AUSTRALIA’S CENSORS

Grey River Argus, 19 February 1943, Page 5

AUSTRALIA’S CENSORS

“DAILY MAIL” MAN’S FUSS On Return to London GENERAL MacARTHUR SHARES BLAME. [Aust. & N.Z. Cable Assn.J (Rec 10.15.) LONDON. Feb. 17. A “Daily Mail” war correspondent. Mr. Noel Monks (an Australian by birth) was interviewed by the “World’s Press News” after his arrival in London after spending a year In Australia. His -interview appears under the heading, “Amazing Disclosures on Australian Censorship.” He asserted:— “Political interference and a parochial outlook on the part of the individual censors make the working conditions of overseas press correspondents in Australia, at times, quite impossible.’’ He said that in addition to an Australian censorship, overseas correspondents had to contend with General MacArthur who had an equally drastic military censorship. He (Monks) was finally forced to return to Britain because he was unable to give a true picture of events. The political censorship refused to allow mention of the word “censorship” in their overseas despatches. For that reason it was impossible for correspondents to inform their offices that their messages had been touched. Moreover, correspondents often were not allowed to send service messages to their; offices. He continued: “Even Germany honours such messages. I had at least, six service messages, not containing security data, banned. Finally in despair, I sent a message from Sydney as follows: “Dispirited. Disheartened. Disgusted. Disgruntled.” Transmission of this was refused on the grounds that it might convey to m v office that I was unhappy in Australia.” . ... . . He said: “Constructive criticism of the Australian political regime was banned time after time, and even editorial comment from newspapers and extracts from speeches in the House of Representatives is prohibited Even if we got through these pitfalls, we still had to contend with General MacArthur’s almost fantastic military censorship, which is the worst I have ever experienced in any war I have reported. Australian censors moreover, have employed intimidation methods, particularly against British correspondents. One censor threatened to refuse me perxmsison to return to England because of the fuss I was making about the censorship. The same censor told a London “News Chronicle” war correspondent, Mr. Dickson Brown, that h# was a Fifth Columnist,, and threatened him with imprisonment. I reported both cases to Doctor Evatt, who took disciplinary action. The Arrays gigantic public relations section showed a marked lack of co-op-eration to overseas correspondents. Some of the greatest heartbreaks and insults to overseas correspondents were at' the hands of these people who. because of their newspaper experience, should have known better. War correspondents do not rank with this public relations outfit. They are regarded as a nuisance.” He said that when he received his “blessed release’’ he asked the head of this organisation for the first favour he ever asked in Australia, namely, to be given a priority plane to travel from Melbourne to Brisbane In order to catch a plane for America. The ■Director refused to pass on his request to the military authorities, but General Winter immediately obtained him a seat in a plane in which General Winter himself was travelling. Mr. Monks, says that the , most important newspaper executives championed the cause of overseas correspondents who were unable to give the outside world a proper picture of events in Australia. Yet the correspondents were unable to send out important resolutions by newspaper proprietors protesting against politi,cal rulings affecting the censorship. He also was unable to send out a message reporting “an extraordinary demand on the floor of the House at Canberra that so important and influential a patriot as Sir Keith Murdoch should be interned because he was campaigning for correction _ of muddles in censorship and political interference with primary direction of the war.” Mr. Monks concluded that the Australian censorship was the worst he had experienced within eight years of reporting in Abyssinia, Spain,' France, the Battle of Britain, th’e United- States, and the Middle East. Even the Abyssinians had a better idea of censorship than Australians. He was convinced that the British censorship, despite the complaints against it, was the world’s fairest and most intelligent.