Captive audience? GDR radio in the mirror of listeners' mail

Abstract

According to the rise of totalitarian theories after 1990 research on broadcasting in the former socialist states emphasised its propagandistic character and political overstretch. This cannot be dismissed out of hand, but a closer look to listeners' mail show, that the praxis of Radio in the GDR didn't simply merge in political persuasion. In fact it results even in dictatorship in the long run from a dynamic negotiation process between audiences and broadcasters. In particular radio in East Germany was by no means resistant to the influences of popular culture from the West.

Notes

Dr Christoph Classen is the Scientific Coordinator of the Department “Contemporary History of Media and Information Societies” at the Centre for Contemporary History at Potsdam/Germany. http://www.zzf-pdm.de/site/791/Default.aspx. [email protected]

 1 ‘Unsere Presse – die schärfste Waffe der Partei.’ Referate und Diskussionsreden auf der Pressekonferenz des Parteivorstandes der SED vom 9.-10. Februar 1950 in Berlin, in E. M. Herrmann, Zur Theorie und Praxis der Presse in der Sowjetischen Besatzungszone Deutschlands. Berichte und Dokumente (Berlin, 1963), 39.

 2 ‘Unsere Presse – die schärfste Waffe der Partei.’ Referate und Diskussionsreden auf der Pressekonferenz des Parteivorstandes der SED vom 9.-10. Februar 1950 in Berlin, in E. M. Herrmann, Zur Theorie und Praxis der Presse in der Sowjetischen Besatzungszone Deutschlands. Berichte und Dokumente (Berlin, 1963), 39.

 3 ‘Unsere Presse – die schärfste Waffe der Partei.’ Referate und Diskussionsreden auf der Pressekonferenz des Parteivorstandes der SED vom 9.-10. Februar 1950 in Berlin, in E. M. Herrmann, Zur Theorie und Praxis der Presse in der Sowjetischen Besatzungszone Deutschlands. Berichte und Dokumente (Berlin, 1963), 39.

 4 See Alec Badenoch, ‘Between Rock and Roll and a Hard Place: ‘Pirate’ Radio and the Problems of Territory in Cold War Europe.' Paper presented to the Tensions of Europe Conference, Sofia, 18 June 2010.

 5 Carl J. Friedrich and Zbigniew K. Brzezinski, Totalitarian Dictatorship and Autocracy (New York, 1965), 10.

 6 Marshall McLuhan and Quentin Fiore, The Medium is the Message. An Inventory of Effects (New York 1967).

 7 On the problem of this term see Christoph Classen, ‘Two Types of Propaganda? Thoughts on the Significance of Mass-Media Communications in the Third Reich and the GDR,’ in Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions 8, 3–4 (2007): 537–553.

 8 See Anna J. Merritt and Richrad L. Merittt, Public Opinion in Occupied Germany. The OMGUS-Surveys (Urbana, 1970); Pertra Gansen, Wirkung nach Plan. Sozialistische Medienwirkungsforschung in der DDR. Theorien, Methoden, Befunde (Opladen 1997).

 9 On the reception research in the GDR see Konrad Dussel, ‘Der DDR-Rundfunk und seine Hörer. Ansätze zur Rezeptionsforschung in Ostdeutschland (1945–1965)’, in: Rundfunk und Geschichte 24, 2–3, (1998): 122–136.

10 The concept of ‘Eigensinn’ was introduced by Alf Lüdtke to analyse workers' everyday life; see Alf Lüdtke, ed.‘Geschichte und Eigensinn’, in Alltagskultur, Subjektivität und Geschichte. Zur Theorie und Praxis von Alltagsgeschichte, ed. Berliner Geschichtswerkstatt (Münster 1994), 139–153. The concept was adapted to GDR history by Thomas Lindenberger, ed. ‘Die Diktatur der Grenzen. Zur Einleitung’, in Herrschaft und Eigen-Sinn in der Diktatur. Studien zur Gesellschaftsgeschichte der DDR, (Cologne, Weimar, Vienna 1999), 13–44. For a similar approach see Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life (Berkeley 1984).

11 See Wolfgang Mühl-Benninghaus, ‘Masse – Massenkommunikation – Propaganda. Lenin und die Medien der Sowjetunion’, Rundfunk und Geschichte 30, 3–4 (2004): 105–115.

12 See Christoph Classen, ‘Ungeliebte Unterhaltung. Zum Unterhaltungs-Diskurs im geteilten Deutschland 1945–1970,’ in Mediendiskurse deutsch/deutsch, ed. Jens Ruchatz (Weimar, 2005), 209–233.

13 As claimed, for example, by ex-federal minister and former editor in charge of RIAS, Egon Bahr, who said in 1992 that ‘it was not listened to, was not read and not watched – C'est tous.’ Quoted in Heide Riedel, ed., Mit uns zieht die neue Zeit…40 Jahre DDR-Medien (Berlin, 1993), 119.

14 Demand of employees at a telecommunications plant in Dresden, union leaders to State Radio Committee, 23 July 1953; BArch, DR 6/193.

15 Analysis of listener mail, July 4 1947; listener letter from Josef Sch., Berlin; DRA Potsdam, Historisches Archiv, Bestand Schriftgut Hörfunk 1945–1952, H 201-01-04/0001.

16 Analysis of listener mail, July 4 1947, listener letter from Ursula K., Berlin-Neukölln.

17 In 1950, editor Alfred Duchrow summarised the results of a written survey of 1,000 employees at the Treptow Electric Appliance Plant with the following words: ‘The factory workers and also the office employees – I am merely noting, without judging – mainly want to hear music, light music, after eight o'clock p.m. and say they are longer physically able to take in longer phrases or tackle political problems in a serious and thorough manner.’ Protocol of the radio conference on the occasion of the five-year anniversary of German Democratic Radio, 11–12 May 1950; DRA Potsdam, Historisches Archiv, Bestand Schriftgut Hörfunk 1945–1952, F 201-00-00/0001.

18 In 1950, editor Alfred Duchrow summarised the results of a written survey of 1,000 employees at the Treptow Electric Appliance Plant with the following words: ‘The factory workers and also the office employees – I am merely noting, without judging – mainly want to hear music, light music, after eight o'clock p.m. and say they are longer physically able to take in longer phrases or tackle political problems in a serious and thorough manner.’ Protocol of the radio conference on the occasion of the five-year anniversary of German Democratic Radio, 11–12 May 1950; DRA Potsdam, Historisches Archiv, Bestand Schriftgut Hörfunk 1945–1952, F 201-00-00/0001, fn.13.

19 According to a poll of East German radio listeners conducted in 1957, music-request shows were the most popular programmes with up to 55% of the listening audience tuning in and ratings of 1.5 to 1.8. Investigation 630/6 of the listener research department of 7–8 October 1957; BArch, DR 6/559.

20 See the comments editor Pincus made at a working conference of the ‘Artistic Word Main Department’ (HA Künstlerisches Wort) in November 1947, who warned, with reference to practices in Nazi Germany, that radio would ‘be trivialised’ (verflachen) if it lapses into ‘the shallow waters of mere entertainment.’ It was imperative, instead, to ‘form good taste.’ See DRA Potsdam, F 201–00–00/0004 (Geschäfts- und Planungsunterlagen Büro des Intendanten 1945–1950), pp. 2–114, here p. 101.

21 Or so the (in his opinion exemplary) practice of the Berliner Rundfunk as depicted by director Kurt Heiss. Minutes of the directors' meeting of the radio director's office of the GDR, 30 March 1951; DRA Potsdam, Historisches Archiv, Bestand Schriftgut Hörfunk 1945–1952, F 210–00–00/0004, p. 79.

22 See Konrad Dussel, ‘Der Streit um das große U. Die Programmgestaltung des öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunks und der Einfluß der Publikumsinteressen 1949–1989,’ in: Archiv für Sozialgeschichte 35 (1995): 255–289.

23 See Konrad Dussel, ‘Der Streit um das große U. Die Programmgestaltung des öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunks und der Einfluß der Publikumsinteressen 1949–1989,’ in: Archiv für Sozialgeschichte 35 (1995): 255–289, fn. 13.

24 Letter to the editor of Sonntag, 30 March 1952, quoted in Gerhard Walther, Der Rundfunk in der sowjetischen Besatzungszone Deutschlands, (Bonn, 1961), 43.

25 On Hauser see the obituary of Ingrid Pietrzynski, in: RuG 20, 4 (1994): 225–227.

26 Analysis of listener mail from 1–30 June 1947, DRA Potsdam, Historisches Archiv, Bestand Schriftgut Hörfunk 1945–1952, F 201-00-04/0001 (Büro des Intendanten: Hörerpost, Hörerforschung 1946–1951).

27 Analysis of listener mail from 1–30 June 1947, DRA Potsdam, Historisches Archiv, Bestand Schriftgut Hörfunk 1945–1952, F 201-00-04/0001 (Büro des Intendanten: Hörerpost, Hörerforschung 1946–1951)

28 Listener letter from Lilli S., Berlin Steglitz of 21 July 1947; DRA Potsdam, Historisches Archiv, Bestand Schriftgut 1945–1952, H 201–00–04/0001.

29 On the impact of Nazi propaganda in general and the state of research in this subject see David Welch, ‘Nazi Propaganda and the Volksgemeinschaft: Constructing a People's Community’, Journal of Contemporary History 39, 2 (2004): 213–38.

30 Partly responsible was the Soviet practice of internment in the so-called special camps of the Soviet zone of occupation. In the spring of 1949 commentator Herbert Gessner wrote to Ulbricht asking him to intercede with the Soviet Military Administration to help alter this practice and improve the conditions of internment. He had received more than a thousand listeners' letters on the subject: ‘Our enemies could not wish for a better psychological basis for lies, slander and horror stories.’ Quoted in Petra Galle, RIAS Berlin and Berliner Rundfunk 1945–1949. Die Entwicklung ihrer Profile in Programm, Personal und Organisation vor dem Hintergrund des beginnenden Kalten Krieges, (Münster, 2003), 268.

31 Analysis of listener mail from 1–30 June 1947 (ibid, fn. 22).

32 See, for example, the report on a talk with the chairmen of the departmental union leadership (Abteilungsgewerkschaftsleitung) of the EKM machine-building factory in Görlitz about the work of the radio, no date [August 1953], BArch, DR 6/192. It is important to keep in mind that these comments have most likely been filtered, i.e., paraphrased and toned down by the interlocutors when writing the report – a mediating role between the presumably harsh criticism from listeners and the higher authorities.

33 ‘Not all of the three stations should say the same thing about current events and not always for days on end. One interesting broadcast by each station is better than several of the same format.’ Protocol of listener discussion on 9 August 1956 in Ilsenburg/Harz; BArch, DR 6/548; Emphasis in the original. The uniform morning programming of all three stations in 1953 was criticised in particular.

34 See, for example, radio sector, analysis of mass communication on the radio, 19 October 1953; BArch, DR 6/231.

35 Permanent commission of the Karl-Marx-Stadt Regional Assembly to the State Radio Committee, 20 November 1956; BArch, DR 6/559.

36 See the monthly reports of incoming listener mail, 1958–1960, BArch, DR 6/270.

37 Monthly report of the listener correspondence office for October 1955; 29 November 1955, BArch, DR 6/548.

38 External correspondence group, development of listener mail from October 1953 to January 1954; 11 February 1954, BArch, DR 6/246.

39 For more detail see Christoph Classen, ‘Revolution im Radio. Zur institutionellen Entwicklung des Hörfunks in der SBZ/DDR 1945–1953,’ in Klaus Arnold and Christoph Classen, eds, Zwischen Pop und Propaganda. Radio in der DDR (Berlin, 2004), 47–66.

40 Organisation, methodology and results of a listener survey of Radio DDR in Freyburg and der Unstrut; BArch, DR 6/409.

41 Organisation, methodology and results of a listener survey of Radio DDR in Freyburg and der Unstrut; BArch, DR 6/409

42 See Michael Meyen, Hauptsache Unterhaltung. Mediennutzung und Medienbewertung in Deutschland in den 50er Jahren, (Münster 2001); Idem, ‘Das unwichtige Medium. Radiohören in der DDR,’ in: Arnold and Classen, Zwischen Pop und Propaganda, 341–356; Idem, Denver Clan und Neues Deutschland, Mediennutzung in der DDR. (Berlin, 2003).

43 As Erich Honecker put it in his report from the Politbüro to the Eleventh Plenary of the Central Committee of the SED, quoted in Dieter Wiedemann, ‘Politik und Unterhaltung in Jugendsendungen des DDR-Fernsehens’, in Louis Bosshart and Wolfgang Hoffmann-Riem, eds., Medienlust und Mediennutz. Unterhaltung als öffentliche Kommunikation (Munich, 1994), 484–490.

44 For more detail see Günter Agde, ed., Kahlschlag. Das 11. Plenum des ZK der SED 1965. Studien und Dokumente, (Berlin, 2000).

45 SED regional leadership in Halle, agitation/propaganda department to Gerhart Eisler, 22 August 1966; BArch DR 6/571.

46 Gerhard Eisler to regional leadership in Halle, agitation/propaganda department, 3 September 1966; BArch DR6/571.

47 Gerhard Eisler to regional leadership in Halle, agitation/propaganda department, 3 September 1966; BArch DR6/571, Jens Gerlach to Eisler.

48 Letter from Birgit Sch., 10 July 1962; BArch DR 6/575.

49 H. Hentschel to State Radio Committee, 3 March 1962; BArch DR 6/156.

50 Decision-makers ultimately defended the amount of Western popular music played on East German radio after the construction of the Berlin Wall. When demands were made to set the ratio of Eastern to Western music at 80:20 in an attempt to save hard currency, the radio director argued that this would have ‘deleterious political effects. The colourfulness of our programme would be substantially impaired and some of our listeners would be induced to listen to enemy radio instead.’ Reginald Grimmer (deputy director of the State Radio Committee) to Siegfried Wagner (head of the Central Committee Culture Department), 2 July 1963, in: BA, DR 6/584.

51 Classen, ‘Ungeliebte Unterhaltung,’ 228ff. (ibid., fn. 8).

52 Response of Gerhart Eisler, in: BArch DR 6/562.

53 This tendency can be observed in the surveys done by the Zentralinstitut für Jugendforschung, ZIJ (Central Institute for Youth Research) in the GDR during the 1980s; c.f. the summary by the former researcher at ZIJ, Peter Förster, ‘Die deutsche Frage im Bewußtsein der Bevölkerung in beiden Teilen Deutschlands. Das Zusammengehörigkeitsgefühl der Deutschen. Einstellungen junger Menschen in der DDR’, in Enquete-Kommission ‘Aufarbeitung von Geschichte und Folgen der SED-Diktatur in Deutschland’. Bd. V,2: Deutschlandpolitik (Frankfurt a. M., 1995), 1212–1380.

54 See Uta G. Poiger, Jazz, Rock and Rebels. Cold War. Politics and American Culture in a Divided Germany (Berkeley 2000).

55 On youth deviance and the reactions of the state in the GDR see Mark Fenemore, Sex, Thugs and Rock ‘n’ Roll. Teenage Rebels in Cold-War East Germany, (New York, 2007).

56 H. Hentschel to the State Radio Committee, 11 February 1962, in BArch DR 6/156.

57 DT 64 began as the festival radio of ‘Deutschlandtreffen 1964’ and went on to become a regular show on Berliner Rundfunk, at first on weekday afternoons, then, as of 1986, as a separate station with its own frequency. See Heiner Stahl, ‘Mediascape and Soundscape in Cold War Berlin’, in Philipp Broadbent and Sabine Hake, eds., Berlin – Divided City (New York, 2010), 56–66.

58 See Edward Larkey, ‘“Heute muss ich Euch mal schreiben…” Hörerbriefe an DT 64 und die Aushandlung kulturpolitischer Legitimation beim DDR-Rundfunk’, in: Arnold and Classen, Zwischen Pop und Propaganda, 323–340.

59 Listener letter from 1980, quoted in Larkey, ‘Hörerbriefe’, 327.

60 Listener letter from 1980, quoted in Larkey, ‘Hörerbriefe’, 329ff.

61 Listener letter from 1980, quoted in Larkey, ‘Hörerbriefe’ 338f.

62 Hilde Benjamin to Hermann Ley, 24 April 1957; BArch DR 6/559.

63 See Thymian Bussemer, Propaganda. Konzepte und Theorien (Wiesbaden, 2008).

64 See Zeitgeschichte online, ‘Thema: Pop in Ost und West. Populäre Kultur zwischen Ästhetik und Politik’, Árpád von Klimó and Jürgen Danyel, eds, April 2006; URL: < http://www.zeitgeschichte-online.de/md = Pop-Inhalt>.

65 Andreas Wirsching, ‘Für eine pragmatische Zeitgeschichtsforschung’, Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 3 (2007): 17.

66 On the problems of the GDR in the transition to postmodernity see Konrad Jarausch, ‘Care and Coercion: the GDR as Welfare Dictatorship’, in Idem, ed., Dictatorship as experience: towards a socio-cultural history of the GDR (New York, 1999), 4–72.

67 See Edward Larkey, ‘Contested Spaces. GDR Rock between Western Influence and Party Control’, in Edward Larky, ed., A Sound Legacy? Music and Politics in East Germany (Washington, 2000), 42–58.