RADIO: WAR OF THE WORLD CSP!

 

RADIO: WAR OF THE WORLD CSP:

Media Factsheet

Read Media Factsheet #176: CSP Radio - War of the Worlds. You'll need your Greenford Google login to download it. Then answer the following questions:

What is the history and narrative behind War of the Worlds?

War of the Worlds, a science-fiction novel by author HG Wells, was first published in 1898. It is a story of alien invasion and war between mankind and an extra-terrestrial race from Mars. In 1938, the world was on edge as Germany mobilised to invade Europe and populations feared gas attacks from another world war. In the weeks leading up to the 1938 broadcast, American radio stations had increasingly cut into scheduled programming to bring news updates from Europe on the chances of war. This meant Welles's use of radio news conventions had more of an impact on listeners who were unaware that it was a fictional radio play.

 

When was it first broadcast and what is the popular myth regarding the reaction from the audience?

Broadcast live on 30th October 1938, popular myth has it that thousands of New Yorkers fled their homes in panic, and all across America people crowded the streets to witness for themselves the real space battle between earth and the Martians.

How did the New York Times report the reaction the next day?

The following morning newspapers across the country revelled in the mass hysteria it had caused. The New York Times headline read, “Radio Listeners in Panic, Taking War Drama as Fact.”

How did author Brad Schwartz describe the the broadcast and its reaction?

Author Brad Schwartz in his 2015 book ‘Broadcast Hysteria: Orson Welles’s War of the Worlds and the Art of Fake News’ suggests that hysteria it caused was not entirely a myth. “Instead it was something decades ahead of its time: history’s first viral-media phenomenon.” 

Why did Orson Welles use hybrid genres and pastiche and what effect might it have had on the audience?

He played with the form and style of both to create some of the twentieth century’s most celebrated media texts. He also experimented with the new technologies of the time exploring the possibilities of both radio and cinema.

Use of pastiche. By borrowing the conventions of the radio newscast, he is able to create real moments of shock and awe, which almost certainly account for the strong reaction it received. By creating a hybrid form – mixing conventional storytelling with news conventions – Welles blurred the boundaries between fact and fiction in a way that audiences had never experienced.

How did world events in 1938 affect the way audiences interpreted the show?

In September 1938, one month prior to the plays broadcast, Hitler signed the Munich Agreement annexing portions of Czechoslovakia and creating the ‘Sudetenland’. Europe’s failed appeasement of Germany was viewed with much concern and for many it seemed that another world war was inevitable. At this time, both the radio networks, including CBS, frequently interrupted programmes to issue news bulletins with updates on the situation in Europe. As a result, audiences became familiar with such interruptions and were thus more accepting of Welles’ faux newscasts at the beginning of the play. Indeed, for the listeners, it didn’t sound like a play.

Which company broadcast War of the Worlds in 1938?

CBS Radio Network

Why might the newspaper industry have deliberately exaggerated the response to the broadcast?

It has been suggested that the panic was trumped up by the newspapers to rubbish this new medium which it viewed as a huge threat. “Radio is new but it has adult responsibilities. It has not mastered itself or the material it uses,” said the editorial leader In the New York Times on November 1st 1938.

Does War of the Worlds provide evidence to support the Frankfurt School's Hypodermic Needle theory?

This states that audiences consume and respond to media texts in an unquestioning way, believing what they read, see or hear. This might be true of the audiences of the 1930s, unfamiliar with new media forms like radio, but in the modern age it carries less weight. It is questionable as to how far most of the audience were actually duped by the broadcast.

How might Gerbner's cultivation theory be applied to the broadcast?

Gerbner’s Cultivation Theory might offer a more accurate explanation of the audience’s behaviour in response to the radio broadcast since it emphasises the longer-term effects that media texts have upon audiences. Based on his research into television viewing, cultivation theory states that high frequency viewers of television are more susceptible to media messages and the belief that they are real. Heavy viewers of TV are thought to be ‘cultivating’ attitudes that seem to believe that the world created by television is an accurate depiction of the real world. Applied to War of the Worlds it could be argued that an audience familiar with the frequent interruptions to radio shows over the weeks leading up to the broadcast did not question the faux invasion broadcasts during Welles’ production.

Applying Hall's Reception Theory, what could be the preferred and oppositional readings of the original broadcast?

Stuart Hall’s Reception Theory is useful when considering how the audience for War of the Worlds interpreted the text (as either fact or Fiction). He argues that audiences might read a media text in different ways. The dominant or preferred reading by the audience is the one intended by the creator of the text. However, a person might read it in an oppositional way depending upon factors such as their age, gender or background.

Do media products still retain the ability to fool audiences as it is suggested War of the Worlds did in 1938? Has the digital media landscape changed this?

In the late 1990s, and inspired by Orson Welles’ 1938 broadcast, two young filmmakers made the low budget film The Blair Witch Project. Supposedly made up ‘found footage’ shot by three student filmmakers who go missing while shooting a documentary about a local legend (the Blair Witch), the film sparked debate among audiences as to whether the footage was actually real. However, given that audiences received the text in a movie theatre (or on video and DVD) it is unlikely to have fooled the audience in quite the same way – or with the same authority – as a series of radio news bulletins.

Analysis and opinion

Why do you think the 1938 broadcast of War of the Worlds has become such a significant moment in media history?

Because of the mass hysteria, made it seem very realistic towards the audience, and it came as a shock to the audience as this was the first time I think this had happened.

War of the Worlds feels like a 1938 version of 'fake news'. But which is the greater example of fake news - Orson Welles's use of radio conventions to create realism or the newspapers exaggerating the audience reaction to discredit radio?

I believe it was the newspaper because deliberate exaggeration was used so that they can misinform the audience. (discredit radio)

Do you agree with the Frankfurt School's Hypodermic Needle theory? If not, was there a point in history audiences were more susceptible to believing anything they saw or heard in the media?

I do not agree with this theory because I believe audience are much more capable of identifying whats true and whats false, mostly mainly everyone knows the difference between expectations vs reality and sometime the media makes everything seem like an expectation, a viewer to remove any doubts received from the media should be able to do their own research that helps them to form their own ideas and opinions.

Has the digital media age made the Hypodermic Needle model more or less relevant? Why?

In the digital media age, the hypodermic needle model is more relevant because the audience are easily brainwashed in what the media shows, they tend to believe everything is correct because its "everywhere".

MORE RELEVANT

Do you agree with George Gerbner's Cultivation theory - that suggests exposure to the media has a gradual but significant effect on audience's views and beliefs? Give examples to support your argument.

Mean World Syndrome is an assumption of cultivation theory, George Gerbner came up with the term to describe a phenomenon whereby violence related content in television and film makes viewers believe that the world is more dangerous than it actually is. People who watch a lot of violent television are more likely to believe that there are more murders etc. then there are in the real world.

Is Gerbner's Cultivation theory more or less valid today than it would have been in 1938?

 Why?

Less valid because audience are now more educated and more aware