Documentary News Letter (1942-1943)

DOCUMENTARY NEWS LETTER JANUARY 1942 NATIONAL SAVINGS PUBLICITY By W. BUCHANAN-TAYLOR, Honorary Publicity Adviser to the National Savings Movement, who is responsible for the production and supervision of National Savings Committee films. when is a door not a door? In the old days of show business the answer was "When it is ajar." The door of Documentary News Letter is ajar — as it should be and sometimes is not. Readers may want to know how the National Savings Committee managed to raise in two years the sum of £1,115,306,106 from what are known as the "small savers." Some of those readers may not be particularly interested, if by any chance it was not altogether due to the use of film propaganda. To satisfy this specialised appetite 1 intend to deal with the film side first and leave the other manifold elements for later discussion in the special phraseology of the "befuddled mind of an old advertising nark" — to quote that precious bit from a recent Documentary News Letter paragraph. I feel I must somehow justify some of the "fatuous National Savings spreads" so beloved of the editorial staff of this Journal. Well, we started on the track of public money in September, 1939. armed with a permanent staff sized to peace time needs. When I say we— I mean the honorary advisory publicity wallahs — S. C. Leslie and myself. And 1 should add, six advertising agencies — a spread-over which was calculated to give us the product of six brains and at the same time do justice to the advertising business, then in a position of parlous prospects. Neither Leslie nor I were concerned with the agency side of advertising, but with advertising itself. Professor Keynes and some other economic pundits figured that the outside edge of smallsaver savings would work out at £400.01)0.000 per year. Many high-ups in the biggest City financial scheme put it at £150,000,000 per year and a few slightly higher than that. In the first year the produce was over £475.000,000 from the "little man" in restricted Securities— the unit maximum being £375 for Savings Certificates and £1,000 for Defence Bonds. How was it done? I believe it was done chiefly through publicity— in all its branches. The part which films played in the record achievement is difficult to measure, since in the first six or eight months we had to depend upon the goodwill and understanding of the newsreel companies. And here I want to pay tribute to them. True, they were a concern already in action and their machinery was going full tilt. The documentary element was still thinking in terms of 10 minute and 20 minute shows. They were still going along in their own sweet way, some of them loftily insisting that that was the only way. The deelasticising of the documentary mind was a slow process. The newsreel folk jumped in with the shorter short— and filled the bill. Not only did the newsreels help us very greatly in thenweekly issues, but they made shorts for us which were realistic and. we believe, effective. Then came the making of the shorter shorts — a limit of live minutes being fixed as between the Ministry of Information and the C.E.A. People in and close-by the film trade will know that not all the shorts made for Government propaganda were accepted or shown. In many cases exhibitors, conserving their rights, felt their territory was being encroached upon. They set themselves up as judges of what was best for their patrons — customers who paid to be entertained and amused and not necessarily to be preached at in varying terms — week by week. The big circuits were on the whole kindlier than the independents, but even they had managers whose attitude towards propaganda was not whole-hearledlv approving. Some averred that the material was in many cases not worthy of being placed alongside the booked material of entertainmenl calibre. And in many cases they were right. It must be remembered that the new and shorter short demanded condensation of story. Not unnaturally some of the earlier efforts were somewhat bald, but condensation in all the arts is one of the most difficult processes. How many journals even of the same genre are comparable with the Readers' Digest? As a nation we have been devoted to elaboration of wordage. Gladstone as a public speaker and many popular authors established a vogue which is only now beginning to diminish. From a ten minute to a five minute short required a process of condensation beyond the immediate grasp of most producers. Like all experts who had become set they had to learn and profit by practice. The National Savings Movement were quick to realise the need for co-ordinating with the exhibitors, even though distribution of their products was in the hands of the M.O.I. Of the necessity for informing even the entertainment seeking publico!' their national duties there could be no doubt. And the cinema, depending for its livelihood on the nation's efforts at preservation, was as much entitled to assist as were the several thousand newspapers which for the best of all reasons regularly published free editorials on Government requirements — recruiting, rationing, saving and the rest. Th. exhibitor is inclined to the riposte that the newspapers get paid advertising and therefore are entitled to give a quid pro quo. That is the old and outworn theory. Newspapers do not give paragraphs to advertisers; in fact the average editorial controller resents the suggestion. Of course there are certain mean journals which indulge in the practice, but they are so few that they don't matter. from the start we tried to make those responsible for distribution appreciate the value of a title not a continuous label which proclaimed the propaganda character of the film. We sought to get our publicity by more or less indirect methods — presenting our shorts, as feature items are presented and placing the credit titlesNational Savings, and M.O.I, as distributors — at the end. To go into a cinema lobby to find on the time-table the simple and unconvincing announcement "M.O.I." meant literally nothing. Even now, I believe, the title of a Government film is rarely announced in bill matter or on the time-sheet. Since November 22nd, 1939, we have produced fourteen shorts and trailers in connection with War Savings. We have two in technicolor — one The Savings Song in which Jack Hvlton and his Band appeared with the Aspidistras and George Baker, and The Volunteer Worker, with Donald Duck, presented to* us by Walt Disney. We weie first in the field of Government propaganda with technicolor. The current National Savings films are Give Us More Ships (Gilbert Frankau, Leslie Banks. George Posford and Geraldo's Concert Orchestra contributing, and produced by Harold Purcell, Merton Park Studios); Sam Pepys Joins the Navy (GaumontBritish); The Owner Goes Aloft (Ivan Scott. Spectator); The I olunteer H brker (Walt Disnej : Donald Duck); Seaman I rank (I rank Laskici returning to sea; Derrick de Marney, Concanen Recordings, Ltd., with commentary bj I de Marney and Laskier himself). IK I short goes out immediately on its news value and because the C.E.A. executive aftei seeing it asked for quick release. All the material we have produced has been adapted for the 15 mobile cinemas, which are in charge of my colleague. Sir Alberl Clavering. \ punctilious calculation and check shows that since April, 1940, over eight million people have seen the film displays on these vans. The press advertising, posters leaflets and exhibitions (of which there are several) have played a highly important part in the building up of War Savings propaganda. They have all been produced by expert advertising men. It will be a miraculous moment when all people agree upon the mould, quality and ellicacv of any one particular advertisement or poster design. Those in the advertising business are always painfullv aware of what's wrong with everybody else's products. But the amateur, non-advertising pundit. who is usually an indifferent performer in his own line, transcends all others in his critical certitude. That may be why the documentary news letter being in the Documentary line is so abundanth qualified to criticise the work of advertising experts for National Savings. There's magic in a thousand million pounds — unless it was merelv an automatic contribution. May it not be that in our midst are several "old Documentary narks'".' SIGHT and SOUND Film Appreciation Number CONTRIBUTORS : P. L. MAN NOCK CHARLES OAKLEY Dr. RACHEL REID H. A. V. BULLEID Published by: The British Film Institute. 4 Great Russell Street, London. W .C.I.