US National Publications
and the Blitz
No aspect of British society went un-reported to the American
public. National publications such as LIFE, TIME, Haper’s Weekly, Saturday Evening
Post and other magazines attempted to create a more definitive scenario,
complete with photos that sought to contextualise Murrow’s words. The articles were not as sensationalised, and
focused less on the exploits of the journalists themselves, instead attempting
to capture the essence of being British.
This bolstered Murrow and his colleagues’ credibility. When the American
people picked up an edition of LIFE
or Saturday Evening Post, the type of
account which they read was very different from the stories which Guy Murchie
and Raymond Daniell were writing for the New
York Times and the Chicago Tribune. Although many of the articles included
anecdotes of lack of sleep, air raid shelters and the spirit of the Blitz, most
accounts spoke plainly about the lack of humanity involved. These publications
were able to develop their characters with real depth. By the end of the article, the reader had
somebody with a face, family and real problems with whom to identify.
American journalists in London and pro-British
news agencies were the real driving forces behind these national
publications. Without their lead from
the field, TIME, LIFE and PM would not have been able to publish
accurate accounts, or display such popular, powerful images. The Associated Press produced most of the
material, and overwhelmingly supported aid-short-of-war. As already noted, Molly Painter-Downes’
‘Letters for London’ segment featured regularly in The New Yorker, while others published accounts straight from
London. The Chicago Tribune’s Guy Murchie featured regularly in TIME and LIFE magazines. Popular
themes were often reported. The 14 October issue of TIME reproduced Murrow’s account praising Churchill’s efforts to
rid the country of Nazi raiders, claiming that caste-conscious Britain was
transforming over night as ‘all are equal under the bomb.’ A previous issue of TIME reported that ‘Smart Winston Churchill’ knew that the only
chance Britain had at winning the war was predicated on the ‘enthusiastic
support of the working classes.’[i]
By September 1940, wartime news was big money.
No other story was bigger than that of German bombs falling on British
cities. American correspondents, Walter
Graebner and Allan Michie, gave a detailed account in LIFE of their night together on 18 September, during a night-long
air raid. LIFE also provided photos of the aftermath.[ii] The account left little speculation as to who
was in the wrong. The majority of US
publications reported German civilian hardships very differently. Hitler’s ‘Master Plan’ justified a
pro-British response. ‘We have built up a defence force superior to any other
in the world,’ boasted Hitler, allowing the German people to go ‘about their
business with perfect tranquillity.’
However, TIME was happy to
point out that these ‘Hitlerian promises’ were soon broken by ‘waves of British
bombers’ that ‘shuttled across the capital’ for nearly five hours. According to the article, this was
‘satisfying news’ to battered Londoners.
It reported that Britain’s plan involved a three-pronged attack, smash
German production, render coastal ports unusable and crack German morale. The entire article provided no justification
outside the norms of war, whereas German raiders and Hitler were unleashing a
new type of ‘total war.’[iii]
LIFE magazine presented the Blitz as a one-sided affair. Like other publications and newspapers, LIFE covered both sides fairly well, but
was unapologetically pro-British. After
the German government promised to punish the British a ‘thousand fold’ for
their ‘organised terror’ against German cities, LIFE told the American people that the ‘dazed German public’ was
unconvinced.[iv] Instead, it illustrated how the German
government had recently boasted of its ‘all-out masterpieces of terrorism’ over
the streets of London. The Battle of
London became a major selling point for US journalists and publications. The Battle of Berlin, however, was relegated
to the bottom of the page. There was
nothing balanced about the magazine’s style of journalism. Although most stories had been wired from
London, the editors presented the material as if the American public had
witnessed it for themselves. As the Battle of Britain reached its climax, the
23 September issue claimed that Hitler had tried to destroy London.
LIFE reported the ‘facts’ as they appeared, including numbers of dead,
houses destroyed, people made homeless and the names of historical monuments
and buildings blasted into history. Many
articles included anecdotes of mothers trying to change their children’s diapers
and heat their bottles during an air raid in damp shelters, while others
volunteered willingly to help in soup kitchens and canteens, serving sandwiches
and cups of tea. Other issues ran
articles on British war humour and the morale of the British public. Perhaps
most tellingly, LIFE argued that
unlike Poland, the Low Countries and France, Britain was not on the run, mainly
because it had ‘simple stubborn guts.’[v]
TIME attempted to produce a more balanced approach
of the Blitz. Before 7 September, TIME covered the bombings through the
provision of equal column space to both German and British strategic bombing
efforts. Their readership was more
historically conservative than that of other major US publications. The editorial team committed at an early
stage to unbiased journalism, and hence dedicated the same amount of press to
both sides. The 9 September issue
published a full-page map of R.A.F. aerial bombing targets in Germany,
including factories, oil plants, munitions plants and other strategic targets.[vi]
However, as indiscriminate bombing became more
frequent and eventually occurred every day, TIME
shifted its focus towards a more pro-British effort. This shift reflected general US public
opinion, rather than any change in policy.
Therefore, German raids on British munitions plants now become acts of
terrorism by barbarous warmongers. In
the 16 September 1940 issue of TIME,
the ‘Battle of Britain’ segment changed its neutral tone to include a scathing
report on German aggression against London.
Accompanied with photographs of the destruction, and captions which read
‘London’s First Refugees’, TIME
reported that in the modern history of London, four catastrophes had occurred,
the fire of St. Paul’s in 1087; the Great Fire of London in 1666; the Great
Plague of the 17th century; and the indiscriminate bombings of
September 1940. The first three, claimed
the article, were ‘impersonal’ but the bombings bore the weight of the human
mind, due to the fact that it was the ‘work of man.’ Waves of German bombers and fighter planes
unleashed a ‘relentless’ attack on London of old school ‘Prussian military
precision.’ The result was the ‘grimmest
series of raids in history.’
TIME’s transformation during the opening months of
the Blitz mirrored that of American public opinion. Germany became the
unquestionable enemy, with Hitler viewed as one of history’s all-time greatest
villains. ‘This is just what Hitler
wants,’ stated the 16 September issue, ‘for Adolf Hitler knows the meaning of
war. To the Fuehrer, political objectives are just as important as gas works
and docks.’ TIME ultimately accepted that bombing civilian populations did not
influence the outcome of military campaigns; but depicted the Blitz as an act
of terrorism, supported by the point that German planes ‘bombed slums far more
than other residential districts.’ Its
editorial staff considered that Hitler was aiming to crack Britain’s ‘armor of
morale’ and highlight class division.[vii]
TIME’s shift towards non-neutral reportage and
sympathy for the British cause now became more evident. In its 14 October issue, it reported that
with the ‘U.S. lending more & more aid, British confidence grew loud’,
enabling morale to be replenished and British efforts to become more effective. [viii] However, when reporting Britain’s bombing
campaign on Nazi Germany, it focused primarily on targets of military strategic
importance and not civilian bombings.
Although Britain’s policy of systematic bombings centred mainly on
military targets, civilian populations were affected. Most US publications omitted the latter, and
concentrated mainly on the former, perpetuating a sense of British moral
supremacy. This system of reporting had
a strong effect on American public opinion.
The American people were much more inclined to believe that Britain was
fighting a much cleaner and legal war; whereas the Nazis had attacked civilian
populations in an effort to usher in a new kind of ‘total war.’
London’s ‘Civilian Army’ received considerable coverage from most
publications. TIME devoted a regular column to ‘Civilians in Battle’, explaining
the hardships and daily life under bombardment.
Often, the attack on London’s civilian population was explained as a
‘methodical’ effort, through which the British people began to see themselves
an ‘army of non-fighters’, forced to take the punishment and hold their
nerve.
The Battle for London was the most publicised phase of the war to
date. The 7 October 1940 issue of LIFE proclaimed that London was the
‘greatest battlefield of the war.’ Life
in London had become something ‘new and terrible in history,’ surrounded by
terror and uncertainty.[ix] A popular slogan circulating the city stated,
‘Join the Army and escape the war.’[x] Londoners posted copies of a notice found in
an Australian trench during the previous war.
It stated five unconditional certainties if the ‘enemy’ attempted to
take their position. Despite the fact
that 50,000,000 lbs of German bombs had been dropped on England, killing 3,500
civilians, LIFE insisted that ‘the
position is emphatically being held.’
The 14 October issue of LIFE
detailed the Grimmond family’s unlucky feat of being bombed-out twice within
the first month of the Blitz. Dominating
with this, the magazine produced a half-page photograph of the family standing
on top of the ruins the following morning looking shocked, but not
desperate. After the first bombing, the
children were sent to Canada. Next to the article was a handwritten note from
one of the daughters to her parents, ensuring them they were safe and enjoying
themselves.[xi]
National publications capitalised on the American public’s fascination
with underground shelters. Images of
Londoners sleeping in underground cities left a lasting impression on the US
public. Often, they echoed the reports
from London. Many photos showed
Londoners smiling and singing along, while the caption told the reader that
this had taken place during an air raid.
The powerful images had a very positive effect on their readership. The 14 October issue of LIFE printed several pictures of Londoners sleeping on the tracks
and the escalators, leaving only a path for commuters desperate to get a full
night’s sleep.[xii] However, most publications did not try to
withhold that sanitation conditions were poor and most stations were inhabited
by poorer citizens, some even traveling across town and queuing for hours for
West End tube shelters.
Despite the fact that very few Londoners regularly
used underground shelters, US publications littered their publications with
images of makeshift civilian camps. The American press continued to portray
these shelters as the epicentre of British resolve. TIME claimed
that the tube station shelters had become the ‘chief centres where the civilian
army encamped.’ [xiii] According to its 7 October issue, the
‘civilian army’ had even begun to assign ranks to their comrades, to help
establish order and keep the shelters clean and running smoothly. In the boroughs of Camberwell and Lambeth,
crowds of 18,000 gathered nightly under the guidance and support of their
‘Shelter Marshall’, Dick Levy, who helped ensure that the shelter stayed
sanitised, and settled any disputes. [xiv]
Most publications agreed that a well-informed public would lead to
sensible policy. Thus they reported the amount of damage in unbiased, factual
terms, the amount of tonnage dropped on cities, ports and factories, and
setbacks in regards to production. TIME stated that the Marshall of the
Royal Air Force, Viscount ‘Boom’ Trenchard, claimed that these losses were
off-setting production operating at full capacity. In an attempt to practice good journalism,
the article closes by stating that, ‘Somewhere between the two opposing claims
lay the truth.’ [xv]
In the same article, TIME reported the amount of damage done to American enterprises
with British branches, the results ‘were not reassuring.’ Most companies cited lack of transportation,
downed infrastructure and direct damage as the main reasons for not operating
at full capacity. They argued that any
delay in production would have devastating effects on Britain’s war effort and
do even more harm to those producing non-military goods. Pro-intervention publications made the case
for more protection against this damage, and thereby assist American industries
doing business in war-torn Britain.
During late 1940 and early 1941, the Blitz was the most covered and
photographed event within LIFE magazine’s pages. Its 16 September issue
produced a photo of Margaret Curtis, aged 2, covered with bandages. Her mother
had been killed trying to protect her.
Other initial photos showed the widespread destruction of bombed-out
London, and homeless refugees streaming out of the capitol.[xvi] However, no image personified America’s
reaction to the Blitz like that which graced the cover of LIFE magazine on 23 September 1940.
Eileen Dunne, a small child of three years, was sitting up in her
hospital bed, with a bandage wrapped around her head and teddy bear in her folded
arms. The caption read, ‘A German bomber
whose crew had never met her dropped a bomb on her North England village.’ The image was reproduced throughout the
country in a number of propaganda posters, pro-interventionists’ flyers and
local newspapers. The photograph was
taken by the prominent British photographer, Cecil Beaton. Beaton was instrumental in British efforts to
influence US public opinion through the medium of photography. He was posted to the Ministry of Information,
and quickly fell in line with their efforts, as Britain’s official wartime
photographer, the majority of AP pictures which circulated the US during the
Blitz came from his lens.[xvii]
The 23 September edition of LIFE, the first since the Blitz had
begun, featured a complete spread of the bombings, including the ‘First
Pictures of London’s Agony.’ It claimed
that ‘some of the world’s most famous picture-postcards’ had crumbled under the
weight of German bombs.[xviii] The editors of LIFE praised the British government for allowing the photos to be
published, showing Londoner refugees fleeing the city in ‘scenes painfully’
reminiscent of recent European cities destroyed by German raids. Other images
showed bombed-out streets with rubble strewn everywhere; and St. Paul’s
Cathedral flanked with smoke and smouldering ashes. The 14 October issue
printed a photo of 1,500 US government officials, praying in the Washington
Cathedral for the victims of Britain and their families.[xix]
The use of photography as a tool of influence proved to be as important
as Murrow’s use of radio. Hundreds of images of the destruction in London and
other British cities presented the American public with the inescapable burden
of wartime Britain. Most depicted bombed-out London at her worst. However, the images of gutted houses and the
British public sweeping away the debris were always accompanied with a caption
that claimed the citizens of Britain were happy to keep ‘London functioning’
through mass effort and friendly banter.
The 7 October 1940 issue of LIFE
displayed a full-page image of a building set alight by an incendiary bomb,
with A.R.P. and Auxiliary Fire Servicemen scrambling to get the blaze under
control. [xx] The caption read, ‘Every Fire is a Raging
Inferno.’ The same issue published a
photo of a Mrs Foster, who gave birth during an air raid, with an A.R.P. warden
acting as a midwife. [xxi]
Like LIFE
magazine, TIME’s coverage of the
Blitz rested on the strength of its photography. Weekly images littered the publication,
ranging from maps of bombsites to streams of refugees fleeing the city, pushing
and carrying their possessions with them.[xxii] Shortly after the Blitz began, TIME focused primarily on the
destruction of civil services. But as
the bombings intensified, more images started to appear of the shelters and
social conditions which had developed during the bombings. Refugees and children were repeatedly shown
to the American public, in order to emphasise the more human elements of war. Political and military consequences were
shown less, in an effort to force the US public to view the war through the
lens of humanitarian struggle.
LIFE and TIME were anxious to
justify their support for American aid.
Despite publishing open letters and condemnation by leading members of
the opposition, LIFE continued to
publish weekly accounts and photos of the Blitz. In its 16 December issue, the ‘Picture of the Week’ showed a downed German plane in the
fields of rural England amongst a flock of sheep, with the caption reading, ‘A
new hazard for English mutton.’[xxiii] In the same issue, Cecil Beaton’s photos of
Oxford Street in ruins illustrated how the UK was still able to function amidst
the chaos and destruction. The article
claimed that the greatest middle-class shopping district outside the US had
taken a ‘terrific plastering from German bombs’; but still ‘does good
business.’ Despite looking like ‘a city
of Flanders’ and ‘masonry tumbling to the ground,’ business was ‘booming.’[xxiv]
The 23 December 1940, Christmas issue of LIFE published an article highlighting the destruction of Coventry;
and the new phase of the Blitz, which included provincial Britain. The article included five pages of the
destruction, including a photo of a hollowed-out Coventry Cathedral. Despite the widespread death and destruction
of the raid, most captions claimed that the city would continue to fight and
defend itself against Nazi bombs. The
headline read, ‘We’re Ruined But We’re Not Beaten.’ [xxv]
National publications rushed to print accounts of the bombings and graphic
pictures of the widespread destruction.
In the February 1941 edition of Harper’s
Magazine, a picture of St. Paul’s cathedral during the Blitz was produced,
with the caption, ‘But Still It Isn’t As Bad As You Expected.’[xxvi] Beaton’s photo of St. Paul’s emerging through
the smoke caused by the raid of 29 December was reproduced and circulated
within the US on a much larger scale than in Britain.
[i] ‘The Revolution’ TIME 16
September 1940, Vol. XXXVI (part I), No. 12, pg. 33.
[ii] ‘A Bad Bombing in Bloomsbury’ Walter Graebner & Allan Michie, LIFE 30 September 1940, vol. 9, No. 14,
p. 25-26.
[iii] ‘Battle of Britain’ TIME
21 October 1940, Vol. XXXVI (part II) No. 18, p. 27-28.
[iv] ‘Blitzkrieg Manners’ LIFE 4
November 1940, Vol. 9, No. 16, p.
[v] ‘Death of a Speaker’ LIFE
30 September 1940, vol. 9, No. 14, p. 22.
[vi] ‘R.A.F. Over Germany’ TIME,
9 September 1940, Volume XXXVI (Part I), No,11, p. 21.
[vii] ‘Battle of Britain’ TIME,
16 September 1940, Volume XXXVI (part I) No.11, p. 21.
[viii] ‘Battle of Britain’ TIME
14 October 1940, Vol. XXXVI (part II) No. 17, p. 34
[ix] ‘The Bombing of London’ LIFE
7 October 1940, Vol. 9, No. 15, p. 85.
[x] ‘London Fights Poor Man’s War’ LIFE
7 October 1940, Vol. 9, No. 15, pg. 6.
[xi] ‘Battle of Britain’ TIME
21 October 1940, Vol. XXXVI (part II), No. 18, p. 27-28.
[xii] ‘The Poor of London Try to
Find a Night’s Sleep by Seizing the Subway’ LIFE
14 October 1940, vol. 9, No. 16, p. 33.
[xiii] ‘Civilian in Battle’ TIME
7 October 1940, Vol. XXXVI (part II), No. 1, p. 27,
[xiv] ‘Civilian in Battle’ TIME 7 October 1940, Vol. XXXVI (part
II), No. 1, pg 27.
[xv] ‘Civilian in Battle’ TIME
7 October 1940, Vol. XXXVI (part II), No. 1, p. 40.
[xvi] ‘German Bombers Go To England To Die’ LIFE 16 September 1940, Vol. 9, No. 12, p. 28
[xvii] LIFE 23 September 1940,
vol. 9, No. 13, p. 3.
[xviii] ‘First Pictures of London’s Agony’ LIFE 23 September 1940, vol. 9, No. 13, p. 23.
[xix] ‘Picture of the Week’ LIFE 14 October 1940, vol. 9, No. 16, p.
29.
[xx] ‘The Bombing of London’ LIFE
7 October 1940, Vol. 9, No. 15, p. 92.
[xxi] ‘The Bombing of London’ LIFE
7 October 1940, Vol. 9, No. 15, p.89.
[xxii] Great Britain’s Capital is Smashed from the Air’ TIME 16 September 1940, Volume XXXVI
(Part 1), NO. 12, p. 21-27.
[xxiii] ‘Picture of the Week’ LIFE 16
Demeber 1940, Vol. 9, No.25, p. 25
[xxiv] ‘Oxford Street, Greatest Shopping Street Still Does Good Business’ LIFE 16 December 1940, Vol. 9, No. 25,
p. 61.
[xxv] ‘Germans Bombing of Coventry, “We’re Ruined But We’re Not Beaten’” LIFE 23 December 1940, Vol. 9, No. 27,
p. 8-13.
