War of the Worlds: Blog tasks

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?

The world was on the brink of war with the rise of fascism in Nazi Germany. Allied Nations were prepared to report on war at any moment. The radio play covers an alien invasion of New Jersey.

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

It was first broadcasted in 1938, just a year before WW2 broke out. The popular myth was that residents of New Jersey thought that the gas over the city was real and that martians had actually invaded NJ.

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

Local police were overwhelmed during the broadcast. It caused mass panic and some people even fled their homes

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.

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

he borrowed conventions of radio and his gripping idea to create a hybrid genre that definitely evokes a frightening reaction from the listeners. The use of pastiche by reworking a Victorian narrative is inspirational.

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

Far right powers in Germany were gaining popularity and they were annexing parts of countries. This made Europe and the US on edge as they prepared for the eventuality of an attack. The show made the audience scared because they were always waiting on a radio report that Germany had invaded the US.

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

CBS Radio

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

To get more sales therefore making the radioshow as well as newspapers more profitable

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

The listeners did not actively consume the media they were exposing themselves to. They blindly accepted the content of the radioshow for what itis and didn;t ask themselves if it was a hoax or just pretend. 

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

Radio in the early 20th Century became a staple of family and daily life. They centralised their entertainment intake on the radio content. The consumption skews peoples perception of reality and it clearly shows through the reaction from the show.

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

Preferred: to be entertained and intrigued

Oppositional: people to cause mass panic

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?

I think not as everyone has matured in the sense that they can sense when something is fake as there are so much fake news stories online nowadays.

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?

It fooled such a big population and gained fame due to its simple yet effective impact on audiences.

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?

The Orson Welles radio show was more fake news-like because it made a lot of people overreact whereas the newspapers just intensifies the existing panic

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?

I agree with it to an extent taking IQ, upbringing and the time period into account.

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

It's more relevant as there are more 'fake news' articles popping up. The spread of social media makes it easier for young or even old people to be susceptible to being fooled by fake news.

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 because 'Mean World Syndrome' is something that occurs as a result of increased media consumption. The bobo doll experiment also shows that increased hours in front of TV or the radio could have an effect on the way you see the world and its surroundings.

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

I think the less media you consume, the less likely you are to be brainwashed by the media. There are less avenues of cultivation if you consume less forms of media. Nowadays we have so many forms of media that we see examples of cultivation everywhere.