Story of the Century
History professor's class examines press coverage of atom bomb
This article was originally published in the April 1999 issue of CLASnotes.
Because it inaugurated an era in which the very existence of the entire human race could be cut short in minutes, the dropping of the atomic bomb has recently been judged by journalists as number one of the top 100 stories of the century. This semester students in Fred Gregory's HIS 3483 ("The Atomic Age") examined how various newspapers at the time covered this and six other stories of the nuclear age. Below are excerpts of papers by students who chose to find out how the events of August 6 and 9 were treated by the press in 1945.
Teague Froscher
Although most of the articles throughout the [August 7, 1945] New York Times are related to the atomic bomb, only a few articles are actually on the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. The articles that followed the bold headline were less about the "rain of ruin" and more about the events that led up to this historic event. For example, in the article titled "Steel Tower 'Vaporized' in Trial of Mighty Bomb," Lewis Wood described the July 16th trinity test of the first atomic bomb.... In another article titled "Atom bombs made in three hidden cities," Jay Walz reported how Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, and Richland Village became the birthplace of the atomic bomb....
On August 9, 1945, the front page headline reads "SOVIET DECLARES WAR ON JAPAN, ATTACKS MANCHURIA, TOKYO SAYS ATOM BOMB LOOSED ON NAGASAKI." At this point, The New York Times coverage of the atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima is a distant memory. Overshadowed by the Soviets announcing their entrance into the war, and the announcement of a second atomic bomb dropped on the Japanese city of Nagasaki, there are no articles on the bombing of Hiroshima. It seems at this point, that the news of the atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima quietly moves from the newspaper to the history books.
Megan Kilduff
The reports that the New York Times had published that informed American readers of the dropping of the bomb began on a positive note. The beginning reports emphasized the great leaps that the Americans and their collaborators had accomplished by being the first to develop and use this new powerful weapon. On the other hand, by the time the second bomb had been dropped on Nagasaki, reports began to demonstrate the horrendous outcome that a weapon of this magnitude would accomplish. The later reports show how Hiroshima was devastated and how people were burned alive. Later reports also propose that the United States may have violated international laws by dropping the bomb in the first place. This change of opinion by those who reported on the bomb shows how both the public and media views shifted once the truth about the effects of an atomic bomb were realized.
Carla M. Conaway
On an inside page [Wall Street Journal, August 7 1945] there was a rather large article entitled "Development of the Atomic Bomb Already Dropped on Japs Opens the Way to a New Source of Power for Industry." It mentioned that the White House had dropped strong hints previously that it might drop the bomb, although I found no evidence of this in the days immediately preceding, or the day of, the actual event. It mentioned that the uses of atomic energy other than those of a war-time weapon were being investigated and that atomic energy might soon rival coal, oil and water in the power industry, although as President Truman said, "it is not now being produced on a basis to compete with them commercially...."
[On August 8,] an article titled "Competition from Atomic Power Too Remote to Worry About, Say Coal, Oil Industry Spokesman," reassured Wall Street Journal Readers who were concerned that atomic power would destroy those industries. Also, many companies proudly owned up to contributing to the production of the bomb. Another article expounded on the stock statistics of a Colorado form which produced much of the US's stores of Uranium.
Amusingly, there was also a small column "Editors of Science Fiction Magazines Yawn at Atomic Bomb," which told that science fiction authors wrote about the bomb a long time ago and had since turned their interests to the aftermath...especially mutants with extra appendages and the ability to communicate telepathically. Although reporters had been censored throughout the war, authors of science fiction kept writing unrestrainedly and boasted proudly in regard to scientific technology that "we were years ahead of everyone else."
John Kelly
[The London Times Atomic Bomb Coverage: August 6, 1945] The most interesting thing I noticed about the articles was that even though the news of the two atomic bombs was groundbreaking and unprecedented, they treated it just like any other big story. I skimmed through some earlier editions of the Times to get a feel for the layout of the paper, and noticed that the larger stories got the biggest type (logically, as any newspaper would). However, the news of the atomic bomb was treated like any other story, with no special sections, no charts, graphs, or sketches, and nothing to distinguish it as a big story other than the multiple columns that it received. The aim of the coverage was "how does this concern the end of the war," not "how is this a landmark event in the history of the world."
It was also noticeable that the British emphasized their contributions to the atomic effort, but this is understandable, since the Times is a British newspaper.... Stories that the Times wrote regarding the bomb were more geared to the scientific point of view, while stories and statements concerning the American use of the bomb were very political and belligerent.
Diana Shipley
The Washington Post's first story of the dropping of the atomic bomb was on Tuesday, August 7, 1945. The long headline read, "Single Atomic Bomb Rocks Japanese Army Base with Mightier Force than 20,000 Tons of TNT To Open New Era of Power for Benefit of Man." Ten articles on the front page described the different aspects of the new bomb. The longest stories were about the testing of the bomb in New Mexico and the blast from the first test. The Post gave a brief description of Major General Leslie R. Groves and his work directing the bomb project. Three pictures appeared on the second page of Sir James Chadwick, Dr. Richard C. Tolman, and General Groves. The articles described the destruction in Hiroshima but not with great detail. Mainly the coverage was on entering the atomic age and the sheer power of the new bomb.
A picture of Dr. Lise Meitner was on the front page on Wednesday, August 8, with an article about her. The headline about the atomic bomb stated, "Single Atomic Bomb Dissolved Jap City." The main article on the front page was about the area of destruction of the bomb and the stories of the pilots who dropped the bomb on Hiroshima. The editorial page had an article about how the bomb might effect Japan's surrender.
"...Atomic Bomb Leaves Countless Dead," was the headline for August 9, with two articles on the front page about the bomb. With information from Tokyo radio and reconnaissance photographs, the articles told of the destruction of buildings and the large loss of human life....
After the initial press coverage of the bomb, the Post printed fewer articles the next week. On August 10, one section was devoted to the war reviews and editorials with articles appearing about the bomb, the scientists, and the bomb's impact on future world politics....
The Post carried people's opinions about the bombs in letters to the editor and it wrote several articles on people's views. On the last page of the paper on August 10 was an article entitled, "Atomic Bomb Use Favored by Virginia Women"....The Post also wrote of some of the Washington area churches' views on the bomb on August 13, in the article, "Use of Atomic Bomb Criticized in Several Pulpits." By August 17, in the Letters to the Editor section "Atomic Power," the four letters were against the use of the bomb.
