American and German perspectives in World War I

World War I

The First World War began in the summer of 1914 with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. The conflict lasted through late 1918, concluding with the treaty of Versailles. The war to end all wars, as it was commonly known, was dominated by trench warfare. Due to numerous advances in defense technology and a lack of tactical advances, both the Allied Nations and the Central Powers, were stymied by a lack of military advances. Early victories in France, by the German army, and in Serbia by the Austrian/Hungarian forces proved to be less than decisive, due to miscommunication between the two Central powers.

Not only was this the First war between so many great world powers, additionally this was the first war to be affected by, and ultimately fought, not only on the battle field but also in the press rooms. Due to expansion in communication abilities and increased ease in printing, information was able to be disseminated to an eager public in a timely fashion. With news being so readily available, and the public so eager for information, the amount of news coverage was astounding. During the course of the war news coverage from both sides became quite different, both in content as well as opinion. News coverage from the west, mostly American, was dominated by editorials concerning eventual peace. This peace was almost always assumed to be at the detriment of the Central powers, most notably Germany. This opinion was widespread, affecting the news articles chosen by editors, the opinions of editorials as well as political cartoons. Conversely, German publications focused attention on what was seen as a "media bias." German news outlets were not a part of the Associated Press and were not generally printed by American, or other, non-German, news outlets. Through examination of the press coverage, one might conclude two very different wars were being waged. Ultimately, this is probably true of most any military or other conflict between peoples so vastly different, not only in culture but language and geographically as well.

The most dramatically different of news sources, naturally, was the editorial page. In review of a pro-German publication, one might find argument that, as Americans, should revolt from our British roots. Seek refuge in a culture less "traditional," revolt against the tyrants, no longer a "new England" but a new America. According to one such account, from a weekly publication called, Issues and Events we find such rally cry: "But we should remember we are Americans, not Britons; and our success is bound up with a coming epoch, not with that now drawing to a close. We should honor the past, but we should live in the future. " (Patton, 1915). Throughout this global conflict editorials ranged through a great many spectrums, the dichotomy, however, between "American" and German leaning opinions was as vast as the great Sahara desert. The pro-German leaning articles seamed to present two sides, one, such as above, suggesting Americans being in need of a culture shock, a culture revolution if you will, where as the other outright decried foul play in regards to American press. "The extent of faking and space grabbing in the present conflicts in Europe is almost incredible. Out of any given forty statements of fact relative to battles, army movements and war declarations printed in the daily pres no more than four are correct." (New York Morning Telegraph, 1914) These quotes come at the same time as the