World War I: British War Propaganda


Figure 1.-- This illustratio appeared in the British "The War Illustrated". The caption read, "There were many proved instances of Germans using women and children as battle-screens." There were manu illustrations like this in the first year of the War. The Germans did behave brutally, for example, seizing civilian food supplies. I know, however, no proven instances of such German battlefield tactics.

British propaganda proved more effective than German propaganda. The German war propaganda lacked subtlety and was seen as strident by most Americans. The British, however, had important advatages. British propaganda was to play an important part in the Allied victory. The British had no propaganda office when the War began, but quickly created one. The War Propaganda Bureau was placed in the hands of Charles Masterman (September 1914). The British had two concens with one broke out. First, The British from the onset needed to influence domestic public opinion. This was more important in Britain than any other because Britain entered the War with only a small all-volunteer army. Thus Britons until 1916 had to be persuaded to volunteer. And the British public as the War progressed will apauling casualties had to be persuaded to continue the War. Second, the British needed to influence world opinion and here it was the United States that most concerned the British. This became increasingly important as the War progressed and neither the Allies or the Central Powers could break the deadlock on the Western Front. By 1917 with the virtual collaose of the French Army and the disolution of the Russian Army that Allied success would depend on America. Here the Germans had given the British a substantial advantage. However the Germans tried to explin it, the fact remained that the War began wjen they invaded Belgium--a neutral nation. And the brutal German occupation regime in Belgium gave the British material for their progand mill. Certainly the British blew iy up out of all proportions, but the Germans provided plenty of material for the British to work with. Had not America rushed food shipments to Belgium, there would have been mass starvation. The British had another important advantage, they controlled the Trans-Atlantic cabels, which meant they controlled the War news America received. Thus from a very early stage in the War, American sympathies were with the Allies. The German introduction of sunmarine warfare and poison gas only confirmed American attitudes toward the Germans and British propaganda made full use of both in their propaganda.

Effectiveness

British propaganda proved more effective than German propaganda. The German war propaganda lacked subtlety and was seen as strident by most Americans. The British, however, had important advatages. British propaganda was to play an important part in the Allied victory.

War Propaganda Bureau

The British had no propaganda office when the War began, but quickly created one. The War Propaganda Bureau was placed in the hands of Charles Masterman (September 1914).

Domestic and International Targets

The British had two concens with one broke out. First, The British from the onset needed to influence domestic public opinion. This was more important in Britain than any other because Britain entered the War with only a small all-volunteer army. Thus Britons until 1916 had to be persuaded to volunteer. And the British public as the War progressed will apauling casualties had to be persuaded to continue the War. Second, the British needed to influence world opinion and here it was the United States that most concerned the British. This became increasingly important as the War progressed and neither the Allies or the Central Powers could break the deadlock on the Western Front. By 1917 with the virtual collaose of the French Army and the disolution of the Russian Army that Allied success would depend on America.

Themes

The Germans had given the British a substantial advantage. However the Germans tried to explin it, the fact remained that the War began when they invaded Belgium--a neutral nation. The British charged that German soldiers committed henous war crimes against civilians. They also targeted the brutal German occupation regime in Belgium which gave the British material for their progand mill. Certainly the British blew it up out of all proportions, but the Germans provided plenty of material for the British to work with. Had not America rushed food shipments to Belgium, there would have been mass starvation in Belgium. Another major them was the inhuman nature of German U-boat warfare. This also proved effective when Americans were killed in the U-boat attacks. Much of the most aggressively anti-German material appeard in the ealy phase of the War. Later British propaganda seem to be more oriented toward positive patriotic themes. I'm unsure just why the British shifted their propaganda focus.

Direction

We are not sure at this time how much of the British anti-German was the direct result of stories planted by the War Propaganda Bureau and how much was the imagination of private British authors and illustrators. The War Propaganda Bureau engaged the services of important authors. We are unsure to what extent they directed their work. Of course after reading newspaper items, authors wrote stories that were not created by the War Propaganda Bureau. It is probably impossible to differentite between the two at this time. And of course with the press censorship at the time, material could not be published unless the Government approved.

Trans-Atlantic Cables

The British had another important advantage, they controlled the Trans-Atlantic cabels, which meant they controlled the War news America received.

America

Germany made two huge mistakes in its War strategy. The first mistake was the ability of its powerful army in securing aquicjk victory as it had done in the Franco-Prussian War. Here Germany would not just be fighting France in the West, but Russia in the East. And attacking France through Belgium brought a third great power, Britain, into the War. The second mistake was its faulty assessment of the United States. Many Germans did not believce America was a real coutry--because it had no core etnicity. And other Germans did not respect a country that had virtually no army. Germany did not think that world public opinion, much less American public opinion, was something with which they need to corncern themselves. The German Chancellor saw treaties as mere 'scraps of paper. With the invasion of Belgium, from a very early stage in the War, American sympathies were with the Allies. The British saw American public opinion as critical to their victory. The Germans ignored it. And as a result, from the omset of the war, German-American relations deteriorated. Given thre respect for which Americans held Germany and the large German-American population, it is almost inconceivable this could have occurred. Only the absurd incopetence of the German Government could have allowed this to happen. The Kaiser and Government officials thought it of little consequence. It is difficult to say if German incomptence or British war propaganda was more important. It was not just the invasion of neutral Belgium and the mistreatment of Belgian civilians that brought this about. The German introduction of submarine warfare and poison gas only confirmed American attitudes toward the Germans and British propaganda made full use of both of these actions which had no real impact on the war in their propaganda. The German sinking of Lusitania (1915) had a particularly important impact on American public opinion bcause of the loss of American lives--including some prominent Americans. The German image would nevcer recover. It almost caused war at the time and would ultimately bring American into rhe War. After the War mny Americans rethought this, but during the War it had a very significant impact on public opinion, adding to anti-German sentiment.

Historical Scholarship

The British recognizing the explosive implications of German conduct in Belgium quickly mde this a cornerstone of their War-time Propannda. They began to refer to the Germans as 'the Hun'. The Britain Government sponsored the Committee on Alleged German Outrages which issued what became known as the Bryce Report (May 1915). The Report provided detailed accounts of the behavior of the German Army in Belgium and northern France. It included many first-hand accounts, including excerpts from diaries and letters found on captured German soldiers. As best we can determine these were real documents and not anti-German forgeries. The Report playd a major role in affecting public opinion in neutral countries. This was of marginal importance because the neutral countries like Denmark, Norway, and Sweden were not going to change the outcome of the War. One country which continued o be sympsthetic to the Germans was the Netherlands. The one exception as to the importance of the neutra countris was the United States. Her the Germans were largely dismissive of America's potential importance. The British on the other hand from the bginning of the War saw America as the one country which cold detemkine the outcomne. The British shipped 41,000 copies to the United States and the contents were widely circulated by the media. The outraged Germans responded with a report of their own detailing alleged atrocities by Belgian civilians on German soldiers. [Quinn, p. 39.] This was a public relations disater of its own, rather like wife batters blaming it al on their wives. The Bryce Report while signidicantly affecting public opinion during the War, was criticized after the war in the 1920s and 30s. It became regarded as exaggerated British war propaganda. And there were priblems. The Committee relied heavily on unproven allegations of refugees and often distorted interpretations of diaries of German soldiers. In particular, criticism of the reported fitted the needs of American pcifists and isolationists determined to prevent american involvement in another European War. There is no way of checking many ofc the first hand accounts rferred to in the report. While they should not be dismissed, first hand accounts are often affected by the individual's terms of reference and unique circumstances. Modern historians addressing the conduct of the German Arny have used additional sources, including the official German records. There is now substantial verification that the German rmy (and not just individual soldiers) committed large-scale deliberate atrocities in Belgium. [Horne and Kramer, Zuckerman, and Lipkes]

Sources

Horne, John and Alan Kramer. German Atrocities, 1914: A History of Denial (Yale University Press, 2002).

Lipkes, Jeff. Rehearsals: The German Army in Belgium, August 1914 (Leuven University Press, 2007).

Quinn, Patrick J. The Conning of America: The Great War and American Popular Literature (Rodopi, 2001).

Zuckerman, Larry. The Rape of Belgium: The Untold Story of World War I (NYU Press, 2004).







CIH









Navigate the CIH World War I Pages:
[Return to Main British World War I page]
[Return to Main German attrocities in Belgium page]
[Aftermath] [Alliances] [Animals] [Armistace] [Biographies] [Causes] [Campaigns] [Casualties] [Children] [Countries] [Declaration of war] [Deciding factors] -------[Diplomacy] [Economics] -------[Geo-political crisis] [Home front] [Intelligence]
[Military forces] [Neutrality] [Pacifism] [People] [Peace treaties] [Propaganda] [POWs] [Russian Revolution] [Terrorism] [Trench warfare] ------[Technology] [Weaponry]
[Bibliographies] [Contributions] [FAQs] [Images] [Links] [Registration] [Tools]
[Return to Main World War I page]
[Return to Main war essay page]
[Return to CIH Home page]





Created: 5:56 AM 5/15/2006
Last updated: 9:56 PM 9/23/2015