The Southland Times WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1942. A Protest Against Censorship

Southland Times, Issue 24868, 7 October 1942, Page 4

The Southland Times WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1942. A Protest Against Censorship

WE PRINT this morning a statement on censorship which may be accepted as representing the collective opinion of the New Zealand Press. It is a strongly-worded statement, and its purpose is to protest against the extension of censorship beyond its legitimate war-time function. Restrictions necessary to ensure the safety of the armed forces have been willingly accepted by the newspapers; but, as the statement points out, the experience of three years of war has shown that the free expression of public opinion is being stifled by “prohibitions which appeal’ to be either dictated by political expediency or issued as a cloak for remediable weaknesses in the services and departments,” Instances of these prohibitions cannot be quoted, for the censor has power not merely to suppress but to prevent publication of any indication of what he has suppressed. The people are thus deprived of news and information without knowing that they have been so deprived. But the Newspaper Proprietors’ Association has indicated in broad terms some of the types of news that are being suppressed when it says that “censorship in New Zealand has meant a steady accumulation of restrictions on news of such matters as sabotage of production, shortcomings in the control of the necessaries of life, administrative mistakes, extravagances that even war cannot condone, and a number of minor but by no means unimportant matters that have their intimate bearing on the war.” This constitutes a serious charge against the Government, for it means that the Government is using censorship to cover inefficiency, and perhaps injustice, in the administration of the war effort and in the administration of ordinary public affairs. As we pointed out in an article last week, when a war enters its third or fourth year there are very few of a nation’s activities, economic, industrial or social, which are not related directly or indirectly to the wai’ effort; and it can be held, by Government officials anxious to extend theii’ authority, that public knowledge of almost any development, or shortcoming, would be damaging to the conduct of the war. Thus they are able to throw the cloak of war-time censorship not merely over military secrets (which are, of course, quite properly suppressed), but over blundering and incompetence. Damage To Morale

This kind of suppression has more than a negative result: it definitely harms the war effort. It is as much an act of sabotage as the failure of miners to hew coal. For it strikes at one of the vital factors in the waging of a war—public morale. It misleads the people into believing that things are better than they are, it encourages them to give theii’ confidence to leaders who do not deserve that confidence, it promotes inefficiency and it permits injustice. The danger is not merely that public morale will be shaken when disillusionment comes, for that may not come till after the war. The real danger is that war preparations made behind a wall of censorship and secrecy will not stand the test at the critical hour. The disintegration of France was a lesson in the evils of excessive censorship that should never be forgotten. The majority of the French people were kept in such ignorance of their country’s weaknesses that they made no effort to remedy them; and when the test came, and their democracy fell to pieces at the first assault, they suffered a disillusionment as tragic as it was complete. It is too late to talk about the evils of censorship after the enemy has won the last battle: the mere existence of censorship (that is, a censorship that goes beyond the suppression of military secrets) is one of the factors that make his victory possible. The enemy will be defeated only if the nation’s war effort is strong and healthy, and the war effort will be kept strong and healthy only if the people are allowed to know, and to discuss, what is going on around them. Free, frank and bold discussion is the very life of democratic government in war time as in peace. Appeal To The People

It is their profound belief in the necessity for this freedom of discussion which has led the newspapers to issue the statement that appears on this page today. They have no axe to grind; they are asking nothing for themselves. The people, not the newspapers, will be the losers if the freedom of publication is further curtailed, for they will lose possibly their last means of protection against injustice and persecution, and possibly their last means of ensuring maximum efficiency in the war effort. And it is primarily to the people that the Newspaper Proprietors’ Association has addressed its appeal. “The newspapers [it states], with the tradition of freedom inherited from our people, require the support of all, and especially of those who have sons and husbands engaged in a war of freedom, in combating a danger that threatens us in our own country.” The people have for so long taken the freedom of publication for granted that it may be difficult for them to realize that this freedom also is now in jeopardy, and that unless they exert their influence they may lose it. But these conclusions are justified by the trend of censorship in New Zealand today. The newspapers are doing all they can do by calling attention to this trend, by indicating what perils it holds for the nation, and by resisting it themselves. The enemy would like to have the Press default on its obligations to the people. It is up to the people to see that the blindness of the authorities (to use no harsher word) does not compel the Press to default.