The American Press And The Coming Of The Holocaust, 1933- 1945
Deborah E. Lipstadt
This is a test
This is a test
384 pages
English
ePUB (mobile friendly)
Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub
Beyond Belief
The American Press And The Coming Of The Holocaust, 1933- 1945
Deborah E. Lipstadt
Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations
About This Book
This most complete study to date of American press reactions to the Holocaust sets forth in abundant detail how the press nationwide played down or even ignored reports of Jewish persecutions over a twelve-year period.
Frequently asked questions
How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on âCancel Subscriptionâ - itâs as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time youâve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlegoâs features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan youâll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, weâve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is Beyond Belief an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access Beyond Belief by Deborah E. Lipstadt in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in History & World History. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.
As soon as the Nazis came to power, they began to institute antisemitic measures. Although the first antisemitic laws were not promulgated until early April 1933, from the earliest moments of Hitlerâs rule in January 1933 violence against Jews in the form of Einzelaktionen, or âindividualâ acts of terror and brutality, was an inherent facet of German life. Boycotts of Jewish shops were conducted by the Nazi storm troopers. Jews were beaten and arrested; some were killed and others committed suicide. When the Nazis strengthened and consolidated their rule in the March 5, 1933, elections, outbreaks against Jews increased in intensity. American Ambassador Frederic M. Sackett, who was then preparing to retire from his post, wrote to Secretary of State Cordell Hull that democracy in Germany had been the recipient of a âblow from which it may never recover.â1
The First Reports of Persecution
Though the press had not previously ignored Hitlerâs antisemitism, most of the early reports stressed Nazi action against communists and socialists. It was only after the intensification of the attacks in March that the press began to focus explicit attention on the Jewsâ situation. Typical of the vivid press reports sent by reporters on the scene was that by the Chicago Tribuneâs Edmond Taylor, who provided readers with a stark description of the âunholy fearâ prevailing among German Jews.
On the nights of March 9th and 10th, bands of Nazis throughout Germany carried out wholesale raids to intimidate the opposition, particularly the Jews . . . . Men and women were insulted, slapped [and] punched in the face, hit over the heads with blackjacks, dragged out of their homes in night clothes and otherwise molested. . . . Innocent Jews . . . âare taken off to jail and put to work in a concentration camp where you may stay a year without any charge being brought against you.â Never have I seen law-abiding citizens living in such unholy fear.2
Taylorâs depictions of the systematic persecution faced by Jews and those deemed âopponentsâ of the regime eventually resulted in his expulsion from Germany. H. R. Knickerbocker, the Berlin correspondent of the New York Evening Post, who was also forced to leave Germany because of official opposition to his reports, provided a similar appraisal.
Not even in Czarist Russia, with its âpale,â have the Jews been subject to a more violent campaign of murderous agitation . . . . An indeterminate number of Jews . . . have been killed. Hundreds of Jews have been beaten or tortured. Thousands of Jews have fled.
Thousands of Jews have been, or will be, deprived of their livelihood.
All of Germanyâs 600,000 Jews are in terror.3
As the news of antisemitic activities reached this country, newspapers in cities large and small responded angrily. The Pittsburgh Sun decried the âacts of revolting cruelty . . . [which] have been committed.â The Poughkeepsie News saw a âtide of Nazi furyâ engulfing German Jews and inflicting great âbodily violenceâ on them. The Toledo Times believed that conditions in Germany were characterized by an âabuse of power, . . . unrestrained cruelty, . . . suppression of individual rights, . . . violent racial and religious prejudices.â4 A midwestern paper was horrified by the reports of âbeatings, torture, murder.â According to the NashvilleBanner, sentiment in the United States was âsolidified in condemnation of Hitlerâs atrocious policy.â The New York Times simply wondered how a nation could âsuddenly go mad.â5
But the persecution of the Jews constituted only one small segment of the story of Nazi Germany and was never the central theme of the reports about the new regime. News of political upheavals, Hitlerâs jockeying for control, the Reichstag fire, the March elections, and the violence perpetrated by groups such as the storm troopers against communists and socialists took precedence. Rarely was news of the persecution of the Jews handled by journalists, particularly by those who viewed the situation from the safety of the United States, as an inherent expression of Nazism. This failure to see Nazi antisemitism as a reflection of the fundamental principles of Nazism was to have important consequences for the interpretation and comprehension of the news of the persecution of European Jewry.
A Drawing Back
When the first reports from Nazi Germany reached this country, Americans were incredulous. This was not the Germany of Beethoven, Goethe, and Schiller. The entire situation, not just that of the Jews, rang of chaos and confusion, revolution and upheaval. There were what the Chicago Tribune and the New York Times described as âwild rumorsâ that the Nazis planned to âmassacre Jews and other political opponents.â The whole Jewish population in Germany was living, according to a London Daily Herald report which the Chicago Tribune reprinted, âunder the shadow of a campaign of murder which may be initiated within a few hours and cannot at the most be postponed more than a few days.â6 In addition to these extreme reports, there were eyewitness descriptions by returning Americans of what the New York Times described as âatrocitiesâ being inflicted on Jews. A number of Americans were among those who were terrorized and beaten. There was a striking difference between the United Press and New York Times versions of this story. The United Press described âthree incidents alleged to have been perpetrated,â while the Times described âthree more specific cases of molestationâ about which American Consul General George Messersmith had complained to the German Foreign Office.7
Though the news that emerged from Germany during this initial period was not nearly as horrifying as that of subsequent years, a deep-seated American skepticism was already evident. In fact, some Americans were more skeptical about this news than they would be about news of far more terrible magnitude. Ignoring the fact that much of the news was based on eyewitness accounts, editorial boards lamented that the âstories which have trickled through cannot be checked and officially verified.â8
It was quite common to find papers and magazines which were convinced that the situation could not be as bad as the reporters contended. This, in fact, would become one of the recurring themes in the press coverage of the entire period: âTerrible things may be happening but not as terrible as the reports from Germany would have you believe.â The Los Angeles Times, which in mid-March carried exclusive reports of German persecution, a few weeks later told its readers that the âamazing tales of oppressionâ being brought from Germany by Americans who were visiting or living there were âexaggerated.â On March 26 the Los Angeles Times featured news of a Los Angeles physician who had visited Germany and claimed that the stories were incorrect.9 The New York Herald Tribune did the same on March 25. In a front-page story John Elliott of the Herald Tribune bureau in Berlin complained that while the situation of German Jews was âan unhappy one,â it was exacerbated by the âexaggerated and often unfounded reports of atrocities that have been disseminated abroad.â He dismissed ten cases of American Jews who had been âmishandledâ as not an âaccurate picture of the position of German Jewry under Hitler.â As proof he cited both the claims of German Jewish organizations that Jews were not being molested and the fact that he was personally âacquainted with members of old Jewish families in Berlin who were so undisturbed by the political change in Germany that they had never even heard of these deeds of violence against their co-religionists.â10 Another doubter, initially, proved to be Frederick Birchall, chief of the New York Times Berlin bureau, who in mid-March assured listeners in a nationwide radio talk broadcast on CBS that Germany was interested only in peace and had no plans to âslaughterâ any of its enemies. He acknowledged that there had been persecution but believed that German violence was âspentâ and predicted âprosperity and happinessâ would prevail.11 (As the situation became worse, Birchallâs doubts would be totally erased.) On March 27, 1933, five days before all Jewish shops in Germany were subjected to a one-day nationwide boycott by the Nazis, the Los Angeles Times announced in a page 1 exclusive âGerman Violence Subsidingâ and âRaids On Jews Declared Over.â The Christian Century, which would emerge as one of the more strident skeptics regarding the accuracy of the reports on Jewish persecution, called for a âtighter curb . . . [on] emotions until the facts are beyond dispute.â12
Other papers expressed their reservations less directly. One paper acknowledged with an almost reluctant air that there âseems to be evidence to support the charges [of brutality against Jews] in the main.â But it then reminded readers that âmany of the cruelties charged against Germany in war propaganda were later proved not to have existed.â13 The Columbus (Ohio)Journal also associated these reports of âdestruction of property, beatings and blacklistingâ with the âexaggerated . . . stories the allies told about German atrocities during the war.â The link with World War I atrocity reports as a means of casting doubt on the current spate of stories was to become a common feature of the American publicâs reaction to the news of the Final Solution. By the time World War II began, Americans had determined, according to Journalism Quarterly, âthat they would not be such simpletons that they would be fooled againâ as they had been in the previous war by the tales of German atrocities.14
The reports on Nazi brutality which appeared in the Christian Science Monitor were also decidedly skeptical in tone.15 In March the paper noted that the Frankfurter Zeitung had condemned as false the stories of the persecution of the Jews which had appeared in foreign newspapers. The Frankfurt paper was described as an âoutstandingly outspokenâ critic of the regime. The New York Herald Tribuneâs John Elliott also cited the Frankfurt paper in his page 1 denial of reports that Jews were being molested. The implication was clear: if a newspaper which had been outspokenly critical of the government claimed that the brutality reports were untrue, then they obviously must be.16 The Chicago Tribuneâs Taylor offered a very different assessment of the Frankfurt paperâs denunciation of the foreign coverage. Taylor pointed out that the paper was owned and edited by Jews and noted, not without a touch of sarcasm, that even though German Jewry was âliving through the most systematic persecution known since the Middle Ages, and has had a fair taste of physical violence, by its own account it has seen nothing, heard nothing, remembered nothing.â To Taylor it was clear that this myopia was prompted by fear and not by a desire for journalistic accuracy.17 Similarly, the popular and widely syndicated columnist Dorothy Thompson, who visited Germany in March 1933, assured her husband, Sinclair Lewis, that the Jewsâ situation was âreally as bad as the most sensational papers report. . . . Itâs an outbreak of sadistic and pathological hatred.â When she returned to the United States she repeated this theme.18
In sum the picture that was drawn in the American press particularly during these early days was a confused one. There was the question of the truthfulness of the reports. Once it became clear that the reports were accurateâthough there were those who would never accept them as completely accurateâthere was the question of what this meant. Were these attacks actually being perpetrated and directed by the Nazi hierarchy, or had they been inspired by the Nazisâ extreme rhetoric? Was this the result of Nazi government policy, or was it simply an outgrowth of the chaos which often followed a revolutionary change in government? Were these events âboyish tricksâ perpetrated by overzealous Nazi enthus...