Radio: War of the Worlds CSP (1938)

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:

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

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.

2) 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.

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

A wave of mass hysteria seized thousands of radio listeners between 8:15 and 9:30 o’clock last night when a broadcast of a dramatisation of H. G. Wells’s fantasy, “The War of the Worlds,” led thousands to believe that an interplanetary conflict had started with invading Martians spreading wide death and destruction in New Jersey and New York.Throughout New York families left their homes, some to flee to near-by parks.

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

He argues that “the stories of those whom the show frightened offer a fascinating window onto how users engage with media content, spreading and reinterpreting it to suit their own world views. But it’s even more important to understand how the press magnified and distorted those reactions, creating a story that terrified the nation all over again, so that we can recognise when the same thing happens today. Our news media still have a penchant for making us fear the wrong things, of inflating certain stories into false Armageddons, as they did with War of the Worlds.”

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

His version of War of the Worlds reworks a Victorian narrative about an alien invasion (which he considered “boring”) and turns it into an exciting radio play through his 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.

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

Through a reservation of reality and during the late 1930s another war seemed inevitable and some Americans believed it was a german attempt of a gas attack.

7) Which company broadcast War of the Worlds in 1938?

CBS Radio Network.

8) 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. Professors Jefferson Pooley and Michael J Socolow writing in Slate magazine in 2013 state: “How did the story of panicked listeners begin? Blame America’s newspapers. Radio had siphoned off advertising revenue from print during the Depression, badly damaging the newspaper industry.

9) 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. As has been noted, those who ‘bought into’ the idea of an invasion, may well have been influenced by external factors such as the social and political context of the time. It was not impossible to believe that a foreign power was invading American soil in 1938.

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

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.

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

The dominant or preferred reading- That there is an alien apocalypse and so the aim is to be entertained 
The Oppositional Reading- The German's are planning a gas attack

12) 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?

The 1938 and 1949 radio broadcasts of War of the Worlds clearly had the power to deceive at least some of the listening audience, but could any media product create such an impact today? Are audiences
too sophisticated and media-literate to be fooled by a similar stunt? In the late 1990s, and inspired by Orson Welles’ 1938 broadcast, two young filmmakers made the low budget film The Blair Witch Project. Furthermore, the film sparked debate among audiences as to whether the footage was actually real.

Analysis and opinion

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

The news was a hoax i.e pseudo news and fooled many radio listeners. Due to this they obtained popularity and had an impact on the audience.

2) 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 that Orson Welles's use of radio conventions to create realism was considered more as 'fake news' as it caused more panic in the audience as opposed to the newspapers exaggerating the audience reaction to discredit radio. Also, because members of the public are more likely to be immune to getting some news from newspapers that aren't fully true or lack certain details, therefore, newspapers often exaggerate and alter news to benefit them and the amount of readers that they gain so it has to be Orson Welles's. Furthermore, the newspapers exaggerated about the audience reaction not the actual act that Welles was involved in.

3) 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?

Yes, I agree with it as audiences do believe what they see/hear and are passive.4) Has the digital media age made the Hypodermic Needle model more or less relevant? Why?

5) 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.

Yes, I agree because an increase in media consumption can change your views and beliefs. 

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

It is more valid today. This is because due to the vast advancement of technology today, people are able to watch and stream whatever they wish via Netflix and Amazon Prime. This puts Gerbner's theory right in play because more people are consuming media today thus a change in views and beliefs is likely