WORLD UNDERSTANDING: A Job for Mass Communications

IT is easy to prove in this exciting era that due to mass media and communications a revolution unparalleled in history is in the making in world understanding. Sensational developments in science and economics have created a new world requiring us to speak a new language, to change our habits, our ideas, our ethics, our whole culture. Nothing on earth or in space will escape this tremendous development. I believe in 1967 - not 1984. Our No. 1 global problem is to take positive advantage of these developments which will allow us to enjoy the most enlightened and affluent civilization ever dreamed of, provided we do not misuse them. We have the means to mobilize them constructively. We must do it.

In the preface to his book, International Political Communication, W. Phillips Davison writes: "If one does not begin an exploration such as this with a sense of modesty, it will be thrust upon him as he gradually realizes the extent of the task. The amount of literature and experience relating to political aspects of international communication is so great that any one student can only tap a portion of it."

It is with modesty, I assure you, that I approach this subject. I am not a diplomat, a statesman, or an academician, but I have been eye-witness to this world change through the eyes and ears of the box-office. The box-office is a very effective ballot box and a powerful popular poll, for the motion picture theatre is an international cross-section of all ages and all peoples. And only recently has there been a proper understanding of the importance of the motion picture.

When I first came into the motion picture field, films were silent and also heavily censored and not taken too seriously. The changes I have seen are almost unbelievable, and parallel the changes in all mass media and communications. But it has all happened so swiftly that many people in high places do not seem to understand to what extent the masses of the world have already been released and what a revolutionary conflict is being caused by all the new developments in mass media and communications. You can see these changes in every facet of everyday life: the natural desire for more affluence - a better education, a better home, a more efficient piece of machinery. The rising attendance at museums and art galleries. Art books priced at $25 sell in staggering amounts; a novel on the best-seller list priced at $7 can gross more than an average motion picture did a few years back. Non-fiction, which used to mean publishing suicide with the exception of dictionaries and Bibles, has a much more stable selling potential than does fiction, which is now a hit-or-miss proposition. Families with only average incomes are traveling to all parts of the globe by ship, plane, and motor. F. A. O. Schwartz, the toy store, looks more like M.I.T. each year. Papers like the New YorkDaily News sponsor science contests for teenagers and are flooded with extraordinarily talented youngsters doing work that an adult like myself cannot begin to understand.

The mores of the universe have been changed. When in the history of the world have the masses been able to hear and see on the day of an event, or the day after an event, a prime minister or a leading citizen discuss the problems of the day on radio or television? Opera and concerts used to be available to the few 30 years ago; now through radio and TV and records, these experiences are available to all. The exposure of Senate investigations on TV is a tremendous influence in our lives. The world is growing smaller and smaller and people are getting smarter and smarter, although we still have a long way to go.

As the public becomes more enlightened, it becomes more sensitive to what is fact and what is propaganda. It is a healthy phenomenon that the public is able to make up its own mind and reject nonsense after a period of time. The audience gets tougher and tougher every year as people become more informed. Despite the conflicts and disruption this creates, the public can now respond in a way that was never before possible. I remember how impressed I used to be when I heard of someone having ventions, whether Democratic or Republican. Today as these conventions and their stupidity are revealed on television, a national disgust has been aroused. Politics of that type no longer belongs in this world any more than the bloomer or the laced shoe.

THE breakthrough in world understanding is already here and it is natural that it should be accompanied by confusion and conflict. This is the changeover period when the Pope flies and the President hops in a jet. I remember well when Woodrow Wilson went to the peace conference in Paris and there was a national uproar over whether the President should leave the United States. It is hard to believe.

What we must learn is that revolution is not a bad thing in itself and can be used positively towards advancement and progress. I resent very much when we Americans are referred to and accept being called a materialistic or an imperialistic nation. We should proclaim ourselves as what we are: the greatest revolutionaries that ever existed. We were formed as a revolutionary country and we still are a revolutionary country. Russia and China, compared to the revolutionary status of this country, are reactionary countries heading towards 19th century capitalism. Where in the world has the worker the influence and the interest in government and his own corporation that he has in this country? Where does he have the benefits? It is absurd for us to tolerate this image that is being put upon us by clever propagandists.

We are caught up in outmoded ways of thinking and speaking. It is clear we need a new language; we should stop talking about the Iron Curtain because it is being pierced; we should stop being afraid of Communism. What we should be talking about is understanding, interdependence, international trade, the elimination of hunger, the international development of mass education and health, the spreading of the use of scientific developments, and international finance.

As U Thant said in his speech to the Amalgamated Clothing Workers in Atlantic City on May 24: "If we can conquer the atom or outer space, it is absurd that we cannot conquer urban misery or the problem of producing and distributing an adequate food supply. These simple propositions should provide a basis on which all nations should be able to start to come to terms with the world in which we actually live.

"I, for one, do not think that any government or people is likely to lose in stature or dignity or worldly advantage from an all-out effort to come to terms with such questions. On the contrary, it is highly probable that the future leaders of the world will be those who first can bring themselves to make the attempt."

And Senator Robert Kennedy paid a high compliment to mass media and communications when he said in South Africa: "The day is long past when any nation could retreat behind walls of stone or curtains of iron or bamboo. The winds of freedom and progress and justice blow across the highest battlements, enter at every crevice, are carried by jet planes and communications satellites and by the very air we breathe."

UNFORTUNATELY, a reactionary attitude towards progress is an old story. I have long been a member of a great industry which had difficulty accepting progress. Every company, with two exceptions, resisted sound, saying that it would ruin motion pictures because we were a silent art, and all we did when we sent our films to different countries was to change the titles. When sound opened its mouth, we were faced with the problem of a different language for every country. Naturally it seemed an impossible obstacle. But it was simply overcome by the scientists who invented dubbing. We then resisted color because we thought it was going to be too expensive instead of realizing it would be helpful in expanding our markets. Then we fought radio because we thought it would be competitive, but it too only succeeded in widening our market. And we boycotted television which has become our greatest ally not only financially but in forcing into films a quality never before demanded. Now we are engaged in the newest battle with closed-circuit and pay TV which will ultimately cause our potential to soar to even greater heights. Today the motion picture industry is stronger than ever.

The revolution has spread to the weekly news magazines and many other publications.

Washington should be wired for sound. Responsible people in government should have access to as much information as big business has, which brings me to the point that the great liberals and visionaries today, in many instances, are the large industrial organizations all over the world (not only in the U.S.) that are opening up markets everywhere and forgetting boundaries, and are sponsoring many of the great national foundations. Isolationism is forgotten completely and business is now looking forward to the whole world as its market and is training men so that they will be worthy diplomats and worthy representatives in foreign lands.

The students too are changing along with the times. In 1950 we had a generation called "the silent generation." Now we have powerful uprisings in the colleges, fomented by the men and women who are going to inherit this country. Isn't it better that they have an interest and a desire and a sense of responsibility rather than indulging in panty raids and pole-sitting and drum majorettes? The criticism should be on the other foot. Why haven't we supplied these young citizens with more intelligent information about what's going on in the world? I often go to the meetings of an organization where I hear leaders of the world on all subjects discuss off the record the problems of the world. Ninety percent of what I hear should be on the record and on television or on closed circuit and given to the young men and women of America who are seeking the truth. Which is only too evident by the books they buy, the paperback sales in the colleges, the new publications that are popping up all over, and the students' revolt in behavior.

And last, but not least, television, in my opinion, has contributed more to world understanding than anything else with the exception of the motion picture. I only say the motion picture because of its ability so far to reach the hinterlands of the world, which television hasn't yet been able to do. The impact of having the Vietnam war come into your home day by day, with the possibility even of seeing one of your family involved, or of having the famines of India brought into your living room is very different from reading about it and has created new levels of realization. Television has taken its opportunity to help world understanding in a most serious and dedicated manner. The documentaries, the reportage, the interviews and the popular programs like the "Today" show, "White Paper' and "CBS Reports" and other programs of this sort are absolutely unique in the history of the world and are serving millions of people with results that cannot be overestimated. The operations of the satellites Earlybird and Telstar are a most effective means towards world understanding and peace. Television should and will continue to be a major force in aiding and agitating this revolution in understanding. As Sir Solly Zuckerman said in a recent article: "Mass communications have exposed the world to the world. Most underdeveloped nations now have a clear realization of their plight and have become persuaded that oppression and starvation are not the natural heritage of mankind."

THERE are men who have already met these challenges and demonstrated their capacity for realizing how to deal with our present crises. These men should be joined into an international group to help the world adjust to an ethical use of mass media and communications. I am suggesting just a few people; I know this is an incomplete list. However, the following come to my mind:

Thant, for one.

Sir Solly Zuckerman: "In theory the twin problems of population and food can be solved. We are not lacking the scientific knowledge which would make this possible. But the problem is formidable since its solution depends mainly on social, political and economic factors. Without stable governments able to develop and impose long-term educational and economic plans, and able to give the plans the overriding priority they will need, we shall get nowhere. The solution depends everywhere upon the intelligent cooperation of a country's people as a whole. And for this educational levels will have to rise well above present standards in most parts of the world."

Walter Lippmann, Lord Hailsham, John W. Gardner: "It is doubtful that we can any longer afford such widespread inattention to the largest questions facing us. We achieved greatness in an era when changes came more slowly than now. The problems facing the society took shape at a stately pace. We could afford to be slow in recognizing them, slow in coping with them. Today, problems of enormous import hit us swiftly. Great social changes emerge with frightening speed. We can no longer afford to respond in a leisurely fashion."

The presidents of the television companies, the presidents of the motion picture companies, Buckminster Fuller,Lord Snow, James Reston, Admiral Rickover, BarbaraWard, Marshall McLuhan, Jean Monnet, Andre Malraux,President Frei of Chile, Harlan Cleveland, and EmmetJohn Hughes.

Jerome Weisner: "We are living during one of history's most exciting periods - a dynamic time when man has almost limitless choices for good and for evil. We can make any kind of a world that man can agree upon, and if we don't learn to agree a bit better, man's days upon this planet may be numbered. I believe that this quarter century is likely to be the most decisive of any in man's long history for we are undergoing a test unlike any challenge man has ever faced before.

Many groups and organizations are studying world understanding. That is not good enough. What is needed is an active group of experts and specialists who can service the world now. As Emmet John Hughes said in Newsweek recently: "But the young Indonesian cares only about the next twenty years. And the concepts that excite him are not crusades. They are: jobs, houses, schools, food and sewers. He is not interested in philosophy. He is interested in plumbing." It is our obligation to accept this magnificent opportunity that awaits us.

I propose that in the interest of world understanding we ask our distinguished alumnus Nelson Rockefeller to call together in New York as soon as possible a conference made up of the international leaders in this field and to enlist the private resources of the great international business organizations to underwrite such a group to advise and service this small, awakening globe in a practical way by hiring experts in the fields of television, radio, press, motion pictures, education - experienced professionals so that all of the world's scientific progress is properly used immediately. The public should be invited to become participants in this international movement.

To quote General Sarnoff, one of the greatest in this field: "For countries such as India or Brazil, where there is urgent need of a national television network to educate a growing population, a satellite broadcast system offers a most promising solution. Its cost would be perhaps half of the minimum needed for the present type of ground-based broadcast service.

"Whether used for education, entertainment, or political indoctrination, direct broadcast satellite systems will ultimately be within the technical and economic reach of many nations, and they will penetrate many barriers, with unpredictable social, political, and economic results.

"What will happen when countries can broadcast directly into the homes of other countries - when the U.S.S.R. can televise to New York and Seattle and the United States can broadcast directly to the citizens of Moscow and Kharkov? What forms of jurisdiction must be established to prevent the television spaceways from degenerating into a confusion of sounds and images? Again, how do we preserve American interests and assure continued American leadership in the new era of space communications?"

"In 1962," says General Sarnoff, "I suggested that the way to achieve these goals was through the establishment of a unified national communications policy suitable to our current and future needs. Such a policy should recognize the fact that competition in international communications is no longer within nations - it is among nations. I believe the need is even more imperative now than it was three years ago.

"Fortunately, a high-level intra-governmental study is now under way to make recommendations to the congress for an international communications policy for this country. I hope that out of it will come proposals that can be translated into legislation which will permit our country to utilize every communications resource at its command.

"America must continue to play the decisive role in shaping the force of the communications explosion. It can do so if our vision and our policies keep abreast of our science and technology. . . .

"Thus far, the history of international mass communications has been a succession of missed or neglected opportunities for achieving greater harmony among men and nations. National rivalries have outweighed technological promises. In place of the free interchange of information and ideas, we have had a discord of conflicting voices, and, in certain instances, deliberate distortion and political subversion practiced over the airwaves as well as in print and pictures.

"The impending communications revolution provides humanity with a fresh opportunity to remedy the mistakes of the past. Prompt action is imperative if the new technology is to be harnessed in the cause of greater under- standing and well-being among people everywhere. This, it seems to me, is the most promising path to follow in the search for an enduring world peace."

And this is my case for immediate action to serve world understanding and a less ruthless but more enlightened world.

WALTER WANGER'S ARTICLE, like General Gavin's, is adapted from the talk he gave at the Class of 1935 reunion symposium in June. Mr. Wanger, producer of 65 motion pictures over the past 40 years, is former president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and has long been a supporter of movies as an international medium for better understanding throughout the world. His discussion with a friend sparked the UCLA-sponsored, adult-education course on "The Impact of Scientific Change."

One of the most progressive leaders in the motion picture industry, Mr. Wanger welcomed new themes and new techniques, and in such films as Gabriel Over the WhiteHouse and The President Vanishes he was the first to use political themes. As producer of Cleopatra he was involved in one of the most celebrated movie undertakings of recent times. Currently Mr. Wanger is president of Walter Wanger Pictures, Inc., associated with the MGM Studios in Culver City, Calif. He is preparing a film for MGM based on the Burke Wilkinson book, Night of theShort Knives, an international thriller about NATO.

Walter Wanger '15 (left) receives the Order of Merit of theItalian Republic from Consul General Alvaro Beltrani in LosAngeles. The Commander's medal was presented to him forhis "friendship and cooperation with the Italian governmentin all phases of the motion picture industry."