"PIM" Editor Tells

Censored!

"PIM" Editor Tells Funny Story of March , 1942

rpHE stupidities of the censorship almost 1 drove me to homicidal mania during the war years. But, seen in retro ?Knnv S e ° f thoSe incidents have their

rr£ y

There was the issue of March, 1942, most of the pages of which were given over to descriptions of what had hap pened in the invasion. It was reported that there had been much looting of early 8 '’iSVSTtSo Unes y w“re Idded-- ' “A store manager declared that ‘the looters were not natives.

In the same issue (March, 1942) we strongly condemned what we called “This anti-British squealing,” which followed the fall of Singapore. We said that the squealing was contained in such phrases as “Damnation to Churchill and his mud dling strategy and his Old School Tie,” and “Finish with England—if Australia escapes the Japs we shall be American in future”; and then we said that “such sentiments betrayed cockeyed ignorance and are sadly and grotesquely wrong,” and we produced facts and arguments to show why they were wrong.

riTHAT issue was printed and posted.

X Then Censorship pounced. The Aus tralian Post Office was forbidden, on “PlM*** death, to deliver one copy of the I - as the publisher of the “PIM,” had no consciousness of wrong-doing. I could not imagine what had caused the black out. High Authority was haughty, sniffy ?“ d al £° f v * toatKi Uke , th< r MtUe gutter and must now e o touted wTthout mother’s kiss^ 1 " 8 *° b “ wlthout The write-off of a whole issue of a newspaper like the “PIM” is a serious matter. The post office was embarrassed, The postage oh the journal had been paid and the journal had been distributed through hundreds of mailbags. What should they do’ c !“ on my belly t 0 Hi « h Authority. wa°s' P lnl ° lm me What High Authority unbent slightly. There were two statements in the “PIM” which the censors would not allow to go into circulation. One was the statement that the Port Moresby looters were not natives The other was the sentence wherein we called down damnation upon Churchill and his muddling strategy and his old school tie.

“But,” I wailed, “the fact that Aus tralian soldiers looted Port Moresbv is well known; and, so far as the Singapore thing is concerned, I merely repeated statements that already had been pub lished. so that I could‘attack them and show the stupidity of them. In the name

of God, what information could either of those things give to the enemy, anyway!”

But High Authority was still sniffy and aloof. The ukase had gone forth, and there was no appeal.

I WENT back to my good friends, the post office officials, and we sat down to consider this amazing censorship, and had a hate session.

One bright lad had an idea. “Look,” he said, “there are only a couple of lines, in two places, which these bloody fools object to. If they were out, the journal could go forward, couldn't it?”

“Yes,” I said, “I think so. But how can I get them out?”

“We could help you to this extent: We could give you back all the copies that have been posted, and —if the censorship is agreeable—we could again receive and distribute the journal, with those lines cut out.”

I began to see some hope. Once more, upon my belly, I approached the mighty intellects which governed the Australian censorship. High Authority said that, without the offending sentences the “PIM” might circulate.

And so it was done. The GPO men, helpful as ever, retrieved thousands of copies from hundreds of mailbags; these were bundled up and taken back to our printery; a team of girls laboriously slipped each copy out of its wrapper, turned to pages 3 and 37 and scissored a few lines from each, and refolded and restored each journal to its wrapper. The job took days. But the issue of March, 1942, was duly posted again, and distri buted.

UNTIL then, I had been my own censor; and I will bet any money that not one line helpful to the enemy ever got publicity through the “PIM.” But, after that illuminating experience, every thing that we published was first sub mitted in proof to the censorship, and formally passed by censorship before it was placed in the paper.

It was a stupid, time-wasting, muddling procedure. What censorship did to those proofs was a sheer delight to anyone with a sense of humour; but they took years from the life of this particular publisher.

I conceived for bureaucracy a hatred and contempt so strong that I think It will go with me into the next world, to chal lenge the dictates of the devil.

I kept a record of the amazing decisions of the Australian censorship. I had in tended, when the war was over, to use this material to show Australians what they had had to put up with.

But, long before the war ended, the Australian newspapers rebelled in a body against the stupidities and the tyranny of the censorship, which to an increasing degree was being used to protect pin headed professional politicians in their positions as Australian Ministers The High Court—the last protector of Austra lian liberty—upheld the newspapers; and

the Australian censorship was kicked con temptuously into obscurity.

However, this little story is written for the information of many subscribers who wanted to know why their “PIM” of March, 1942, “had little holes cut in it.”

So fierce was the censorship then that I could not even tell them that their copies had been censored. Now they know what happened.—R. W. ROBSON.