Name: Adam Lee Student ID: 15599412

How far has Media and Government Intervention separated History from fact

It is the very nature of Media to manipulate past and present occurrences. Governments also
exercise their power to manipulate what is fed to public audience, and it is not uncommon for
collaboration between Government and Media, especially in times of war. History is often
exaggerated, hidden or bent out of shape in order to re-dress facts, and this is done largely to
convey a message or opinion to an audience. Manipulation comes at a price however. Facts become
diluted, masking the reality of the events being described. Ultimately key History is fictionalised,
leaving us with a reworded version of events heavily influenced by popular myth. But how far has
History been distanced from the truth? Is the stigma attached with ‘manipulation’ justified? Do we
owe it to our ancestors to truthfully narrate the happenings of the past or is this manipulation
necessary? These are the questions that will form the basis for my research. In this essay I will be
exploring key dates in specifically British History where the clarity of events could be put under
debate. After comparing historical accounts with media and government sources, and finding
differences between them, I will come to an ultimate conclusion on these questions. I will also
question the morality of manipulating history and the effects this could bring about. My emphasis
will be on Dunkirk, however I will also include examples from other periods of the Second World War
to broaden my research whilst still maintain a focused argument.

For many, the very mention of Dunkirk instantly congers up heroic images of small fishing boats
racing back and forth across the channel, rescuing soldiers from bombarded beaches, the men and
women on board taking immense risks in the process. Ultimately these images are designed to
inspire patriotism, but one must question the accuracy of these depictions, and who is responsible
for planting these ideas in the heads of so many people and, perhaps more importantly, why? The
image of the patriotic civilian is a popular theme for the media, however it could be argued that the
role Civilians played in Dunkirk was limited. Harman suggests this, stating ‘The little ships operated
only on the last few days of British evacuation’.1 He also brings their effectiveness into question,
which is mirrored by Summerfield, stating the ‘their vessels broke down in mid-Channel or grounded
on the sands.’ Figures are also used to further highlight the limited effect the civilian vessels had at
Dunkirk.2,3 According to Harman, only 18,575 soldiers were evacuated by ‘Civilian craft’, a low figure
when compared with the 106,519 evacuated by the Royal and Merchant Navy and the 197,139
soldiers evacuated by the British and French navies.4 Although the efforts made by the civilian boats
involved shouldn’t be understated, is it not equally important to prevent exaggeration of their role?
Evidence suggests heavily that the civilian efforts at Dunkirk were, by and large, more of hindrance
than a help, which contradicts the image many of us have of the ‘core elements’ of Dunkirk.

Newspaper reports tell a different story however. Reporting on the restorations of privately owned
boats used in the ‘Dunkirk Armada’, one Daily Mail report from 1941 paints a valiant image of the
role of Civilian boats, heavily emphasising the completion of restoration efforts on damaged ships. It
also draws the reader’s attention to the ‘Channel Epic’ of Dunkirk, further emphasising and possibly

1
Nicholas Harman, Dunkirk: The Necessary Myth (London, 1980). Pages 11-12
2
Nicholas Harman, Dunkirk: The Necessary Myth (London, 1980). Pages 11-12
3
Penny Summerfield. Dunkirk and the Popular Memory of Britain at War, 1940–58. Journal of Contemporary
History, vol. 45, no. 4, (2010) pages 788–811.
4
Nicholas Harman, Dunkirk: The Necessary Myth (London, 1980). Pages 11-12
Name: Adam Lee Student ID: 15599412

over exaggerating these roles.5 However, this newspaper report was written mid war, so one must
bring into question the motive behind the report. It could be argued that the nation’s moral was a
factor, with the government and media facing what was essentially a large scale defeat and retreat
of the British Expeditionary Force. With the passing of the Emergency Powers (Defence) Bill in 1939,
the British government had renewed censorship powers.6 Therefore, it could be possible that these
powers came into play with regards to the overdramatic and ‘Rose tinted’ rephrasing of events and
the failure to report every detail of the evacuation, under the motive of national wellbeing. Saying
this however, post war newspaper reports no longer need to oblige this issue.

A more recent Daily Mail report, published on the 22nd of June 1970, describes commemorations for
the 30th anniversary of the battle and the involvement of the ‘Little Ships’ that took part in the
evacuation.7 The article makes no mention of Military or Navy involvement, focusing on the
‘pleasure boats, Private yachts and almost anything that could float’. The article goes on to describe
how these ‘little boats’ ‘Evacuated British and Allied Servicemen from the beaches of France’. This
latter statement is interesting, as, although it appears to be stating fact (civilian boats did evacuate
men from the beaches of Dunkirk), it provides a somewhat false description. In choosing to leave out
the efforts of other Naval forces, the statement could create the misconception in the readers mind
that it was the sole effort of these ‘Little Boats’ that had the greatest impact. Therefore, one could
go as far as to say that, by leaving these facts out, it misrepresents history. This brings up another
question, the question of morality. Is it correct to commemorate solely the actions of these ‘little
boats’ and not that of other servicemen and Civilians that lost their lives during the evacuation,
especially when the ‘little boats’ being commemorated had a relatively minor role in events when
compared with the Naval aid present during the evacuation?

It is easy to associate the bending of History with malicious intent, as if facts that are unsettling or
shed a negative light on a certain group of people are purposefully left out of accounts. In some
cases this is all too true, but one must also look at the reasons for such deception, is it necessary?
War crimes are a key example of uncomfortably truths glossed over or shunned by Governments
and Media, the main motive of this deceit could possibly be to maintain a clear vision of the ‘enemy’
in the minds of the public. The Second World War provides clear examples of this, and although
there is no dispute that the Germany army committed uncountable acts of atrocity under Nazi
regime, how did other countries handle their own foul play? There are many instances of mass
shooting of captured British and French prisoners of war during Dunkirk, with the most high profile
cases at Wormhoudt and Le Paradis being blamed on members of SS regiments Leibstandarte Adolf
Hitler and Totenkopf.8 These ‘Massacres’ are heavily reported on by British Media at the time. What
is interesting is the similar large scale reporting of a debated war crime committed by the British, the
Bombing of Dresden. One account, by Ascherson, is particularly vivid, describing the effects of the
bombing in graphic detail ‘as the firestorm tore away the oxygen at ground level and filled their
lungs with searing carbon monoxide’. He goes on to question the Allied involvement, stating ‘Did

5
‘Dunkirk Armada’ Boats Reprieved for Thames. Daily Mail 24 Mar. 1941: 5. Daily Mail Historical Archive, 1896-
2004. Web. 12 Dec. 2016.
6
K. Fred Gillam. Salem Press Encyclopedia. (January, 2016)
7
Little ships remember. Daily Mail 22 June 1970: 4. Daily Mail Historical Archive, 1896-2004. Web. 12 Dec.
2016.
8
Commander of the killing barn. Daily Mail 20 Jan. 1994: 18-19. Daily Mail Historical Archive, 1896-2004. Web.
13 Dec. 2016.
Name: Adam Lee Student ID: 15599412

Dresden bring the Allies down to the level of those who razed Warsaw and drove the Jews into the
gas chambers? ‘.9 The honesty in this reports paint a contradicting view of the Media, somewhat
disproving the stereotype of manipulated news stories and making us question whether our mistrust
is justified. It also highlights a change in modern day media more focused on truth. It would appear
that the more serious the situation, the more truthful the History.

From my research I can ultimately come to one conclusion, history can never truly be free from
manipulation, but the distance in which it has been separated from fact is not as great as once
thought. Fact is still presented, albeit in a diluted form, but this is necessary in order to keep
otherwise forgotten history alive. The main purpose of Media is to create an interest for a topic,
prompting large audiences to share or develop that interest. Whether this is through newspaper
reports, films or another form, the presence of popular history stimulates remembrance for that
subject. Governments have a duty to maintain the national welfare of the people they govern. Facts
are available for those who wish to read into a subject deeper and gain a more rounded and truthful
view, but it is important to have ‘popular’ history available to a wider audience, even if some truth is
left out. Morally I feel this is an acceptable compromise, as the acts that form the foundation of this
manipulated History are still kept alive through this generation of interest. History is the myth by
which we live, but Myth and fact together can promote the accurate remembrance of History,
Immortalising events that shape our present.

Bibliography

Ascherson, Neal. ‘The day Dresden died: Frederick Taylor debunks the myths of the air raids and
remains appalled by the truth.’ (February 2004)

‘Commander of the killing barn’. Daily Mail 20 Jan. 1994: 18-19. Daily Mail Historical Archive, 1896-
2004. Web. 13 Dec. 2016.

‘’‘Dunkirk Armada’’ Boats Reprieved for Thames’. Daily Mail 24 Mar. 1941: 5. Daily Mail Historical
Archive, 1896-2004. Web. 12 Dec. 2016.

Harman, Nicholas. Dunkirk: The Necessary Myth (London, 1980). Pages 11-12

K. Fred Gillam. Salem Press Encyclopaedia. (January, 2016)

‘Little ships remember’. Daily Mail 22 June 1970: 4. Daily Mail Historical Archive, 1896-2004. Web. 12
Dec. 2016.

Summerfield, Perry. ‘Dunkirk and the Popular Memory of Britain at War, 1940–58. Journal of
Contemporary History’, vol. 45, no. 4, (2010) pages 788–811.

9
Neal Ascherson. The day Dresden died: Frederick Taylor debunks the myths of the air raids and remains
appalled by the truth. (February 2004)