Talk:Committee on Public Information

This Article Repeats its Self

It uses the same quote of George Creel. I suggest it be revised to include a different quote or only use the same quote once. Isimbot (talk) 03:18, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. But you should add your comments to the bottom of a "talk" page, not the top.

Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 15:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Removal of information

RE: recent edits.

Please do not remove cited information. Travb (talk) 21:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Independent ??

How it is possible that a part of the goverment is independent ?? This might be absolutly nonsece. And the Quotations are pure propaganda from the chief-member of this committee. Actualy is was an committee of censorship. Surly not like the german despotie, but also censorship 188.193.95.217 (talk) 17:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC).

If you follow the link at the words "independent agency" you learn that: "Independent agencies of the United States federal government are those agencies that exist outside of the federal executive departments." It is NOT "independent." It is an "independent agency."

Other than that, this entry does need to be expanded with attention to a balanced point of view. Nothing wrong with allowing Creel to make his own case, but I doubt that belongs under the "Quotations" heading, which is usually reserved for quotable quotes, not what this entry has at the moment, one very lengthy quote and one half sentence.

Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 21:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Questionable material

For the moment I have deleted this unsourced material:

Hollywood movie makers joined in on the propaganda by making movies such as The Claws of the Hun, The Prussian Cur, To Hell With The Kaiser, and The Kaiser, the Beast of Berlin. These titles illustrate the message the CPI tried to convey.

This raw propaganda included complete fabrications, such as images and stories of German soldiers killing babies and hoisting them on bayonets. CPI pamphlets warned citizens to be on the lookout for German spies. Dozens of "patriotic organizations," with names like the American Protective League and the American Defense Society, sprang up. These groups spied, tapped telephones, and opened mail in an effort to ferret out "spies and traitors." The targets of these groups was anyone who called for peace, questioned the Allies' progress, or criticized the government's policies. They were particularly hard on German Americans, some of whom lost their jobs, and were publicly humiliated by being forced to kiss the American flag, recite the Pledge of Allegiance, or buy war bonds.

It is not clear that the films referenced in the first paragraph were the work of the CPI. The first sentence of the 2nd paragraph expands on that film material. The next sentence (CPI pamphlets...) might be true, but is not sourced. The remainder of the paragraph is interesting material about the war years, not the CPI. Perhaps it could be added to an entry covering "World War I enforced patriotism in the U.S."

Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 03:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Bias stated as fact

RE: recent edits.

"In no degree was the Committee an agency of censorship, a machinery of concealment or repression. Its emphasis throughout was on the open and the positive. At no point did it seek or exercise authorities under those war laws that limited the freedom of speech and press. In all things, from first to last, without halt or change, it was a plain publicity proposition, a vast enterprise in salesmanship, the world's greatest adventures in advertising...We did not call it propaganda, for that word, in German hands, had come to be associated with deceit and corruption. Our effort was educational and informative throughout, for we had such confidence in our case as to feel that no other argument was needed than the simple, straightforward presentation of the facts."

This is clearly a bias statement, not factual in nature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.86.152.118 (talk) 18:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

The material you quote is not presented as fact. It's a quote and therefore represents the views of the author, Creel. You may not like how Creel presents his work during WWI, but it's still his view and as a key participant he's worth quoting, though perhaps not at such length IMHO. Other views of the work of the Committee on Public Information would be welcome with citations. I have some material to add soon that casts a bit of its work in a less favorable light, but it's relatively minor and doesn't reflect on the CPI's work generally.

Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 20:25, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Bernays

We say this: "Among those who participated in it were Wilson advisers Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays, the latter of whom had remarked that "the essence of democratic society" was the "engineering of consent," by which propaganda was the necessary method for democracies to promote and garner support for policy.

Aside from the clunky explanatory phrase (by which...), I wonder if this is a proper way to explain who Bernays was. He wrote an article called "The Engineering of Consent" 30 years later in 1947. If he said the phrase circa WWI it might be OK here. I'm going to re-write the sentence to identify Lippmann and Bernays so the reader will have some idea who they are without stopping to follow their linked names. It seems most unlikely that Bernays would have written/spoken this way during the life of the Creel Committee.

Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 19:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Radio

Article claims Commission used radio to broadcast their message. If I remember correctly, radio broadcasting did not begin until around 1921. Snezzy (talk) 11:23, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Photo caption

There is currently a photo of 12 individuals in the article with the caption, "Committee on Public Information in 1916." It seems like this is most likely a misleading caption. The photo itself has a handwritten caption, "C.P.I. delegates to Europe." Given the ultimate size of the organization described in the article, it doesn't seem likely that these twelve individuals also made up the entire CPI at some point in 1916, as the current caption seems to imply. 134.134.139.76 (talk) 00:07, 22 July 2017 (UTC)