Criteria B – Summary of Evidence
The Official History of Australia in the War of 1914-18 was written by C.E.W. Bean in 1920 published by Angus and Robertson in Melbourne. This secondary source which was written by the author after the war contains information about the Australian home front during the war as well as social and economic effects of the war. The source says that many journalists actually made trips to the battle-front to report on the events occurring at Gallipoli, however many of these articles written were actually censored by the generals at the time and therefore differed to the actual events at Gallipoli. Furthermore, the source also goes on to state that the Australian public often had a sense of pride for their “great diggers” (p339).
Australia During the War by Ernest Scott in 1919 and was published by Angus and Robertson in Melbourne. This is a secondary source, due to it being written outside of the areas in which the book covers. Furthermore, the source also states that in an article about the torpedoing of the ship Southland by C.E.W Bean who was the official Australian war correspondent was strictly censored by the Australian censor, Captain William Maxwell. The source also goes on to state that Bean’s approach at writing articles significantly changed over time and that due to his content being significantly censored, he changed his writing habits. The source also contains the uncensored and censored articles written by Bean
Criteria C – Evaluation of Sources
- First source above – could actually be censored, and therefore may have invalid information
- However due to it being written after the war, censorship may not be a factor
- Author was the Australian war correspondent, and must have been chosen aptly, so his skills as a writer would have been good
- Due to it being published after the war, some of the information he obtained may have been outdated or incorrect from the time
- The source was written in Australia, so therefore the whole publication may be biased towards Australians rather than other countries
- Second source above – written outside the parameters that the book contains
- Ernest Scott – Englishman, and was a well known historian at the time, so therefore his sources would have been highly significant
Criteria D – Analysis
From the sources mentioned above, it can be concluded that censorship did in fact exist in Australia during the Gallipoli campaign, in various forms. However the main form of censorship was in the form of news articles, as stated by Scott in Australia During the War. Bean also goes on to say that Australians were proud because of the news that was becoming available to them, therefore it can be concluded that due to the misinformation that the correspondence conveyed to the Australian public, Australians had a false sense of pride and therefore had no negative reaction to the incorrect information.
Furthermore, various sources state that the Australian public generally wanted information on a “need to know basis” (Knightly, 1975) From that it can be inferred that generally the Australian public wanted more positive news rather than negative which would imply that the Australian public were scared of negative news, which would be news of casualties or losses of battles. As well as the Australian public, politicians also encouraged increasing use of censorship, to keep the general mindset of the Australian public positive.
- Furthermore, letters to the home front from the battle front were strictly censored, which would further emphasise that the Australian public were not allowed to know about anything negative happening on the battlefield
Criteria E – Conclusion
In conclusion, the Australian public were in fact censored by the Australian government in the form of letters and newspaper articles, which generally made the public more positive due to the misinformation that the Australian public were receiving.
Criteria F – Bibliography
Author: C. E. W. Bean
Title: Official History of Australia in the War of 1914-18 / By C. E. W. Bean
Publisher: Melbourne: Angus and Roberston, 1936
