Why We Fight - Film As Medium of Choice To Present War Information

Film As Medium of Choice To Present War Information

After World War I the methods used to gain support from troops and civilians needed to change. Giving speeches to both soldier recruits and the American public was no longer effective. Film became the medium of choice to inform American soldiers and recruits about why fighting was necessary. As Kathleen German states, “this was the first massive attempt to influence opinion in the U.S. military” through film. Film was also chosen because it combined the senses of sight and hearing, giving it an advantage over radio or print. Capra, who had no experience in documentary films, was chosen because “of his commitment to American ideals” and because of the popularity of some of his earlier feature films. He was thought “to understand the heart and soul of American audiences.” Once the documentary series was completed, it was said to contain the “Capra touch.”

The series' appeal was furthered by how the film was edited. “Throughout his career Capra depended upon his skill as an editor to achieve the contrast of the individual and the group, critical in the success of his Hollywood movies.” Capra thought it would be most effective to use the enemy’s original film and propaganda in the series in order to expose the enemies with their own images. By taking pieces of the enemy material to edit together and placing his own narration over the results, Capra gave meaning and purpose to the war with added narrative. This “parallel editing” created an “us vs. them” image by reframing and showing clips out of their original order and context.

By such careful editing, the films compared and contrasted the forces of evil with America and its traditional values. Capra highlighted the differences between America and the enemy and showed how the enemy would attack these values if “we” did not fight. This worked to create a battle not only between Allies and the Axis Powers but between good and evil. Capra treated it as a matter of showing the enormity of the Axis cause and the justness of the Allied. In order to justify the Western Allies' alliance with the Soviet Union, the series misportrayed or simply omitted many facts, which could have cast doubts on the "good guy" status of the Soviets, such as the Nazi-Soviet alliance, Soviet invasion of Poland; Soviet occupation of the Baltic States, Winter War and others. Virtually in line with Soviet propaganda, the series was not only screened but widely acclaimed in the Soviet Union. To exonerate the Soviets, the series casts even less important Allies, like the Poles, in the bad light, even repeating Nazi propaganda claims such as the Tuchola Forest myth or false claims about the Polish Air Force being destroyed on the ground.

The Why We Fight series became a heavily used means of presenting information about Axis powers for the American government during World War II. General Surles, the director of the Department of War’s Bureau of Public Relations, had hoped that the series would be effective enough to allow similar kinds of army films to be shown to the general public. Surles saw this goal realized when Prelude to War, the most successful of the seven films, was shown to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Roosevelt saw this film as so important that he ordered it to be distributed in civilian arenas for public viewing. However, some objections were raised against the Why We Fight series because it was so persuasive. Lowell Mellett, the coordinator of government films and aide to Roosevelt, saw the films as dangerous. He was most concerned with the effect the series would have after the war was over and the “hysteria” the films would create in their wake. At least 54 million Americans had seen the series by the end of the war, and studies were done to gauge the impact of the films. However, the results were inconclusive, and therefore the effectiveness of the series is still in question.

Read more about this topic:  Why We Fight

Famous quotes containing the words film, medium, choice, present, war and/or information:

    Television does not dominate or insist, as movies do. It is not sensational, but taken for granted. Insistence would destroy it, for its message is so dire that it relies on being the background drone that counters silence. For most of us, it is something turned on and off as we would the light. It is a service, not a luxury or a thing of choice.
    David Thomson, U.S. film historian. America in the Dark: The Impact of Hollywood Films on American Culture, ch. 8, William Morrow (1977)

    Life is amazing: and the teacher had better prepare himself to be a medium for that amazement.
    Edward Blishen (b. 1920)

    Romanticism is found precisely neither in the choice of subjects nor in exact truth, but in a way of feeling.
    Charles Baudelaire (1821–1867)

    It cannot be denied that for a society which has to create scarcity to save its members from starvation, to whom abundance spells disaster, and to whom unlimited energy means unlimited power for war and destruction, there is an ominous cloud in the distance though at present it be no bigger than a man’s hand.
    Arthur Stanley Eddington (1882–1944)

    What war has always been is a puberty ceremony. It’s a very rough one, but you went away a boy and came back a man, maybe with an eye missing or whatever but godammit you were a man and people had to call you a man thereafter.
    Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. (b. 1922)

    As information technology restructures the work situation, it abstracts thought from action.
    Shoshana Zuboff (b. 1951)