A History of the Ministry of Information, 1939-46

201

SECRET
For internal circulation only.
APPENDIX
ATROCITY PHOTOGRAPHS IN THE PRESS

At the request of the Home Planning Committee, R.I.Os were asked to report on the public's reactions to recent newspaper photographs of Russians being hanged by Germans. From the eleven replies received it appears that the public - except in Wales - was indifferent and, for the most part, apathetic. Three R.I.Os thought this indifference due to the public's preoccupation with events coinciding with the publication of the photographs, while eight others reported indifference, lack of spontaneous comment, and, in a few cases, failure to have noticed the pictures at all. Three R.I.Os reported a minority objection to such propaganda on principle.

REGIONAL REACTIONS

Northern Region : “These photographs attracted considerable attention, though their impression has been somewhat erased by subsequent events.” On the whole, the results seem to have been good; some “responsible persons” advocate “more of this kind of picture in order to bring home to us the realities of war”.

North Eastern Region : The only spontaneous reaction in this Region appears to have been that the photographs might have been more effective had they been used in driving home the realities of invasion in this country, but that as the atrocities took place so far away they would fail in their object in this respect. The pictures themselves seem to have been considered “horrible”, but no emotion is recorded other than an increased admiration for the Russians, and loathing for the Nazis.

North Midland Region : This Region reports that the photographs appear to have passed unnoticed by the twenty people with whom contact was made. The subject was, however, raised at the meeting of the Spalding Sub-Committee who reached the conclusion that: “Whilst it is agreed they are revolting, most folk think it quite right that they should be printed to bring home the realisation of such atrocities now taking place”.

Eastern Region : The R.I.O. heard no comments or allusions to the pictures. When questioned the public appear to have suspected the photographs as “fakes”, and the newspaper stories as “stunts”.

London Region : Although no spontaneous reaction was reported from this Region it seems clear that the effect of these photographs on the public was vague. They were thought to be “a bit ghastly”, but produced no special sense of shock. Their authenticity was apparently unquestioned. A minority objected to this type of propaganda “because of its possible effect on post-war settlements in Europe”. It is stated from some sources that “the public just doesn't care two hoots so long as the atrocities are not upon our own people”. A Labour Manager in a War Production factory, commenting on reactions to earlier atrocity stories, said the usual feeling they had aroused was of anger against the Government: “We just take it and do nothing to retaliate.”.... “We are still a darned sight too soft”.

(From this Region also comes a report that photos in Picture Post of Chinese prisoners being bayoneted by Japanese soldiers has actually worried people more than the pictures under consideration).

Welsh Region : Here the reported reactions were immediate, definite and in parts almost violent. Rhondda Valley particularly gave the impression of having been thoroughly roused. Typical comments from the R.I.O's report are: “A deepening belief that the Germans as a nation are sadistic”. “Photographs should be dropped over the occupied countries”. “Local communists say that the photographs are genuine ... each will be avenged” and so on. Among certain groups there was scepticism about the authenticity of the pictures. A very small minority were against publication of this type of thing.

A Swansea contact reported that such propaganda would certainly stimulate better results in factories, and Home Guard and Civil Defence Services. It is understood from a press report that “at least one firm has issued pictures of Nazi horrors in the wage packets of employees and has already noticed an increase in production”.

Midland Region : Out of one hundred and fifty persons (very few of whom had seen the photographs before being shown the cuttings) the majority thought the pictures were not so very atrocious, and that the publication of such photographs was not much use as propaganda. Twenty-five percent were in favour of atrocity pictures, but thought that they should be “much more gruesome than the Russian hangings”. Some appear to have thought the pictures were fakes.

North Western Region : Some public interest was reported, but little spontaneous comment. It is suggested that a series of such photographs might have some value if accompanied by a “Government guarantee of authenticity”.

Some suggested that the pictures were “fakes or just propaganda” and were of the opinion that “things like that always happen in war”.

Scottish Region : Some horrified comment was provoked, but spontaneous reaction has been limited. No details have been given. (In this Region also comparision was drawn with the Japanese atrocity photographs recently published in Picture Post ).

South Eastern Region : Results of the R.I.O's enquiries were virtually negative”.

Northern Ireland Region : The enquiries yielded no evidence that the pictures had been widely seen, or that they created any special impression.

CONCLUSIONS

Although these particular photographs seem to have aroused comparatively little interest, a majority of those who remembered or discussed them seemed to think the use of such pictures justifiable as a means of bringing home to the public the grimmer realities of what we are fighting against. A minority thought these pictures were not sufficiently gruesome. The suspicion that they were fakes appeared to be widespread. The main effect of them seems to have been increased hatred of the Germans rather than productive energy in the war effort.

Home Intelligence,

25th February, 1942

We use cookies to track usage and preferences.

Privacy & Cookie Policy Accept & Close