Im writing a paper on wartime censorship

C

Confalone

Still Mildly Glowing
So I'm writing a 10 page paper in my history of journalism class about the mixed agendas of the media in wartime coverage. Conjoined with that topic is also"

"Discuss Canada’s wartime censorship system in World War I and World War II. Can wartime censorship really work? (Think about the other ways news spreads)."

Since Ive seen quite a few picturesque propaganda posters around NMA (many of which enjoyed brief stints as my desktop background) I was wondering if anyone could point me towards any good sources for a paper like this related to the media's mixed agendas (propoganda/ vs. fact) or wartime censorship
 
Wartime censorship can work. A good example is when the British were chased back to england in 1940 two ships were sunk killing some either 4000 or 2000 soldiers that were evacuated. Churchill decided to censor it and focus on the glorious evacuation across the channel. So that the retreat was seen as a success and noone knew about the ship incident until after the war.

As for papers on the subject, I got no idea.
 
Be sure to put in the impact TV had on public opinion on the Vietnam War.
 
Confalone said:
So I'm writing a 10 page paper in my history of journalism class about the mixed agendas of the media in wartime coverage. Conjoined with that topic is also"

"Discuss Canada’s wartime censorship system in World War I and World War II. Can wartime censorship really work? (Think about the other ways news spreads)."

Since Ive seen quite a few picturesque propaganda posters around NMA (many of which enjoyed brief stints as my desktop background) I was wondering if anyone could point me towards any good sources for a paper like this related to the media's mixed agendas (propoganda/ vs. fact) or wartime censorship
Click to expand...

Of course it can work. Find a source that covers the role of propaganda in the Third Reich, especially the Eastern Front, where, in the interest of propaganda, cities often weren't evacuated until it was too late (when Soviet tanks rolled down the streets).

And no German knew a thing, since the propaganda was so thick.
 
Loxley said:
two ships were sunk killing some either 4000 or 2000 soldiers that were evacuated. Churchill decided to censor it and focus on the glorious evacuation across the channel. So that the retreat was seen as a success and noone knew about the ship incident until after the war.
Click to expand...

that's perfect I think I'm going to look for some info about that (it'll be hard to find enough primary sources to fill 2 footnotes a page but meh)

thanks for pointing me in the right direction guys
 
Confalone said:
Loxley said:
two ships were sunk killing some either 4000 or 2000 soldiers that were evacuated. Churchill decided to censor it and focus on the glorious evacuation across the channel. So that the retreat was seen as a success and noone knew about the ship incident until after the war.
Click to expand...

that's perfect I think I'm going to look for some info about that (it'll be hard to find enough primary sources to fill 2 footnotes a page but meh)
Click to expand...
Actually he mentioned it in his memoirs from the war. If you can be bothered to search through the 12 volumes. Primary source as good as gold.
 
might be more useful to investigate why so many reporters are embedded in combat platoons (lol, bonding much) and howcome all those supposed experts are all connected to the army and the arms industry. :)
 
Loxley said:
Actually he mentioned it in his memoirs from the war. If you can be bothered to search through the 12 volumes. Primary source as good as gold.
Click to expand...

That's a great idea, Im sure the library has all the volumes, thanks again times a million guys, im seriously pointed in the right direction now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top