Propaganda as a war
tactic
Bringing the battlefield to the page
By Emily Burton Sherman, 2011 NEH workshop “Crossroads of an Empire”
The power of words in the War of 1812
Newspapers were a growing industry in America
at this time, reaching more readers further from
central city hubs than ever before
– New York state had 31 newspapers in 1795 and reached
every county with very little, if any, censorship
But the British saw “public words as potentially
dangerous, exciting emotions hat could provoke
deadly revolts” (Taylor 70)
– Only one in British Upper Canada (Ontario) at that time
– Was highly censored prior to publication, a big no-no in
the newspaper world of today.
But newspapers back then had a bit
less concern with good reporting
Example: During the British colonies’ (who would
later become the U.S.) war with the French in the
French and Indian War, several colonial
newspapers ran story to bolster British feelings of
supremacy over French and portray French men as
evil, child-stealing husbands. However, no one
could prove any truth in the story and historians
believe it was fiction based on hearsay.
Did that stop colonial newspapers from printing
it? Absolutely not.
Today, it would be a tabloid story only and NOT
acceptable it true newspapers with any sort of
good reputation.
Excerpt from “news article”
“A private letter from Albany, informs us, that when The
French Prisoners, lately taken at Niagara, arrived at that
City … an English Woman, Wife to one of the soldiers that
was in General Braddock’s Army, having been taken
Prisoner by the French at that Time of the Defeat of
General Braddock, and supposing that her Husband was
slain [in the battle], during her Imprisonment, married a
French [soldier], by who she had one Child, being with her
Husband coming Prisoner through Albany, was there
discovered by her former [British] Husband, who was then
on Duty there: He immediately demanded her, and after
some Struggles of Tendreness for her French Husband, she
left him, and closed against with her First; Tho’ it is said
the French Husband insisted on keeping the Child, as his
Property, which was consented to by the Wife and first
Husband.”
• From “Seige – 1759: The Campaign Against Niagara” by Brian L.
Dunnigan, Old Fort Niagara Association, Inc. New York, 1996
Modern tabloid translation:
“We’ve intercepted a private e-mail that tells the story of a
beautiful wife of a British soldier who thought he was killed
in the latest battle with the French. So when the French took
her prisoner, she was forced to marry a French soldier for
her own protection. When her husband was captured, she
followed him as the prisoners were marched on display
through Albany, New York. But, to her absolute delight, her
British husband spotted her in the group and they were
reunited. Though she had a moment of doubt about leaving
her French husband, as they had a child together, she dried
her tears and ran happily into the arms of her dashing, brave
British soldier and resumed her marriage with him. But her
evil, cowardly French ex demanded she give up her beautiful
child to him as his rightful property. This is all the more
reason to hate our enemies as cowards and crooks. But, in
order to resume her happy, preferred marriage to the
dashing, brave British soldier, and escape the clutches of the
evil French loser, this brave woman gave the brat up and
moved on. We can only hope she lives happily ever after.”
The War of 1812’s battle of words:
Federalists versus Republicans
After the Revolutionary war, back in the states,
those newly-created American citizens still loyal
to England created a political party called the
Federalists
– Federalists were painted by opposing newspapers as
blood-thirsty allies of Haudenosaunee (known by us
today as the Iroquois) bent on encouraging scalping and
plundering the goods of the frontier settlers in the name
of the king.
Those Americans who were (still) against the
British called themselves Republicans
– Federalist newspapers claimed Republicans were
secretly in league with Britain's enemy, France, and
wanted a dictator government with Napoleon.
Is either claim true?
Actually, no
– Both views of Federalists and Republicans were put
forth by politically bias news articles meant to appear
factual but actually based on personal opinion only with
the intention of furthering personal beliefs.
– This is what we call propaganda:
• In other words: Personal or political beliefs stated in the media
meant to sway public opinion but which are not based on fact
or have slanted the facts.
And this propaganda helped fuel the country’s
bitter political division, that will eventually lead to
a form of media civil war in the early 1800s.
Soon the Canadian media joins in
the growing discord in the states
This propaganda put forth by the Federalists
and the Republicans in the states worked its
way into British territory, too
Gideon an Silvester Tiffany, two brothers
from New Hampshire, tried to quietly
‘modify’ the content of the Upper Canadian
Gazette in 1796 to favor more news from
the states – which brits saw as a war of
words and promptly fired the brothers.
What was the problem?
The main issue with the Tiffany brothers:
– A speech by King George III got no play in the
paper.
– One chief justice fumed the speech was “the
finest thing in Modern History, & which ought
to be circulated in all his dominions, & got by
heart by all his Subjects, has never made its
appearance [in the paper] while every trifle
related to the damned States is printed in large
characters.”
But…
While the Tiffany brothers’ paper later
failed, the fledgling country’s perchance for
printing uncensored “trifles” would later
play a large part in the War of 1812
…You know, the War of 1812, America
against the British after the Revolutionary
War?
Ok, maybe we should quickly review
It all starts in 1803…
British fighting against with French in Europe and needed more sailors
for extensive navy, so ‘impressed’ thousands of U.S. men from U.S.
ships while minding their own business, sort of speak, in 1803-1812.
British army continues its association with Haudenosaunee in the
upper U.S., seen as “stirring up trouble” and instigating bloody attacks
on settlers.
U.S didn’t want to abide by previous treaties created by British with
Haudenosaunee to protect natives’ ancestral homelands from grasping,
greedy settlers (as they saw it.)
– The new U.S. government resented the seemingly arbitrary boundary lines
in their own country that seemed more like cages and hindrances to
progress than the rights of native nations of people AND desperately
needed money from the sale and use of those lands and natural resources.
Lastly, and most importantly for journalists, the Federalists and
Republicans are ruthlessly attacking one another in the press
through propaganda, creating the civil turmoil in the press that
sparks the War of 1812, America’s first civil war by some
historian’s standards
To sum:
America was still seen as a weak, petty upstart
with little power by the British and treated thusly.
Americans didn’t appreciate the British teaming
up with the Haudenosaunee against our settlers.
Americans had land lust for new territories, even
though the British had tried (somewhat) to
preserve old treaties protecting just that.
Overall, this was an extension of the
Revolutionary War – America against British for
autonomy and citizens’ rights – and a civil war
between the Federalists and Republicans in the
media.
So who was caught in the middle?
Haudenosaunee separated on the issue of which
side to support, which weakened their own nation
of allied tribes.
Some certainly joined the British, sealing their
fates with those of the redcoats.
Some, though, fought with the Americans, which,
soon after the war, Americans seemed to forget.
In short, the Haudenosaunee fought with both
sides but, through the use of propaganda, were
vilified in the U.S. media.
They paid for it heavily after the war, through the
eventual loss of autonomy as a nation and the loss
of nearly every acre of ancestral land, save for a
few small reservations.
Who were the players?
Among dozens of politically-bias newspapers of
the era of the War of 1812, many stand out in
history.
Examples:
– National Intelligencer – a slightly Republican paper
funded in part by the U.S. government
– The Aura – a Federalist newspaper in which personal
attacks and gossip were readily reported
Both political parties ‘duke it out’ in a war of
words and propaganda against military and
political leaders of the day through the nation’s
newspapers.
Personal attacks, hearsay and just plain fiction
were all commonly found in these newspapers
The
Aurora:
“Absent officers
now on furlough
… will join their
respective corps
or regiments
immediately.”
J.B. Walback,
Adjutant general
- May 27, 1814
National
Intelligencer:
Was the only source for
national government
news in early 1800s
Other newspapers
“borrowed” items in the
Intelligencer to include in
their own pages.
During War of 1812,
becomes a daily paper in
order to sate American’s
thirst for news
Partially funded by U.S.
Government, so not
completely unbias
So what were some examples of
propaganda from early 1800s?
“By an advertisement in our paper, if will be seen
that the joint committee, appointed to investigate
the election of Mr. Findlay, wish to bring some of
the good folks of Cumberland county to
Harrisburg, in order to have the pleasure of
laughing at them. We would advise the gentlemen
who signed the petition from this county to stay at
home less unhappily they might come off worse
than [Mr.] Cochran and Thackara, and not only
have their [complaints] but themselves, thrown
under the table.”
– The Aurora, 1818
A ‘report’ to justify violence in the
War of 1812
During the war, American troops savagely
plundered and burned York (now Toronto) despite
specific orders for restraint.
In order to cover up this lack of control over its
soldiers and excuse the horrible destruction, U.S.
military leaders planted a story in their report that
the troops were justified in the horrors because
they found a human scalp (assumed to be
American) hanging in plain view in the town’s
parliament building (Taylor 217).
It served to further vilify the Haudenosaunee as
savages working for the British.
Reports on Americans at the time…
Rev. John Strachan, a cultural and political activist
in York during War of 1812.
– “This new nation are vain & rapacious and without
honour – they are hurried on to any action provided
they gain money by it.”
Told American-born majority living there:
– “You have been adopted into our family and received
as children. Let then obedience and submission to the
laws mark your conduct, and as you receive protection,
our king [of England] has a just claim to your service.
Americans fire back:
George McClure, commander of Fort
Niagara, 1813, had published wildly
exaggerated accounts of Native American
cruelties against Americans on behalf of the
British
– But he didn’t care about the truth, he wanted
more volunteers to join the Army.
McClure’s (Republican) call to arms
“On the west, behold your brethren under faith of
a surrender shut up in a combustible dwelling and
there burned to death by inches! Or, if they escape
the fire, see them tomahawked by savages and
their dead bodies kicked about the highway until
they are devoured by hogs and dogs! Can the
vengeance of God sleep? Can the indignation of
man be stifled?”
... “Advance then, Americans, defenders of your
country’s rights, avengers of her wrongs,
protectors of your wives, your children, and your
friends.” (Taylor 248).
…and his tirade against cowards
This is a Republican view of Federalist soldiers
who refused to cross into Canada with him due to
a clause in their service contract, which they used
to avoid gruesome, bloody battles in which many
likely would be maimed or killed.
“Let them return amidst the mockery and
contempt of their friends and neighbours and wear
out their life in sloth and infamy. They shall be
standing objects of scorn and their children’s
children shall blush to acknowledge them!”
(Taylor 248)
The result?
Propaganda such as this only served to fuel the
heated divide in America during the War of 1812,
nearly driving some states to succeed from the
union and destroy the fledgling U.S. government.
– While America won more autonomy from the British
by war’s end, it nearly succumb to a very heated
political divide fueled by propaganda in the media.
The Haudenosaunee, also vilified in American
media as savage scalp hunters for the British,
never recovered from the bad press and paid in the
next 100 years with their lives, their culture, and
their land.
Now what?
Read your assigned primary document illustrating
propaganda generated during the War of 1812.
Use the four square graphic organizer to closely
examine the document and its meaning.
We will discuss your findings as a class once
everyone is finished on his or her document
Then, students will be broken into groups of four
for a short group research presentation regarding
other types of propaganda in modern conflicts (see
assignment handout)