report such high numbers. It was seen as detrimental for the Government to report such a devastating incident in case it deteriorated mass morale. Furthermore, a media blackout was issued to the Press to avoid publishing specific details on the location, photographs and casualties. This case emphasised a fine line between honesty and censorship that could have easily forced the public to lose trust in the British Government for denying something so blatantly obvious with eyewitnesses. (7) ConclusionIn conclusion, the British Government’s desire to censor reports and withhold vital information and use propaganda was successful on the surface but allowed darker and more sinister events to transpire at home, like crime. The British Government also took the opportunity of continuing their legacy and reputation throughout liberated Europe through films to secure they place in politics. It is also worth noting that this is no different to how other countries employed political propaganda to ensure their success. While censorship and propaganda have many benefits to boosting morale, it also had negative consequences that alienated the public when lived events were reported incorrectly or denied outright. The war changed the way media and radio operated and pushed boundaries between dreary information and entertainment as well as democratic principles. It is also significant that the BBC still censor what they broadcast, for example the FIFA World Cup in Qatar in 2022 saw the BBC boycott the opening ceremony on main shown programming without explanation although it was widely reported and implied that it didn’t align with their editorial values. Censorship still occurs but through subtle ways that are not often recognised. Find that piece of interest? If so, join us for free by clicking here. References(1) H. Irving, ‘Chaos and Censorship in the Second World War’, 2014, Gov.UK < https://history.blog.gov.uk/2014/09/12/chaos-and-censorship/ >[accessed 23 May 2024]. (2) UK Parliament, ‘Emergency Powers (Defence) Act 1939’, 2024, UK Parliament < https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/yourcountry/collections/collections-second-world-war/second-world-war-legislation/emergency-powers-defence-act-c20-1940-/ >[accessed 22 May 2024].(3) HC Deb, 29 June 1944, vol 401, cols 822 – 825.(4) The National Archives, ‘Second World War Propaganda Posters’, 2024, BETA The National Archives < https://beta.nationalarchives.gov.uk/explore-the-collection/explore-by-time-period/second-world-war/second-world-war-propaganda-posters/#:~:text=During%20the%20Second%20World%20War,production%2C%20salvage%20and%20military%20recruitment>[accessed 24 May 2024]. (5) BNA, ‘Crime and the Blitz’, 2015, The British Newspaper Archives < https://blog.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/2015/07/17/crime-and-the-blitz/ >[accessed 24 May 2024]. (6) IMW, ‘The Rise and Fall of Lord Haw Haw During the Second World War’, 2024, IWM <https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/the-rise-and-fall-of-lord-haw-haw-during-the-second-world-war >[accessed 28 May 2024]. (7) M. Oakley, ‘Second World War Bombing Raid South Hallsville School’, 2023, East London History < https://www.eastlondonhistory.co.uk/second-world-war-bombing-raid-south-hallsville-school/ >[accessed 29 May 2024].
News Feed (Home)
Popular Posts 
Events 
Blog 
Market 
Forum 
Headline News
VidWatch
Game Zone
Top PodCasts
