There is no British propaganda in this country, and no need of it. It would be of no avail,--we are assured from many sources.
In "The Issue of Might and Right", ( Boston Herald, Oct. 1) a gentleman prominent in Wall Street, Harvard, and directorates, asserts that 'the emotional reaction to undeniable facts is not the effect of propaganda'. He should remember that the job of the propagandist is to so present the facts as to arouse the desired emotional reaction.(1)
Herbert Hoover, who lived twenty years under the British flag, knows that this is not true. In the August American Magazine he declares that "the first and most important danger of our being dragged into the war" is "foreign propaganda to inflame our emotions", adding as second and third dangers "preachments of our officials and steps by our Government to entangle us".(2)
These two contrasting statements show that one is likely to hold to what fits his emotional attitude which has been determined by propaganda. Mr. Hoover has seen Germany smashed and lacks faith that that is the cure for the world's troubles. Moreover, he is not directly dependent on the favor of our foreign bank affiliates.
Our news from Germany comes over cables owned by the British, or by radio which could be blocked if the British so desired. But Lord Macmillan, explaining that there is no British propaganda adds, "Hitler is our best propagandist".
Discontented expatriates, women scorned, and fugitives(3) from foreign governments have readily disposed of their copy to our periodicals and have influenced our opinion. Most newspaper correspondents must serve their masters to sell their copy.
Rogerson, in his "Propaganda in the Next War", published last fall