International Committee Against Fake News: Revealing the Facts of World War I
Cedric Couder - International Committee of the Red Cross
The term "fake news" has gained a persistent presence in the media for several years now. Deliberate misinformation seems to be one of the major risks afflicting our contemporary world. While not a new issue, all conflicts have provided fertile ground for propaganda, where false news blends with rumors, and information becomes a real weapon in the chaos of war, subjecting facts to a wholly relative perspective.
World War I was no exception. Numerous historians have focused on the spread of rumors about the atrocities committed by the enemy, brainwashing, and how civilians perceived the propaganda disseminated at that time.
War Prisoners: Victims of Fake News
The humanitarian sector was not immune to information warfare. The radical shift in the conflict and the way the enemy was portrayed negatively impacted the treatment of war prisoners. The harsh cycle of revenge against millions of deprived individuals fed daily on propaganda campaigns justifying those actions. While all warring parties were, to varying degrees, responsible for the poor conditions of detainees, each side quickly complained publicly when their citizens were subjected to such mistreatment.
Three types of propaganda were identified: dehumanizing enemy prisoners, condemning the ill-treatment they suffered, and defending the conditions of detention on one side or the other. Brochures, reports, and newspaper articles claimed to unveil the truth or reveal facts, necessarily depicting a noble nation fighting enemies on equal terms. These publications faced constant condemnation from opposing parties as soon as they appeared.
It became nearly impossible to distinguish between truth and fiction, understanding the conditions detainees unequivocally faced amid this widespread chaos. These ambiguous circumstances plunged the relatives of prisoners into a pit of extreme anxiety. Driven by an intense desire to know if their loved ones were in good health, receiving sufficient food, and if the detention conditions adhered to proper health standards, the answers provided raised doubts about the credibility of government discourse and journalistic reports.
International Committees Response
The International Committee could not remain a mere spectator in the face of families need for satisfactory answers and the suffering caused by the flood of propaganda. It decided to confront the propaganda war by disclosing its observations. Initially, it engaged in humanitarian diplomacy, holding cautious and continuous dialogues with governments, expressing its opinions, observations, and suggestions patiently to improve the prisoners situation.
In this particular context, the International Committee found it necessary to make its observations public to instill peace of mind in grief-stricken families. It utilized all available means to accomplish this task. The first platforms it turned to were "Bulletin," now called the "International Review of the Red Cross," and "Nouvelles," a weekly newspaper issued by the International Agency for Prisoners of War. The "Nouvelles" newspaper, widely circulated among warring governments, Red Cross associations, and the journalistic community, highlighted living conditions in the camps and presented facts, accompanied by relevant images.
Pictures became an effective tool against propaganda, serving as compelling evidence of the events. Photographs taken by International Committee delegates achieved tremendous success; they were not only published in the "Nouvelles" newspaper but also sold as postcards. By January 1916, the photo catalog included 140 diverse postcards depicting life in the camps. The International Committee, after challenging negotiations, convinced warring parties to send more pictures for publication.
Finally, the International Committee capitalized on the reports written by delegates returning from field missions. Although secrecy had been a distinctive feature of the organization in the past, the reports written during World War I were released to the public to reach the widest audience possible. The reasons behind this were (a) they were not directed solely at governments but also at civil society, (b) the purpose of disseminating this objective and balanced content was to counter information warfare, and (c) these reports were supposed to reassure families about the actual conditions their relatives were experiencing in internment camps.
Real Objectivity
What guarantees the accuracy of the information proclaimed by the International Committee? Several factors lent weight and credibility to the organizations media activities. Delegates of the International Committee worked on the ground, visiting camps themselves, comparing conditions from one camp to another, and recording their observations accurately, unlike propagandists and rumor-mongers of that time. The reports they wrote were devoid of rumors and contained information derived directly from their firsthand sources, accompanied by detailed observations of what they actually witnessed, a point they consistently emphasized. One report from that time stated, "It is impossible to distinguish between the truth and this amount of heated claims that serve special interests. One must see everything for oneself, gather the facts, record reliable data, verify the claims, and prioritize eyewitness accounts above all."
The determination of the delegates never wavered in adhering to objectivity, which constituted a fundamental cornerstone of their work. They considered neutrality an inherent quality, whether due to their Swiss nationality or their representation of an international organization performing work that transcended the current state of war. Swiss citizenship and international representation motivated them to adopt neutrality and impartiality, avoiding bias towards one party or another. Starting from 1915, delegates began working in pairs, with Swiss citizens who spoke French and German collaborating in each pair to ensure a certain level of balance and objectivity in their work.
Reactions to these efforts that sought to prove the facts and unveil the truth varied. Each warring party welcomed the International Committees observations if they supported their propaganda and objected to them if they felt the treatment of prisoners by the enemy was not adequately criticized. While archival documents are nearly devoid of records of prisoners families reactions to the International Committees efforts, there are indications of the organizations standing as a reliable source of information.
There is no dispute that the Committees observations did not present the complete picture. Even in those times, criticisms were directed at the delegates reports, accusing them of whitewashing the truth. The desire to reassure prisoners families may not have entirely aligned with the goal of describing camp conditions as objectively as possible. Warring parties attempted to limit visits as much as possible, concealing poor conditions in the camps. Delegates, being products of their time, may have genuinely believed in the claims of the warring parties. Despite these flaws in the delegates work, the International Committees efforts to "reveal the facts" undoubtedly aided in confronting the fake news propagated by the propaganda machine in the war.
Conclusion
While the term "fake news" did not appear during the war between 1914 and 1918, the problem was undoubtedly a reality at that time. Controlling information has always been a method of war, but the way information is circulated has dramatically changed over a century. During World War I, warring parties completely controlled the press and propaganda machinery, imposing strict censorship according to their whims. Now, it is extremely difficult to control information as social media platforms gain increasing importance, providing everyone the opportunity to play the role of a journalist. Although fake news often originates from tightly controlled propaganda strategies, it has become easy to disseminate without fear of its accuracy, sometimes unintentionally, making it challenging to confront.
The media activity of the International Committee has undergone significant development since 1918. The improvisational approach that prevailed during World War I has been replaced by appropriate media strategies, selecting information broadcast to the public accurately. Delegates reports are now surrounded by a veil of secrecy, with an entire team of staff specifically working on public relations, including social media.
The world has changed, and the International Committee has changed with it, but some things have remained the same. Just as it was in 1918, delegates today must base their observations on what they see with their own eyes, adhering to the principles of neutrality and impartiality that form the foundation of their work. Observations by the International Committee undergo meticulous examination before dissemination, and this information remains highly reliable due to the organizations field presence, enabling direct interaction with victims and monitoring their suffering firsthand. Unfortunately, there are still those who seek to manipulate what the International Committee states. In the end, we can only say that the Committees sole goal has not changed since 1918 – to provide assistance and protection to the victims of war, while committing to disseminating its observations on the consequences of armed conflicts as objectively as possible.
--
Humanitarian Magazine
A quarterly Arabic-language magazine published by the Regional Media Center in Cairo. It addresses political and social issues in the region from a humanitarian and human rights perspective, prioritizing the victims of conflicts and disasters. The magazine aims to be a source of knowledge and a reference for the dissemination of international humanitarian law and human rights in general among readers following regional and international events.
