275 276 -2- 277 - 3 - 278 - 4 - 279 - 5 -

IP.
Copy on B/17/16
EXECUTIVE BOARD
BROADCASTING BY OFFICERS OF THE ROYAL NAVY, ARMY, AND ROYAL AIR FORCE IN THE HOME SERVICE OF THE B.B.C.

Paper for Discussion on Friday, 24th January

1. The different types :-

Broadcast talks given by officers of the fighting Services are of two distinct types:

Type A .

Talks intended to explain the strategic aspects of the War. Those in the series “War Commentary” are of this type. They are fifteen minutes in length, and have been given weekly (with two interruptions) since October 26 1939. The first speaker was Major-General Sir Ernest Swinton, who gave eighteen talks between that date and February 29 1940. He was invited with the concurrence of the three Services, who agreed to supply him with material and to check his scripts in regard to technical matters. In February last it was decided to form a panel of speakers, one from each of the three Services, who would, whenever the course of events did not render this inappropriate, speak in rotation. This procedure has been followed from March 7 1940 until now. The speakers who succeeded General Swinton have included both serving and retired officers.

Type B. Talks describing some particular incident of the War (e.g. an air battle or bombing raid), or some particular form of naval , military or aerial activity (e.g. a day on a minesweeper, or the routine work of the R.A.F. Coastal Command).

The speakers in these talks are either serving officers and men who have themselves taken part in what they describe, or reporters who have been given special facilities for observation.

Serving officers and men, unless the competent service authority in any particular case decides otherwise, speak anonymously.

Talks of this type are normally quite short - about five minutes in length- and appear in many different broadcast programmes, e.g. in ‘postscripts’ to the News and such series as “The World Goes By”, “Naval Log” and “Air Log”.

2. Difference between Type A and Type B involves difference in qualifications of Speakers .

It will be clear that the qualifications required for a speaker in talks of Type A are entirely different from those required for a speaker in talks of Type B.

In Type A the speaker must be of sufficient seniority and professional reputation for his views to carry weight with the public. In Type B the speaker's seniority does not matter; the essential qualification is that he should have, and convey the impression of having, first-hand experience of what he describes. *

Again, for the 15-minute talk of Type A, the speaker requires far more professional knowledge and broadcasting skill than are required for the 5 minute talk of Type B, which consists of description rather than appreciation, and in which deficiencies of broadcasting ability are usually outweighed by the exciting character of the subject.

For talks of type A, a speaker should be a senior officer of recognised ability; he should have a good voice, and the knack of being instructive without being dull, of being humorous without being ‘cheap’ and, without suggesting condescension, of being

intelligible to a vast audience, in which no background of technical knowledge can be assumed. Above all, perhaps, his style of speech should convey an impression of good temper, sincerity and sympathy with the ordinary man. Experience has shown that speakers with these qualifications are to be found - though not easily - in all three Services.

3. Procedure .

The procedure in the case of both types is essentially the same: - The speaker is selected by agreement between the Corporation and the competent authorities of the Service to which he belongs. The script is prepared by the speaker or taken down from his oral statement; it is then scrutinised by the Service authorities from the technical standpoint and, when approved, is passed to the Corporation where it is scrutinised again in the light of the instructions and directives received from the Censors’ office and the Ministry of Information. Reference to these authorities is made when this appears to be necessary on any particular point.

4. Purpose of these broadcasts .

The talks now in question form only one component part of the plan devised by the Corporation for keeping the home audience informed of the progress and real significance of the war, and so contributing to the maintenance of the national morale. In order to appreciate their purpose, it is necessary to look for a moment at this general plan.

At the outbreak of the war, the Corporation had to consider how best it could contribute to the national effort. The main factors bearing on this problem had come into existence since the last Great War, and appeared to be:-

(a) the development of broadcasting;

(b) the emergence of the theory and practice of “total” war, involving civilians in actual hostilities; especially, in the case of Great Britain, through attack from the air, and a threat to food supplies;

(c) the certainty that by means of (a) and (b) the enemy would make unprecedented efforts to undermine civilian morale in this country;

(d) the extension of popular education which might be expected to result in a general demand from the British public for full information regarding the conduct of the war, and a claim by “the man in the street” to form his own opinion as to the efficiency of such conduct;

(e) the effect produced, during the twenty years preceding the outbreak of this war, by the Pacifist movement and by what has been called the campaign of “Blimp-baiting” waged by the ‘soft-boiled intellectuals”. Whatever might be the intrinsic merits of the views represented by these movements, their effect on the British people could hardly be conducive to the successful prosecution of a war depending, as largely as this one would, on whole-hearted concentration of effort and on the maintenance of mutual confidence between the civil population and the armed forces.

In view of factors (d) and (e) it seemed that the Corporation could make a valuable contribution by broadcasting talks in which the conduct of the war would be explained, and particular operations described to the radio audience, by members of the fighting services themselves. Broadcasting could serve to meet the demand for objective information regarding the significance of events, and at the same time to establish relations of confidence between the public and senior officers of the fighting services. In this way, the minds of the audience might be to a large extent sterilised against infection by hostile propaganda, which could only be dangerous in an atmosphere of ignorance and mistrust (cf. the state of public opinion in France before the collapse). *

In the view of the Corporation and of this Ministry, therefore, broadcasts by officers of the three Services have a special purpose and value of their own, and if talks of type A are to continue they must be given by officers of the requisite seniority and authority.

5. The value of these broadcasts (particularly type A) .

To attempt to use journalises instead of serving officers would not increase the confidence of the public in the higher command of the fighting services. Moreover, talks so prepared would not express the speaker's own views, and would consequently, as experience shows, lack the force of personal conviction.

The degree of success actually achieved by the “War Commentary” series must remain largely a matter of speculation, but some evidence is forthcoming from figures which are obtained by recognised methods of statistical research, and are claimed to be correct within a small margin of error. According to these figures, the smallest audience for a talk in this series has been 16%, and the largest 35%, of the adult population. Thus, if the adult population is taken as 31 millions, the audiences for these talks have ranged from nearly 5 million to 10½ million; figures which require no comment.

(It is worth noticing that while the lowest figure was that for a talk by a civilian journalist, the higher figures were all obtained by Service speakers.)

In short, the evidence available goes to show that the series has been successful, although naturally some speakers have been much more effective than others.

The Ministry of Information is convinced that broadcasts on these lines have an important part to play in maintaining national morale, and that they cannot be satisfactorily carried out unless the Cabinet is ready to give more licence to serving officers of standing and repute to broadcast, subject to proper control.