The press THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1937. Radio Propaganda in South

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22271, 9 December 1937, Page 10

The press THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1937. Radio Propaganda in South

America It is an interesting speculation whether the Monroe Doctrine, so long regarded by Americans as the heavy artillery in their weapons of international policy, carries any more weight than the paper on which it is recorded in the archives of Congress. According to the United States Under-Secretary of State the doctrine is infringed by wireless broadcasts to Latin America from Fascist and Communist countries in Europe, but it is difficult to see how an invasion of the Latin American ether can be resisted by waving the Monroe bludgeon. In its application to modes of interference that could reasonably have been anticipated at the time of its formulation, the doctrine is admirably specific: “ Any attempt on the part of non- “ American Powers to exert through force “ their political - or material influence on the “ American continents will immediately be a "matter of the gravest concern not only to the “United States but to every other American “republic, and appropriate action will immedi- “ ately be determined as a result of common “ consultation among them.” Whether such a doctrine can be applied to radio broadcasts, however, is another matter. In the first place, it is not easy to decide that force has been exerted to produce political influence. It is an axiom of private law—and, by inference, of public law—that the air is free, subject to the restriction that no man may be deprived of air to breathe or of light by which to see. In international law there are conventions, having merely the force of moral suasion, which seek to limit the scope of aerial navigation; but this limitation concerns the territories over which aircraft fly and on which they may make landings, rather than the air through which they travel. But since the air knows no frontiers of its own, it is manifestly impossible to impose any sanctions against the discharge of electrical activity into the ether. Another very practical difficulty confronts those who contemplate resort to the Monroe Doctrine. Propaganda which is distributed by wireless waves does not become propaganda merely by being disseminated from the transmitting station. It is not propaganda until it reaches a receptive ear, and the receipt of such propaganda depends essentially upon the conscious effort of the proposed recipient. It is not sufficient to be the owner of a wireless receiving set; it is necessary to tune in to the particular wavelength of the station which is broadcasting. South America being quite as favourably placed for world-wide reception as New Zealand, it is apparent that the people there will have an equal, if not a superior, range of choice to that which the broadcast listener enjoys here. If the South American householder prefers the programmes of Moscow and Rome to those of New York and Philadelphia, how is the Monroe Doctrine going to correct this regrettable lapse in taste? It is conceivable that South Americans themselves may have views of their own on the purposes for which the Monroe Doctrine may be justly invoked, and that this is not one of them. If the United States wishes to stop the propaganda, if the United States feels itself called upon to stop the propaganda, and if the United States feels that its action will not lead to grave misinterpretations in Latin America, then two methods of dealing with the situation suggest themselves. The first is the direct method of broadcasting, on the same wave-length as the offending stations, programmes well calculated to drown the reception of the latter. The second method is to make representations to the countries concerned seeking the discontinuance of propagandist broadcasts for South American listeners. If the offending countries are sufficiently solicitous of the good opinion of the United States it is possible that they may be moved to comply with such representations. Failing either of these methods, the United States would be well advised to learn the lesson that a stretch of water and an introspective way of thinking do not give that “ splendid “ isolation ” which was valuable a century ago.