Mind-Munitions

Propaganda, Cold War and the Television Age 277
British, American co-operation was vital, particularly in the sphere
of intelligence, even at the risk of President Reagan abandoning his
anti-communist crusade in Latin America that was to have been
spearheaded by Argentina. Getting the Americans to side with the
British was thus no straightforward matter. The British campaign
in the USA in April 1982 proved every bit as important as that
conducted between 1914-17 or 1939-41.
With Resolution 502 safely through the United Nations with
American support, the Thatcher government had to confront the
question of domestic morale in a real war fought 8000 miles from
home in the television age. Equipped with some degree of experience
of media management derived from the ‘Troubles’ in Northern
Ireland, and with the ‘Vietnam effect’ very much in mind, there
would be no uncensored war in the South Atlantic. Only 29
journalists and crew were permitted to accompany the Task Force
– all British; the foreign media were to be served by the Reuters
representative. Even that small number was only agreed to
reluctantly by a Royal Navy holding on to its reputation as the
‘silent service’. The compensation was that the journalists would
all be totally dependent upon the navy in two vital aspects: travel
to and from the war zone, and communicating their copy from the
Task Force back to London. The opportunity for near complete
military censorship was achieved. Reports could only be compiled
on the basis of what military personnel on the spot were prepared
to say or show, and could only be sent home via military channels.
At each stage, the blue pencil censors were at work. After stories
reached London – and one was delayed longer than Russell’s
despatches took to reach London from the Crimea in the 1850s –
they were subjected to another censorship stage (or ‘security review’)
prior to release. A third phenomenon was also closely observed,
that of ‘bonding’ between reporters and soldiers. Journalists
dependent upon the military for their safety, let alone their copy,
soon came to identify closely with the troops who shared their
confined sea-borne quarters and their anxieties. Ironically, therefore,
when the BBC back home tried to treat the enemy’s case objectively,
it was criticized by the government for being ‘unacceptably evenhanded’.
Mrs Thatcher informed Parliament:
I know how strongly many people feel that the case for our boys is not
being put with sufficient vigour on certain – I do not say all – BBC
programmes. The Chairman of the BBC has assured us, and has said in