Abstract
Propaganda and censorship were used with greater success during the First World War than at any other time in history. The early part of the Twentieth Century conspired to produce the perfect conditions for propaganda. It was a period of progressive idealism as it appeared that the world was progressing rapidly towards "civilization", where humanity ruled the hearts and lives of men and women. The beast within had been conquered and inventions were multiplying rapidly. There had been no wars in Europe for fifty years and everywhere peace was being preached. Competition may have been fierce in commercial and colonial development but it was mostly peaceful. Wars were confined mainly to Africa and Asia. In these continents the Great Powers worked together to exploit their resources to the detriment of the indigenous people. Politics and politicians were looked upon with respect and trust. The newly literate world believed what they read in the press. Political and economic freedoms were now matters of right, not privilege. Pacifism seemed a popular and viable option. Certainly, there had been a few scares that threatened to swallow up this peaceful idyll but all the close calls had been averted by compromise and appeasement.
The Great War thrust itself upon this confident and peaceful time to wreck mayhem and horror. And with this great scourge came its twins, propaganda and censorship. […]
A mixture of innocence 1 trust and ignorance was vital for Otago/Southland's acceptance of Germany as inherently evil villains. These ingredients combined to create a vacuum of real knowledge about the enemy into which was hungrily sucked the "facts" of war after they had been distorted by propaganda and censorship. There seemed to be little in the way of first hand knowledge of Germany in Otago/Southland. It was writings by and about Germans and Germany that provided the main window into the reality that was the "German enemy". The distance of Otago/Southland from the Front accentuated this ignorance of real facts, facts that would have intruded upon the fantasy world of the imagined enemy. Trust in the integrity of the British Government further hampered Otago/Southland.
According to accepted historical orthodoxy New Zealand swallowed propaganda whole with only the left wing questioning the Imperial line. Supposedly, there were also some more broadbased doubts after Gallipoli and the Easter Rebellion. The most English of the British Dominions placed all of its resources at the disposal of Britain as a matter of course and without debate. Most of New Zealand was apparently content to accept the British version of events with little public dissent and no new mature voices emerged to criticize the British Empire New Zealand wholeheartedly believed that Germany was unrepentantly evil and the Allies gloriously virtuous and brave, as skilful British intended.
But how far was this really true in Otago/Southland? Did the southern portion of New Zealand slavishly follow the guide-lines set down by British propaganda for the duration? Was there any mainstream resistance to the overnight transformation of Germany from the leader of civilization into its greatest scourge? Was the dishonesty of British propaganda discerned? What was the result of this resistance, if indeed it existed?
Originally, I was looking for linkages between the major battles and the "image of the enemy" but as my research progressed the focus of this thesis changed. Linkages between battles and the "image of the enemy" mostly failed to materialize except for the initial contact period between New Zealand troops and the various enemy armies. This was because reporting of the major battles was exceptionally inadequate as a result of censorship and British concealment of disasters. The names of the great battles of Passchendaele, Somme and Ypres did not become truly famous until after the War in Otago/Southland.
Unintentional though it was on my part, the "image of the enemy« proved a useful tool in gauging public discontent with British War management. It provided evidence that challenges the prevailing orthodoxy of New Zealand history that dissent only came from the left and later the Irish Catholics. It also challenges the notion that grew up out of post War Germany that British propaganda was a wonder to behold and extremely successful.' British propaganda was the most highly organized and impressive of all the belligerents, but it was not omniscient as events in Otago/Southland proved. […] [Extract from Introduction]