73 74 -2- 75 -3-

EXECUTIVE BOARD, Tuesday 20th May, 1941

F/145

NEWS REELS AND PROPAGANDA FILMS

DIFFICULTIES IN OBTAINING FACILITIES FROM SERVICE DEPARTMENTS

1. Mr. Ford, Film Officer at New York, recently submitted a Report on propaganda films in the United States of America (copy of which is attached) in which he stressed the necessity for news reels and short films dealing dramatically with our fighting effort, and showing “the combined forces of the United States, Great Britain and the Dominions fighting and winning battles on land, sea and air with the single aim of defeating Hitlerism”. The five news reel companies to whom Mr •Ford’s Report was sent all welcome his suggestions and comments, but have pointed out that they are hampered by their difficulty in obtaining facilities from the Service Departments. I am therefore bringing this matter to the notice of my colleagues so that the following suggestion made by the Films Division, if approved, can be raised with the Service Departments when the Minister meets them.

2. The Films Division would be glad (a) to receive more helpful treatment and less obstruction from the Service and other Departments, and (b) to be given a freer hand in the production of material even if it cannot be published immediately.

Point (a) is self-evident. Point (b) which is considered to be of the greatest importance, can be stated thus:

(i) Newspaper complaints are not comparable because, in most cases, they relate to censorship after news has been secured.

(ii) The film problem is censorship of production (for propaganda films and newsreels); i.e. before the filming of any Service item is allowed, the Service Censorship decides if the item should be filmed.

(iii) It is considered vital that the film should be allowed first to be taken and that the item should then be submitted to Censorship in the usual way.

Censorship should be on publication, only and not on production

(iv) There is no difficulty in keeping secret or withholding films or parts of films (either negatives or positives) that are not to be released for publication.

3. The following cases of difficulty are mentioned as examples illustrating the foregoing:

War Office .

(i) Some time ago, the War Office organised a visit of representatives of the newsreel companies to the Northern Command to arrange for the taking of a group of four twelve-inch howitzers and the big gun, “The Boche Buster”. The visit was made and arrangements discussed, including the selection of the best shots. When, however, the cameraman should have gone north to do the job, he was refused permission. Later, pictures of “The Boche Buster” appeared in the Press. The newsreel companies took immediate steps to get their own pictures, but it had to be done hurriedly and it was several days before the pictures could appear in the newsreels. Had the companies been allowed to take the pictures in the first instance, even though publication was withheld, they would have had more satisfactory pictures available at the right time.

(ii) M.O.I., at the request of the Belgian military authorities, first consulted the War Office in February about making a film on the Belgian Military Forces in this country, who have received less publicity than the other allies. At the beginning of April, the Belgians had heard nothing on the subject from the War Office. M.O.I. pressed the matter again on the 22nd April, suggesting, as a new military angle for the film, the staging of a mock landing on the English coast, as though it were on the Belgian coast, and asking for facilities. On the 1st May, the War Office stated that Home Forces had no objections, but that the Director of Combined Operations would not allow certain shots to be taken. Details of these were not forthcoming till the 9th May, as follows:

“A film can be made of Belgian troops carrying out an exercise provided that:

1. No sea shots are shown.

2. No craft are shown.

3. No shots are taken which would indicate the strength of beach defences

4. No strong points are shown.

5. No troops are shown actually landing”.

In view of the nature of the proposed film, comment is superfluous.

Air Ministry .

After the destruction of the twenty-four raiders last week, the Air Ministry refused permission to the newsreel companies to take pictures of the night fighters (individuals and planes); and after the thirty-three were brought down the Air Ministry were most unhelpful in response to requests for information as to where the majority of the planes were located.

Ministry of Aircraft Production.

It took from about the 3rd April till about the 8th May - and the intervention of the D.D.G. - to get the Ministry of Aircraft Production to agree to the release of material showing the arrival in this country of aircraft supplies from the U.S.A. in order to publicise the effects of the Lease and Lend Act.

D.

15.5.41