"How Journalists Covered the Rise of Mussolini and Hitler" Topic
5 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please do not use bad language on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Interwar (WWI to WWII) Message Board Back to the WWII Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestWorld War One World War Two on the Land
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Featured Showcase ArticleSoviet women were tough!
Featured Workbench Article
Featured Profile ArticleDoes anyone claim these mystery photos?
Featured Book Review
|
Tango01 | 02 Mar 2020 12:35 p.m. PST |
"How to cover the rise of a political leader who's left a paper trail of anti-constitutionalism, racism and the encouragement of violence? Does the press take the position that its subject acts outside the norms of society? Or does it take the position that someone who wins a fair election is by definition "normal," because his leadership reflects the will of the people? These are the questions that confronted the U.S. press after the ascendance of fascist leaders in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and 1930s…." Main page link Amicalement Armand |
Editor in Chief Bill | 02 Mar 2020 1:38 p.m. PST |
Note that this was also difficult because the fascists were organizing to oppose the Communists, who were already practicing violence across Europe at the time. And because the violence was not openly encouraged – in many cases, the politicians disavowed violence (but secretly encouraged it). |
deephorse | 02 Mar 2020 2:28 p.m. PST |
|
Mark 1 | 03 Mar 2020 3:01 p.m. PST |
But the main way that the press defanged XXX was by portraying him as something of a joke. He was a "nonsensical" screecher of "wild words" whose appearance, according to Newsweek, "suggests Charlie Chaplin." His "countenance is a caricature." He was as "voluble" as he was "insecure," stated Cosmopolitan.… even after he was made (National Leader) – about a year and a half before seizing dictatorial power – many American press outlets judged that he would either be outplayed by more traditional politicians or that he would have to become more moderate. Sure, he had a following, but his followers were "impressionable voters" duped by "radical doctrines and quack remedies," claimed The Washington Post. Now that XXX actually had to operate within a government the "sober" politicians would "submerge" this movement, according to The New York Times and Christian Science Monitor. A "keen sense of dramatic instinct" was not enough. When it came to time to govern, his lack of … "profundity of thought" would be exposed. I can think of a couple of countries where, if the population were well educated in history, the electorate might take some sobering concern from these words … -Mark (aka: Mk 1) |
Tango01 | 04 Mar 2020 12:37 p.m. PST |
I can think of more… (smile) Amicalement Armand |
|