(University of Oviedo)
This essay was originally intended as a centerpiece for IJOCA 27-2. - ed.
1.- The prominence of the British press in the anti-comic campaign
The British anti-comic campaign intensified after the end of World War II, as did other European democracies (such as Italy and France) with which it had many other points in common: on the one hand, the presence of a nationalist element that led to mistrust of both comic books from outside their borders and those produced in their own country that followed the same models. On the other hand, the Communist Party took center stage in these campaigns, within the context of the emerging Cold War. This explains why the most controversial foreign comics were those from the United States. Finally, the coincidence in time of this campaign with a policy aimed at protecting minors, the main victims of the World War that had just ended, and the subjects on whom the future reconstruction of the country depended.
Also, as in other European countries, the press played a prominent role in the anti-comic campaign that took place in England in the 1940s and 1950s.[1] In fact, the starting point of this campaign can be traced back to the newspapers, when Reverend Marcus Morris used the Sunday Dispatch as a pulpit to accuse American comics of promoting youth violence and crime.[2] However, the prominence of the press in the anti-comic campaign may seem paradoxical, considering that the animosity shown by newspapers towards comic books was identical to that which they themselves had suffered since the 1930s for publishing comic strips.
That's right: some characters in these comic strips had proved highly controversial. One of the best-known cases was that of Jane (1932-1959), published in the Daily Mirror in what is considered the first British pin-up comic strip. Jane's creator, Norman Pett, had been commissioned to design a character aimed at adult audiences, and so, in 1932, he created the first design for his character, with a story initially titled "The Diary of a Bright Young Thing", using his own wife, Mary, as a model.[3] Shortly afterwards, Pett and his wife looked for a model to take on the role, and found her in a 22-year-old woman, Chrystabel Leighton-Porter, who from then on would pose—always nude—for the hundreds of illustrations that Pett drew of his increasingly popular character. Jane became an institution for the British public, appealing equally to both female readers—because of the dresses she wore—and male readers—because of the tendency to strip Jane of those same clothes. In fact, 82 percent of women who read the Daily Mirror read Jane's adventures,[4] although those who were most passionate about the naive blonde were members of the military, always eager to see when the young woman would get into some kind of trouble that would leave her in her underwear.[5] RAF Lieutenant Ian Gleed noted that his routine was always the same during World War II. After his hearty breakfast, he would turn to the comic strips: "What is Jane doing this morning (...) Has she any clothes on today?".[6]
 |
|
Image 01: Jane, by Norman Pett (Daily Mirror, August 1st, 1942) |
For combatants, the Daily Mirror and Jane were one and the same,[7] to the point that when the newspaper's journalist Harry Procter visited British troops as a correspondent, he became known as "the Jane-Man".[8] The journalist himself acknowledged that the Daily Mirror's policy was to offer sex, and Jane fulfilled that objective and helped sell more newspapers.[9] Some war vehicles, including RAF aircraft, were decorated with drawings of the character,[10] such as a bomber nicknamed "Just Jane" which featured an image of the naked girl on a bomb.[11] She became so popular among British forces fighting in World War II that Churchill is credited with saying that Jane was "the British secret weapon"[12] and soldiers referred to her as "the Army's Sweetheart" or (less elegantly) as the "Mascot" of either the Royal Navy or the RAF. Apart from the Daily Mirror, her stories were published in armed forces magazines such as Eighth Army, Gunpit, and Union Jack.[13] In response to this support and to cheer up the troops, precisely during World War II, the day after D-Day, Jane was portrayed completely naked[14] (Daily Mirror, June 7, 1944). Only one lieutenant in the British armed forces had the audacity to ban the comic strip from being read among his battalion, considering it obscene.[15] This censorship was ultimately trivial, given the character's popularity.
 |
| Image 02: WWII Lancaster bomber |
When the Harmful Publications Act, aimed at restricting the circulation of comic books, was debated in England, several Tory MPs requested that the law also control the content of comic strips in newspapers, specifically mentioning the case of the Daily Mirror.[16] The proposal sparked considerable controversy, as it was considered that limiting the circulation of comic books was one thing, but adopting measures that could affect the daily press was quite another. This was partly because comic books were not considered to be a genuine exercise of press freedom.[17] But, in addition, it was considered that allowing control over newspapers could be extremely dangerous, as it opened the door to politically biased censorship: not surprisingly, the Daily Mirror was a left-wing newspaper that was highly criticized by the Tories, so the intentions to restrict it could also be politically motivated.
Those same newspapers, which had experienced firsthand the possibility of restrictions on the lucrative comic strips they published in their pages, ended up joining the anti-comic campaign, becoming one of its main champions.[18] The excuse for this was that there was a huge difference between the comic strips they published and the comic books that children bought: the former were subject to the newspapers' own filtering, which supposedly ensured that their content was not inappropriate. This filter, they said, was lacking in the case of comic books, with which publishers sought to make a profit at any cost, even by publishing material that was inappropriate for their target audience, minors.
In any case, the ideology of the different newspapers was not a determining factor in their criticism of comic books: conservative and left-wing newspapers agreed on practically all the arguments used to criticize them. One might think, for example, that anti-Americanism would be a differentiating factor, so that newspapers linked to the left, such as the Daily Mirror, would use it more intensely to attack comics from the United States. But the truth is that this same anti-Americanism is present in conservative newspapers. Undoubtedly, the motivations were different: in left-wing newspapers, it was framed within the Cold War, while in conservative newspapers, it responded to an intense nationalist sentiment not without a certain elitism. But, whether for one reason or another, the fact is that the newspapers agreed in their rejection of American comic books.
2.- Quantifying comic books
The first approach used by the British press to join the anti-comic campaign was to warn citizens about the quantitative dimension of the problem. To this end, numerous news reports mentioned the extraordinary circulation of these magazines throughout the British territory. According to some estimates, in the early 1950s, sales ranged from 60[19] to 80[20] million copies per year. Most were imports from the United States,[21] or were printed in England from printing plates sent directly from that country.[22]
The fact that most comic books (and particularly the most harmful ones) were considered to come from the United States affected the terminology used to refer to them. As was the case in parliament, until the 1950s the term most commonly used in the press to refer to the most reviled comic books was "American comics" or "American-style comics." Sometimes, to emphasize the undesirable content of such products, the word "horror" was added ("American horror comics" or "American-style horror comics").[23] The introduction of the term "horror" gained ground at the expense of references to their geographical origin, until finally the term "American comics" was replaced in the press by "horror comics". This change was also an attempt to avoid confrontation with an ally on which England was somewhat economically dependent after World War II.
 |
| Image 03: Catholic Standard (October 8th, 1954) |
Obviously, if comics were so widely circulated in England, the press also had to pay attention to who their main consumers were and in what proportion they read them. Newspapers mentioned numerous studies that showed worrying figures: comics had become the main reading material for children between the ages of 11 and 14, according to a study carried out in the county of Essex.[24] A survey of students at a school in Hull concluded that 40% read comics,[25] while at another school the figures were even more striking: 23 out of 25 students in the same class admitted to owning "horror comics".[26] Newsagents reported that children and teenagers were indeed the main consumers of comic books,[27] although in reality, just as important as sales was the exchange of these magazines among young people.[28]
 |
| Image 04: Survey on comic book reading among children. Daily Herald (August 26th, 1953) |
The identification of young people as regular comic book readers would be decisive for the British anti-comic campaign which, as is well known, ultimately led to the approval of a law to curb their circulation. Known as the "Harmful Publications Act", it was actually a law regulating the rights of minors, as its full title revealed: Children and Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act. Even so, the press also reported on the popularity of comics among the adult population. It was mentioned that many adults read more comic books than their own children,[29] which ultimately made it difficult to trust them to control the circulation of these magazines among their offspring.[30]
If this was the profile of the readers, what was that of those who produced these magazines? Publishers were described in many British newspapers as unscrupulous individuals, motivated solely by financial gain and unconcerned about the damage their products could cause to the weak minds of minors.[31] The authors of the comic books were described as psychopaths and sick minds, as evidenced by the horrific scenes and gruesome stories that came out of their imaginations.[32]
 |
Image 05: Publishers, portrayed as individuals motivated solely by greed. Daily Mirror (October 16th, 1954) |
The questioning of comic book publishers and authors also explains why the British press was largely in favor of them, and not the sellers, being held legally responsible for the inappropriate comic books that fell into the hands of children.[33]
3.- The undesirable content of comic books
What bothered the press about comic books? In reality, newspapers did not contribute any new arguments about these publications, but merely reproduced those that had already been repeated in the anti-comic social campaign by educators, clergy, PTAs, writers, and intellectuals: comic books were no longer humorous, so even their name was no longer adequate to describe their content,[34] which had shifted toward the glorification of war, crime, terror, and eroticism.
Newspaper pages were thus used to disseminate the various types of criticism that the social campaign employed to question the content of comics.
The first was elitist criticism, which rejected both the content of comics and their characteristic format. From this perspective, comics were described as works of "bad taste" and "trash literature", without any literary value.[35] As the writer Sterling North (who practically started the anti-comic campaign in the United States) would say, the comics were poorly drawn, poorly colored, and poorly printed.[36] Adjectives such as "trash" and "naughty" were frequently used to refer to the pages of those popular magazines.[37]
Linked to elitist criticism was pedagogical criticism, which questioned comics because they were considered harmful to the education of young people. On this point, the press gave voice mainly to PTAs, teachers, and school principals. From their experiences, it was deduced that comics interfered with education for several reasons. First, because the presence of drawings turned children into lazy readers,[38] unable to read without illustrations, which also ended up stifling their own imagination.[39]
 |
| Image 06. Yorkshire Evening Post (December 18th, 1951) |
They also undermined the reading skills that children were supposed to acquire in school: the presence of onomatopoeia in the panels and the use of incorrect English in the “balloons” had a negative effect on their reading comprehension and writing fluency, drastically reducing their vocabulary.[40]
A final negative effect of comics on education stemmed from the fact that they were very absorbing: children read them in class, distracting them, and also at home, neglecting their schoolwork.[44]
 |
|
Image 07: Some less-radical teachers used comics as a teaching tool. Daily Mirror (December 19th, 1947) |
Another criticism present in the British campaign was therapeutic (i.e., the accusation that they caused deterioration in the health of readers, especially mental health), although it had less impact in England than in the United States. In the latter country, the involvement of psychiatrists and psychologists in the anti-comic campaign had a notable impact, as it served to give it a certain air of scientific credibility.[45] In England, however, the idea that there was a connection between reading comics and mental health problems was often put forward by people who did not belong to the world of medicine or psychology, so they lacked that air of professional respect, giving the impression that they were merely unproven conjectures.
Despite these limitations, the truth is that therapeutic criticism was also widely reported in the press. Although there were isolated mentions of the deterioration of children's eyesight caused by the poor printing quality of comics,[46] most of the accusations against comics stemmed from the alleged psychological damage they caused. On this point, the horror genre was particularly questioned, as its content was considered to have a devastating effect on the impressionable minds of children.[47] Horror comic books were accused of causing nightmares,[48] fears,[49] and disorders that operated on a subconscious level.[50] In fact, the horror genre was the most rejected in the British anti-comic campaign, to the point that its label was extended to all other questionable comics, which came to be known, by contagion, as "horror comics". Some of the most controversial magazines were Tales from the Crypt, Haunt of Fear, The Crypt of Terror, and Black Magic,[51] whose stories are said to have influenced a real event that was widely reported in the press and even mentioned in the British Parliament:[52] for several days, a large group of teenagers in their city searched for and tried to capture the "Glasgow Vampire", a supposed monster with metal teeth that some boys claimed to have seen. The press described it as a case of mass hysteria stemming from the horrendous stories they had read.[53]
 |
| Image 08: Daily Mirror (December 15th, 1954) |
Moral criticism, meanwhile, focused on the idea that comics were destroying the ethical standards of British society.[54] This criticism was particularly voiced by clergymen, and the press also helped to spread it. Thus, it was said that comics showed perversion and depravity,[55] contaminating the impressionable minds of young people and preventing them from distinguishing between good and evil.[56]
One moral aspect particularly concerned comic book detractors, as reported in the British press: eroticism. This was a subject of particular concern to religious groups, who claimed that Satan was at work through the comic strips.[57] It was said that the drawings placed special emphasis on the female body,[58] but above all they linked sex and violence,[59] which would ultimately encourage "sexual abnormalities" and sadistic behavior.[60]
Criticism of "public order" was one of the most intense aspects of the British social campaign and the one most widely covered in the press. This position questioned comics for encouraging juvenile delinquency by showing violent behavior and glorifying criminals.
In the 1950s, the debate about the influence of comics on the criminal behavior of young Britons was one of the most intense aspects of the anti-comic campaign. The press played an essential role in this debate, largely arguing that there was a connection between juvenile delinquency and comic book reading, even though there was no evidence to support this.
Newspapers picked up on any statement from the leaders of the anti-comic campaign that linked comics to juvenile delinquency. Giving voice to women's associations, academics, psychologists, teachers, and authorities, they published unverified conclusions that pointed to the detection of "gangster attitudes" among children and a notable worsening of their behavior, supposedly attributable to reading comics.[61] They attributed this to the fact that magazines such as Crime Does Not Pay portrayed criminals as heroes worthy of imitation,[62] causing young people to become desensitized by being constantly exposed to violent images:[63] "There is not a single page of this where there is not a lady with a very over-developed front, and also someone being beaten up".[64] Without any scientific backing, alarming claims were made, such as that delinquent children read twice as many comics as "normal children"[65] or that children who ended up in court had an average of 40 to 50 comic books in their homes.[66] Along the same lines, the press claimed that "teddy boys" only consumed this type of reading material.[67]
To support the connection between juvenile delinquency and comic book reading, the British press was filled with news about young readers of these magazines who committed criminal acts. In some cases, these were thefts of comic books or money to buy them,[68] which reinforced another recurring idea in the anti-comic campaign: that comic books ended up creating an unhealthy dependency among their readers,[69] to the point that their consumption was likened to that of narcotics. The pathological need for comics even led to more radical cases reported by the press, such as that of a child who had killed another during a dispute over one of these magazines.[70]
In other cases, these were criminal acts that supposedly imitated what was seen in comic books. There were many incidents reported in the press about break-ins[71] and robberies committed by young people supposedly influenced by reading comics.[72] But there were also violent crimes. In some cases, these were accidental. For example, the incident involving a 14-year-old boy, James John Warburton, who shot a ten-year-old friend while playing gangsters, after getting hold of a revolver belonging to his father.[73] But in other cases, the press reported on tragedies in which there was clear intent on the part of the perpetrator, such as the case of 16-year-old Christopher Craig, who stood on a rooftop shooting at passersby with a revolver,[74] or that of Alan Poole, four years older, who killed a police officer and then committed suicide after being cornered.[75] In both cases, the press emphasized that the criminals were avid comic book readers, suggesting a causal relationship between this hobby and criminal behavior.
Although the press took this connection between comics and crime for granted, the authorities were not so sure. While some judges claimed that American comics were indeed related to juvenile crime[76] (or that at least it was something that should be studied),[77] other officials involved in the judicial system, such as the Probation Officer of Halifax, were more moderate and concluded that crime had deeper causes that could not be simplified by blaming comic book reading.[78] A former judge who had been active for fourteen years and had dealt with more than three thousand cases of juvenile delinquency described as "ridiculous" the blaming of comics for crimes committed by children, since the real culprits were almost always the parents, who had not provided them with adequate care and education.[79]
4.- Measures taken against comics in other countries
Once the press had decided that comics were a harmful product that should be kept away from children, it began to mention how the problem, far from being exclusive to Great Britain, was spreading across half the world. So it also reported on the measures being taken in other countries to tackle it. The intention of these news reports was clear: to warn that England could not lag behind in the war against comics and should follow the path laid out by other states.
The first issue, namely the plague of comics spreading across half the world, focused mainly on the circulation of American magazines. In the case of Europe, it was mentioned, for example, that in Germany the distribution of "American comic books" had been an unforeseen consequence of the "Marshall Plan".[80] In Commonwealth countries, the cases of Australia[81] and Canada[82] were cited as worrying examples of the massive influx of American products, in many cases surplus from the country of origin.
With regard to the measures implemented in the countries, both those adopted at the civic level and those implemented by the public authorities were mentioned. With regard to the former, purely social measures, mention was made, for example, of those adopted in India, where churches had organized to combat the presence of "horror comics".[83] More traumatic measures were cited from Canada, such as that promoted in Vancouver by the Junior Chamber of Commerce, which burned all the comics obtained from an exchange with books in a bonfire lit by the mayor.[84]
 |
| Image 09: Metaphorical drawing depicting comics as a snake ready to devour the chicks in their nest. Daily News (London) (November 1st, 1954) |
As for the measures adopted by the authorities, there was no shortage of references to the most radical one, which consisted of banning American comics from entering the country, as had been agreed in Singapore.[85] In other states, unable to stop the entry of American comics (or prevent the printing of similar products on their own soil), they had opted to pass laws regulating the distribution and sale of comics, imposing penalties when their content was deemed harmful. This was the case in France,[86] which had had anti-comic legislation in place since 1949, one of the first to be passed in Europe and which influenced other countries, including Franco's dictatorship. Legislative measures adopted by Commonwealth countries such as New Zealand[87] and Canada[88] were also mentioned.
However, two countries in particular were mentioned in the British press due to their special social, economic, and political ties with the United Kingdom: Ireland and the United States.
With regard to Eire, it was reported that the massive influx of American comics (estimated at 100 million per year)[89] had caused alarm and anxiety among the population and the authorities,[90] triggering a movement to promote their prohibition. In the social sphere, librarians and clergy were among the most active detractors of comics: while the former denied them the status of literature, the latter also considered them anti-Catholic and pagan.[91] The authorities shared this animosity towards comics: for example, the position of juvenile court judges who considered that comics disturbed children's minds and promoted delinquency was mentioned.[92] Particularly interesting was also the claim that the importation of these magazines harmed the national publishing industry and artists;[93] a point of view that was, however, used more in the Australian anti-comic campaign.[94]
With regard to the measures proposed in Ireland, it was reported that parents would be made responsible for their children's reading material,[95] but the possibility of passing a specific law to stop the circulation of comics was also mentioned.[96] This law was ultimately not passed as unnecessary, since Ireland already had one of the most repressive laws on freedom of the press in the Western world at that time.[97]
The United States was, however, the country most mentioned in the British press when discussing the problem of comic books: not surprisingly, the most reviled were those coming from that country. With an estimated circulation of 100 million per month,[98] the most talked-about aspect was the link between reading comic books and juvenile delinquency.[99] Of course, Fredric Wertham was cited as the great expert who demonstrated this connection, and his book Seduction of the Innocent was widely discussed and praised.[100] Only the Belfast Telegraph opposed the positions of the German-American psychiatrist, accusing him of exaggerating and failing to satisfactorily prove his claims.[101]
But this was an isolated perspective, as the British press chose to blindly believe Wertham's ideas. To corroborate the supposed link between comics and crime, the press used a familiar tactic: mentioning shocking cases of crimes committed in the United States by minors, allegedly under the influence of reading comic books. Some were truly absurd, such as the case of two children who had stolen an airplane and managed to fly it thanks to having learned how to do so in a comic book.[102] But above all, much more serious cases were mentioned, in which an alleged comic book reader had ended up killing a friend.[103]
The measures adopted in the United States were also widely reported in the British press, highlighting both purely civic and strictly institutional measures.
Among the social measures cited was the formation of citizen committees that drew up lists classifying the content of comics,[104] with particular reference to the Cincinnati committee, the most active of all.[105] Of course, there was also talk of the public burning of comics,[106] one of the least popular measures in the United States, which was in fact opposed even by some detractors of comics, who considered that it was too reminiscent of events in Nazi Germany.
With regard to institutional measures, the British press reported the widespread approval of municipal ordinances to ban comics in fifty states,[107] mentioning in particular some cases, such as that of Tulsa.[108] And, above all, that of New York, referring to the New York Committee in which MP Joseph F. Carlino had stated that comics "dealing with sex and filled with bloodshed have an upsetting effect on the emotional stability of children".[109] Of course, the debates on comics in the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency[110] were also frequently mentioned.
The outcome of the anti-comic campaigns in the United States was also widely reported in the British press, which referred to the positive effect they had had in forcing publishers to self-regulate. And so, detailed news was given of the establishment of the Comics Code Authority, which, curiously, British journalists sometimes confused with the previous Comic Magazine Association of America.[111] There was also talk of the particular case of William Gaines and his decision to stop publishing EC's "New Trend" line of comics due to pressure from the anti-comic campaign.[112]
Despite this, one of the most important members of the British anti-comic campaign, Simon Yudkin, expressed his doubts about the effectiveness of the Comics Code Authority in the press. Clearly differentiating between this and the code produced by the Comic Magazine Association of America, he recalled that the latter had been useless, so he did not predict better fortune for the new version.[113]
In any case, the idea that all these references to other countries in the press were intended to convey to British readers was clear: comics were a global problem that many other countries were also suffering from and were taking severe measures to address. England should not be left behind.
5.- Civic measures adopted in England
The English press played a key role in publicizing the civic measures that were adopted against comics throughout the country.
Parental control was undoubtedly the measure most supported by the press, which considered that, after all, it should be parents who were responsible for their children's reading material.[114] "You wouldn't send your child to the cinema to see some horror film, so don't let them see these".[115] However, some newspapers were more skeptical about the effectiveness of this control. This was due to several circumstances: on the one hand, children could easily hide comics, so that their parents would not even be aware of their existence.[116] On the other hand (and this was more worrying), parents were often part of the problem, because either they did not care what their children read,[117] or they themselves were comic book readers.[118]
 |
| Image 10: Birmingham Daily Gazette (November 12th, 1954) |
Precisely because of this circumstance, newspapers also mentioned other types of measures aimed at changing the reading habits of the population, such as creating libraries, especially school libraries, to keep children away from comics.[119] Needless to say, this measure was promoted mainly by librarians.
Measures were also publicized that, in a constructive spirit, sought to inform the public about the dangers of comics. The press regularly announced the dozens of conferences held throughout England for this purpose.[120] Reference was also made to the numerous exhibitions held throughout the country for informational purposes: Uxbridge,[121] Hayes,[122] Newcastle,[123] Hull,[124] Leeds…[125] However, the most talked about was the one organized by the National Union of Teachers, focusing on "American comics"[126] and which, according to a doctor who attended it, "It was agreed that the 'horror comics' were much worse than anything most of us had imagined. For sheer sadism and degradation in all its forms, I think I have never seen worse printed matter".[127] The exhibition was described by the Times education supplement as "one of the most macabre shows to be seen in the city"[128] and, after spending several days in London, it toured various locations such as Birmingham and Manchester.[129] The press acknowledged that many teachers had begun to ban comics in their schools after visiting the shocking exhibition.[130] But the event was also visited by numerous MPs, who until then had not understood the scale of the problem, as MP David Eccles acknowledged.[131] As a result, the exhibition ended up playing a key role in the subsequent legislation restricting the sale and circulation of comics.
One much-discussed measure of the anti-comic campaign was to draw up lists of comics unsuitable for minors, following the example of what had been done in some parts of the United States. The main difference lay in who was responsible for these lists: while in the United States it was mainly civic associations (many of them women's groups), in England the task was carried out mainly by librarians and educators.
 |
|
Image 11: Not even comics with stories from the Bible were viewed favorably by the anti-comic campaign. Daily Herald (September 15th, 1953) |
Among the first, the press mentioned a list compiled by Coventry Libraries, which would classify comics from "highly objectionable" to "suitable".[132] However, examples of lists compiled by educators were more abundant. In London, a group of educators drew up a list based on the Cincinnati list, in which only 26 comic books were deemed unobjectionable, while 49 were considered problematic.[133] At one school, after a teacher found a nine-year-old student reading a comic book featuring a half-naked girl, the teaching staff decided to send parents and newsagents a list of seventy-five titles requesting that they not be sold or allowed into homes.[134] Of course, this type of list had clear drawbacks. On the one hand, it left it up to private individuals to take censorship measures; on the other, as the National Union of Teachers pointed out, it could have the opposite effect, since if these lists fell into the hands of children, they would surely be tempted to try to get hold of the magazines listed as most objectionable.[135]
Linked to the compilation of lists of objectionable comics was another measure: putting pressure on newsagents.[136] Parents and teachers were the main protagonists of this type of action, which essentially involved coercive measures of dubious legality. Another measure reported in the press was also questionable: the burning of comics, which was generally promoted by clergymen.[137]
Despite all these measures, which were reported on regularly by the press, by the end of 1954 some newspapers considered them insufficient and pointed to the need for the authorities to take institutional action.[138] The time had come for the anti-comic campaign to go one step further.
 |
| Image 12: Connection between comics and delinquency. Daily Mirror (October 30th, 1954) |
6.- News about the Harmful Publications Act
Faced with growing social pressure on comics in England, the press also began to highlight—and even propose—institutional measures that should be adopted to curb the spread of reading material that was considered so harmful.
The civic campaign merged with the institutional one, as the first thing the press reported was the growing social demand for the authorities to intervene. There were countless news stories mentioning associations, PTAs, and schools that submitted petitions to local authorities and the central government demanding measures against comics.[139] A prime example was the news about the decision taken in this regard by the East London Teacher's Association: "Alarmed by the threat to children and youth by the publication and dissemination of comics of a vicious and dangerous nature, the conference calls on the authorities to use the powers at their disposal to combat this threat to the cultral and moral standards of the nation".[140]
Since American comics were the most controversial, it should come as no surprise that the first measure demanded was to ban their importation.[141] This measure was supported by parliamentarians such as John Rankin.[142]
This measure was quickly rejected by the government, which warned that import licenses could not be used as an instrument of censorship. It should also be noted that many of the comics circulating in England were printed within the country itself, using printing plates sent by mail.[143] As things stood, the executive continued to see anti-obscenity legislation as the most appropriate remedy for attacking comics.[144]
In general terms, the British press did not initially rule out the possibility of censorship measures being introduced against comics. Although freedom of the press was considered one of the most precious legacies of British legal culture, it was accepted that comics could be censored in the same way as cinema and theatre,[145] bearing in mind that the ultimate goal was to protect children who would otherwise be left unprotected.[146] The key point was to define precisely what was considered a "comic book" in order to prevent censorship from extending to other types of publications.[147] Among these were newspapers, of course.
 |
| Image 13: Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette (January 7th, 1955) |
So, with the press generally favorable to legal measures against comics, it should come as no surprise that it closely followed the parliamentary activity that was launched to debate, and subsequently regulate, the problem of comics.[148] It repeatedly reported on parliamentary questions to the government, inquiring about the measures it intended to take to curb the circulation of those magazines,[149] most of which were raised by the Labour opposition, which constantly complained about the government's lack of response to the problem.[150] As the press also constantly reported, Home Secretary Gwilym Lloyd George said he took the matter very seriously, but warned of the difficulties in addressing it,[151] and in the end, no progress seemed to be made.
Until the end of 1954. At that point, the press reported that the government had finally decided to legislate on comics. This was an inevitable measure, due to social pressure, and would lead to the passage of the Children and Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act of 1955. The Home Secretary became the main supporter of the bill, asserting that it was the British government's obligation to protect children from the bad influence of such reading material.[152]
Image 14: Parody of the comic book “Eagle”. Lilliput,
n. 159, 1960
From that moment on, the press adopted a rather ambiguous stance. Although it had played a decisive role in the anti-comic campaign (announcing it, but also being an active part of it), it began to perceive that the bill could end up jeopardizing freedom of the press, and therefore also affect newspapers. Several newspapers, particularly the Bradford Observer, expressed their misgivings about the bill, considering that it could be the vanguard of a broader movement that would end up telling the British what they could and could not read.[153] The fact that the law focused on comic books was not a sufficient guarantee, because even defining what a comic book was no easy task.[154] Ultimately, the fear was that the law would be used to restrict publications other than comic books.[155]
In response to these fears, Lloyd-George guaranteed that the prosecution would never allow the persecution of publications that were not strictly comic books, because there was absolutely no desire to restrict freedom of the press.[156] This statement implied that the government did not consider comic books to be a true exercise of that freedom.
The press followed the progress of the bill closely, although it continued to insist that it had attracted more criticism than initially expected.[157] When the bill was finally passed, some newspapers considered it a necessary evil:[158] freedom of the press had its limits, which comic books exceeded.[159] In fact, following Lloyd's reasoning, it was considered that the law did not restrict freedom of the press, because it was only applicable to literature and newspapers.[160] And in any case, the Attorney General's words were repeated: the Harmful Publications Act would never be applied to newspapers.[161] Even so, several newspapers—even those of different ideologies—expressed concern about the law, fearing that it would give the government too much power[162] or that it would end up banning all types of comics, not just those that were truly harmful.[163] As if that were not enough, there were fears that the law would be useless: comics would continue to be "trafficked" on the black market,[164] and the law could be circumvented by publishing magazines in which only part of the content was comics.[165]
In this sense, it can be concluded that the press played an important role in the anti-comic campaign, especially by publicizing it, but in general it was more favourable to the social measures adopted by citizens than to those undertaken by the authorities, and in particular the Harmful Publications Act. The fear that freedom of the press would suffer legal restrictions—which would harm the newspapers themselves—was too real to support that law.
 |
| Image 15: The anti-comic campaign lost momentum when television became the main form of entertainment for young people. Daily Mirror (March 13th, 1958) |
Ignacio Fernández Sarasola holds a PhD in Law and is full professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Oviedo (Spain). A specialist in constitutional history and freedom of expression, he is the author of more than 280 works published in Europe, North America, Latin America, and Oceania, and translated into English, French, Italian, and Portuguese.
[1] The best book on the British anti-comic campaign remains, without a doubt, Barker, Martin: A Haunt of Fears, University Press of Mississippi, Jackson and London, 1984. A magnificent summary of the volume can be found in John A. Lent's essential work: Barker, Martin, "Getting a Conviction: Or, How the British Horror Comic Campaign Only Just Succeeded”, John A. Lent, Pulp Demons. International Dimensions of the Postwar Anti-Comics Campaign, Associated University Press, Cranbury, 1999, pp. 69-92.
[2] Morris, Marcus: "Comics that bri ng Horror into the Nursery”, Sunday Dispatch (February 1949), p. , pp. 3-5.
[3] Saunders, Andy: Jane. A Pin Up at War, Leo Cooper, Barnsley, 2004, pp. 12-14.
[4] Ibid., p. 23.
[5] In a curious study by journalist Margot Bennett, it was concluded that, after examining 260 stories in the Daily Mirror, the character appeared half-naked or erotically displaying parts of her body on no less than 232 occasions. Scott, Jack: "The Story of Jane”, in Pett, Norman / Freeman, Donald, The Misadventures of Jane, Titan, London, 2009, p. 7. The text is a reproduction of the one published in the army magazine The Maple Leaf in July 1945. Jane's comic strips during the war period can be found in Pett, Norman / Freeman, J. H. G.: The Misadventures of Jane, Titan, London, 2009, although only those published between May 1944 and June 1945 are included, along with some additional graphic material. Much more comprehensive is the compilation by the Daily Mirror itself in Jane At War, Wolfe, London, 1976, which covers the period from 1939 to 1945.
[6] Gleed, Ian: Arise to Conquer, Random House, New York, 1942, pp. 103-104.
[7] In fact, some historians have commented that soldiers did not generally read the press, and if they did consult the Daily Mirror, it was only to look at Jan's comic strips. Faulks, Sebastian: The Fatal Englishman. Three Short Lives, Vintage Books, London, 1997, p. 144.
[8] Bingham, Adrian: Family Newspapers? Sex, Private Life & The British Popular Press, 1918-1978, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2009, p. 211. Procter, Harry: The Street of Disillusion, Allan Wingate, London, 1958, p. 74.
[9] Ibid.., p. 58.
[10] Norris, John: Vehicle Art of World War Two, Pen & Sword, Barnsley, 2016, pp. 57-59.
[11] Franks, Norman: Ton-Up Lancs. A Photographic History of the Thirty-Five RAF Lancasters that Each Completed One Hundred Sorties, Grub Street, London, 2005, p. 106; Franks, Norman: Images of War. Veteran Lancs, Pen & Sword Books, Barnsley, 2016, p. 36.
[12] Freeman, Donald: "Introducing Jane. Strip (tease) Heroine and Queen of the Undieworld”, in Pett, Norman / Freeman, Donald, The Misadventures of Jane, Titan, London, 2009, p. 4. When Jane's comic strips were to be published in the United States, they were subject to heavy censorship, demonstrating that American society was much more puritanical than British society in its perception of sexuality.
[13] Saunders, Andy, Jane. A Pin Up at War, op. cit., pp. 23-24.
[14] Ibid., p. 51; Khoury, George: True Brit. A Celebration of the Great Comic Book Artists of the UK, Twomorrows Publishing, North Carolina, 2004, p. 11. The American press echoed the popularity of this character among British soldiers, to the point that the American newspaper comic strip syndicate Hearst's King Features wanted to acquire the rights to publish it with the same objectives in the US press. "The Press: Jane”, in Time (August, 27, 1945).
[15] Scott, Jack: "The Story of Jane”, in Pett / Freeman, The Misadventures of Jane, vol. op. cit. p. 9.
[16] Reginal Paget, House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, cols. 2309 and 2317 (where he also quoted the Daily Sketch); William Rees-Davies, House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, col. 2313. The News of the World newspaper was also quoted. Charles Hale, House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, col. 2318. The tendency of newspapers to include comics was also noted in academic circles, which considered it an adaptation to the need to entertain, and not just inform, the population. Levin, Harvey J.: "Competition Among Mass Media and the Public Interest”, The Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 18, no. 1, 1954, p. 77.
[17] Sir Reginald Manningham-Buller (The Attorney-General), House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, cols. 2304 and 2305. The exclusion of newspapers from the scope of the law was described as "license." Jon Rankin, House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, col. 2314. Some MPs, however, rightly pointed out that freedom of the press was not limited to the publication of newspapers. James Ede, House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, col. 2306; Reginald Paget, House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, col. 2308; Roy Jenkins, House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, col. 2323. Finally, the inclusion of an explicit reference to newspapers was rejected, albeit by a fairly narrow margin: 153 votes to 123. House of Commons (March 24, 1955), vol. 538, col. 2332.
[18] In fact, the Daily Mirror boasted that it had been one of the first British newspapers to join the anti-comic campaign. "Just tear 'em up!", Daily Mirror (November 24, 1954), p. 2.
[19] "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6; Cribb, Rodolph: "Horror Comics and the Law”, Birmingham Daily Post (November 4, 1954), p. 19; "New law is needed to stop horror comics”, Bradford Observer (December 4, 1954), p. 4
[20] Baistow, Tom: "Some of these Comics need cleaning up”, Daily News (London) (October 2, 1952), p. 2
[21] "Imported 'comics' problem”, Middlesex County Times (February 14, 1953), p. 10; "Mother blames radio, television and films”, Crawley and District Observer (December 7, 1951), p. 18
[22] "Angry Parents Stopped 'Horror' Comic”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (July 23, 1954), p. 3; "American 'Comics' Criticized”, Eastbourne Gazette (October 15, 1952), p. 17; Waterhouse, Keith: "Horrors Unlimited Banned... in New York, but not in London”, Daily Mirror (September 14, 1954), p. 7
[23] "Ban American Comics”, Sunderland Daily Echo and Shipping Gazette (October 12, 1954), p. 7; "City may ban the H-comics”, Daily Mirror (September 27, 1954), p. 16; "Parents told 'ban those horrors lurking in your homes'“, Daily Herald (October 9, 1952), p. 3; J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'", Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4.
[24] "Boys and girls prefer comics”, Daily News (London) (July 2, 1947), p. 3.
[25] Ibid.; "Hull appeal to teachers on 'comics'“, Bradford Observer (November 23, 1954), p. 5.
[26] "Appeal to Rotary Club. Fight 'Horror' Comic Menace”, St. Andrews Citizen (October 16, 1954), p. 5.
[27] Onlooker: "N.U.T. and horror comics”, Western Mail (November 27, 1954), p. 6.
[28] "Nearly half Hull's youth see H-comics”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (November 23, 1954), p. 6.
[29] "Boys Say 'Horror Comics' Are 'Stupid'“, Stapleford & Sandiacre News (November 20, 1954), p. 1; "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6; "Nearly half Hull's youth see H-comics”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (November 23, 1954), p. 6; "The problem of adults who read comics”, Runcorn Weekly News (December 10, 1954), p. 1.
[30] "New law is needed to stop horror comics”, Bradford Observer (December 4, 1954), p. 4.
[31] Ibid.; "No So Comic”, Aberdeen Press and Journal (January 31, 1949), p. 2; "Fifth Avenue 'Kelt' Annoys Scots”, Aberdeen Press and Journal (January 31, 1949), p. 2; "New N.U.T. President Lashes Out At 'The Age of Folly'“, Nelson Leader (January 21, 1955), p. 12.
[32] Onlooker: "N.U.T. and horror comics”, Western Mail (November 27, 1954), p. 6; "Horror Comic”, Bradford Observer (February 11, 1955), p. 4.
[33] "Mother of 4 tells bishops of 'this comics poison'“, Bradford Observer (November 17, 1954), p. 5.
[34] "Horror Comics. Cupar Presbytery's Comments and Resolution”, Fife Herald (December 15, 1954), p. 5; "Horror Comics. Cupar Presbytery's Comments and Resolution”, St. Andrews Citizen (December 18, 1954), p. 6.
[35] "Angry Parents Stopped 'Horror' Comic”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (July 23, 1954), p. 3; "Shortage of School Books. Head Teachers and Trashy Literature”, The Scotsman (May 27, 1947), p. 3; "Mr. Manchester's Diary”, Manchester Evening News (February 7, 1955), p. 4; "Reading for Scouts”, Liverpool Echo (March 14, 1952), p. 8.
[36] Ibid.; Vigilant: "Flotsam and Jetsam”, Hastings and St Leonards Observer (October 18, 1952), p. 5; Baistow, Tom: "Some of these Comics need cleaning up”, Daily News (London) (October 2, 1952), p. 2; J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'", Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4.
[37] "Comics Called 'Cut-throat, Murderous, Adulterous Rubbish'", Banbury Advertiser (April 14, 1954), p. 1; "Limelight”, Kensington Post (March 21, 1952), p. 5; "Bede Girls' Headmistress Attacks Bad Comics”, Sunderland Daily Echo and Shipping Gazette (November 10, 1954), p. 7.
[38] Baistow, Tom: "Some of these Comics need cleaning up”, Daily News (London) (October 2, 1952), p. 2; J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'" Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4.
[39] "Teenagers read fewer books. TV, cinema, and 'visual aids' are equal menaces”, West London Observer (January 2, 1953), p. 5; "Mr. Manchester's Diary”, Manchester Evening News (February 7, 1955), p. 4.
[40] "Good English was 'cissie,' boys said”, Daily Mirror (July 4, 1952), p. 7; Tisdall, John: "These American Comics...”, Manchester Evening News (October 1, 1954), p. 8; "Horror Comics: Headmaster's Lecture to Parents”, Shipley Times and Express (March 2, 1955), p. 14; "Shortage of School Books. Head Teachers and 'Trashy' Literature”, The Scotsman (May 27, 1947), p. 3.
[41] Bourne, John: "Horror serial”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (August 21, 1953), p. 4; "Kill Superman and give child reality”, Northern Whig (June 2, 1952), p. 3; Richman, Alfred: "Censor vice comics plea to Minister”, Daily Herald (February 22, 1952), p. 3.
[42] Micawber: "More about comic papers in schools”, Fleetwood Chronicle (August 13, 1948), p. 6.
[43] Grove, Elizabeth: "Readers aid their views: Children's films”, Crawley and District Observer (April 10, 1953), p. 5.
[44] "Under Cover Comics”, Daily News (London) (March 10, 1952), p. 3; "Children do like arithmetic head”, Leicester Evening Mail (December 31, 1952), p. 7; "Ban on Gangster Films for Children Urged”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (December 31, 1952), p. 16; "Ban gangster films for children”, Daily News (London) (January 1, 1953), p. 3; "Ban on Gangster Films for Children Urged”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (December 31, 1952), p. 1; "Pictures Children Shouldn't See”, Liverpool Echo (December 31, 1952), p. 6.
[45] Fernández Sarasola, Ignacio, "Poison for the Mind. The participation of mental health specialists in the American anti-comic campaign (1940-1960)", Revista de la Asociación Española de Neuropsiquiatría, vol. 36, no. 129, 2016, pp. 63-78; Fernández Sarasola, Ignacio, "Poisoned letters. The role of mental health specialists during the anti-comic campaign", Lazarillo. Revista de la Asociación Española de Amigos del Libro Infantil y Juvenil, no. 52, 2025, pp. 11-17.
[46] "Horror comics no worse than comic cuts, Coundil told”, Belfast Telegraph (May 13, 1955), p. 1.
[47] Baistow, Tom: "Some of these Comics need cleaning up”, Daily News (London) (October 2, 1952), p. 2; "Low standards”, Belfast Telegraph (August 21, 1952), p. 4.
[48] "Angry Parents Stopped 'Horror' Comic”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (July 23, 1954), p. 3; "Washington call to publishers of American comics”, Belfast News-Letter (February 21, 1955), p. 5; "Barbarians within our gates”, Catholic Standard (October 8, 1954), p. 1, 12; "The Young Mind”, Lincolnshire Echo (November 6, 1946), p. 4.
[49] "Good comics a godsend, say Miss Glory”, Dundee Courier (November 8, 1954), p. 5.
[50] John, Old: "Round the Clock Tower”, Leicester Evening Mail (May 10, 1954), p. 2.
[51] Waterhouse, Keith: "Horrors Unlimited Banned... in New York, but not in London”, Daily Mirror (September 14, 1954), p. 7; "Horror in our time. The menace to young minds...", Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette (June 7, 1955), p. 7; "A super horror comic at 3s. 6d. is new menace", Newcastle Evening Chronicle (August 20, 1954), p. 1.
[52] "City may ban the H-comics”, Daily Mirror (September 27, 1954), p. 16
[53] "Chased 'Monster'“, Sunderland Daily Echo and Shipping Gazette (September 25, 1954), p. 10; "Children chase cemetery 'monster'“, Lancashire Evening Post (September 25, 1954), p. 1; "Monster in cemetery chased by children”, Leicester Evening Mail (September 25, 1954), p. 3; "Children search for monster”, Daily Herald (September 25, 1954), p. 1; "Children Hunt for Monster. Comics Blamed for Cemetery Scare”, Birmingham Daily Post (September 25, 1954), p. 18; "Monster in Cemetery”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (September 25, 1954), p. 8; "Horror in our time. The menace to young minds...”, Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette (June 7, 1955), p. 7.
[54] "Comics: 'A threat to nation's morals'“, Birmingham Daily Gazette (February 22, 1952), p. 3.
[55] Vigilant: "Flotsam and Jetsam”, Hastings and St Leonards Observer (October 18, 1952), p. 5; "Mother blames radio, television and films”, Crawley and District Observer (December 7, 1951), p. 18; "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6; Kirkby, Rev. A. H.: "Comics. Good and Bad”, Leicester Chronicle (October 9, 1954), p. 9; "Barbarians within our gates”, Catholic Standard (October 8, 1954), p. 12.
[56] "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6; "Comics a Menace But T.V. is Good. Says Headmaster”, Barnoldswick & Earby Times (October 17, 1952), p. 5; "A vicar attacks horror comics”, Leicester Evening Mail (December 2, 1954), p. 8; "Christian Duty Not To Gamble, Says Archdeacon”, Bradford Observer (October 26, 1954), p. 6.
[57] "Church Assembly condemns the horror comics”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (November 17, 1954), p. 5; "Ban horror comics say church leaders”, Daily Mirror (November 17, 1954), p. 16.
[58] "Coventry Survey of American Comics”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (December 6, 1952), p. 7; "Comics: 'A threat to nation's morals,'" Birmingham Daily Gazette (February 22, 1952), p. 3; "Your letters: Comics”, Catholic Standard (March 23, 1951), p. 12; "Church Assembly condemns the horror comics”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (November 17, 1954), p. 5; "Mother of 4 tells bishops of 'this comics poison'“, Bradford Observer (November 17, 1954), p. 5.
[59] Richman, Alfred: "Censor vice comics plea to Minister”, Daily Herald (February 22, 1952), p. 3; "Comics: A threat to nation's morals”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (February 22, 1952), p. 3.
[60] "Minister hits at the horror comic paper”, Bradford Observer (October 11, 1954), p. 5; "Boys Say 'Horror Comics' Are 'Stupid,'" Stapleford & Sandiacre News (November 20, 1954), p. 1.
[61] Paul, N. S.: "Comic, or poison?", Beds and Herts Pictorial (July 13, 1954), p. 10; Downton, Jane A.: "Are we 'retooling illiteracy'?" Lancashire Evening Post (February 25, 1955), p. 6; Baistow, Tom: "Some of these Comics need cleaning up”, Daily News (London) (October 2, 1952), p. 2; "Parents told 'ban those horrors lurking in your homes'“, Daily Herald (October 9, 1952), p. 3.
[62] "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6; Baistow, Tom: "Some of these Comics need cleaning up”, Daily News (London) (October 2, 1952), p. 2; "Head bans U.S. 'Comics' at School”, Burnley Express (October 18, 1952), p. 7; "Women deplore 'danger of comics,'" Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (May 29, 1952), p. 1; "Archbishop Draws Some Comparisons. U.S. and British Ways of Life”, Birmingham Daily Post (November 17, 1954), p. 21; "At 40 Women Need Uplift. Says Woman Magistrate”, Biggleswade Chronicle (December 7, 1951), p. 1; Tisdall, John: "These American Comics...”, Manchester Evening News (October 1, 1954), p. 8; "Comics a Menace But T.V. is Good. Says Headmaster”, Barnoldswick & Earby Times (October 17, 1952), p. 5; "Ban gangster films for children”, Daily News (London) (January 1, 1953), p. 3; "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6.
[63] "Comics Attacked”, Bradford Observer (December 12, 1952), p. 5; "Coventry Survey of American Comics”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (December 6, 1952), p. 7.
[64] Richman, Alfred: "Censor vice comics plea to Minister”, Daily Herald (February 22, 1952), p. 3.
[65] "Women deplore 'danger of comics'“, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (May 29, 1952), p. 1.
[66] "Nearly half Hull's youth see H-comics”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (November 23, 1954), p. 6.
[67] "Teddy Boys: An Inquiry”, Daily News (London) (May 5, 1954), p. 4.
[68] "A Second Chance”, Morpeth Herald (February 9, 1945), p. 4; "Wilful damage by local boys”, Hartlepool Northern Daily Mail (May 22, 1941), p. 2.
[69] "Watch for those horror comics”, Winsford Chronicle (November 27, 1954), p. 17.
[70] "Boy shot dead over 6d. comic”, Daily Mirror (October 5, 1948), p. 1.
[71] "American Comics Blamed by Boy”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (October 17, 1952), p. 11; "Blames U.S. Comics. Boy Broke Into Houses And Stole Goods”, Liverpool Echo (October 16, 1952), p. 10.
[72] "To Stop Reading American Comics”, Reading Standard (November 20, 1953), p. 2; "Boys had dagger in shop raid, Court told”, Belfast Telegraph (October 7, 1953), p. 1; "16-Year-Old Had Cosh, Face Mask and Dagger”, Winsford Chronicle (October 24, 1953), p. 17; "Boy Stole From Meter at Home”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (September 24, 1954), p. 14.
[73] "Boy shot dead in 'Jesse James' game”, Portsmouth Evening News (September 10, 1952), p. 8; "Game of bank bandits ends in boy's death”, Daily Herald (September 11, 1952), p. 5; "By shot in Jesse James game”, Daily News (London) (September 11, 1952), p. 3; "They played 'Jesse James.' Boy killed”, Liverpool Echo (September 10, 1952), p. 10.
[74] "Craig tells of roof-top shooting: 'It was like the films'“, Birmingham Daily Gazette (December 11, 1952), p. 7; "Craig, Bentley found guilty of murder: detention-death”, Daily Record (December 12, 1952), p. 1.
[75] Baistow, Tom: "Some of these Comics need cleaning up”, Daily News (London) (October 2, 1952), p. 2.
[76] "At 40 Women Need Uplift. Says Woman Magistrate”, Biggleswade Chronicle (December 7, 1951), p. 1; "Children's Justice On 'Comics,'" Catholic Standard (December 10, 1954), p. 6.
[77] "Juvenile Courts full of 'Just Williams', Crewe Headmaster”, Crewe Chronicle (December 18, 1948), p. 2.
[78] "More Halifax Children Buy American 'Comics'“, Halifax Evening Courier (August 14, 1952), p. 2.
[79] "The blame is on father”, Daily News (London) (March 9, 1954), p. 3. The Chairman of the East London Juvenile Court also expressed this opinion, stating that comics were not really harmful: they were simply stupid and reading them was a waste of time. "American Comics 'Not Corrupting Morals'. Quite Stupid”, Liverpool Echo (November 20, 1954), p. 7.
[80] "Funnies for Berlin”, Yorkshire Evening Post (November 6, 1948), p. 1.
[81] Gloucester Citizen (May 23, 1950), p. 1; "Australian Attack on U.S. Comics”, Gloucestershire Echo (May 23, 1950), p. 5; "U.S. Comics Attacked”, Leicester Daily Mercury (May 23, 1950), p. 8.
[82] "Canada's War Plants”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (August 13, 1942), p. 2.
[83] "Fight Against 'Horror' Comics in India”, Birmingham Daily Post (October 27, 1954), p. 4.
[84] J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'", Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4.
[85] "Comics Seized”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (September 5, 1948), p. 4; "Comics Forbidden”, Gloucester Citizen (September 6, 1948), p. 8; Gloucestershire Echo (September 6, 1948), p. 1; "Forbidden”, Hartlepool Northern Daily Mail (September 6, 1948), p. 5; "City bans 'comics,'" Lincolnshire Echo (September 6, 1948), p. 1; Nottingham Evening Post (September 6, 1948), p. 4.
[86] "Comics cut”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (July 20, 1949), p. 1.
[87] J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'", Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4; "Charles Trentham's Puppet Stage", The Stage (November 24, 1955), p. 7.
[88] "Ban harmful literature-M.P.”, Northern Whig (May 23, 1952), p. 2.
[89] "Harmful Foreign Publications. Naas Urban Council's Protest”, Leinster Leader (August 22, 1953), p. 1.
[90] "Irish Comics?", Catholic Standard (September 26, 1952), p. 3.
[91] "Harmful Foreign Publications. Naas Urban Council's Protest”, Leinster Leader (August 22, 1953), p. 1.
[92] "Comics Damage”, Catholic Standard (February 13, 1953), p. 10; "Children's Justice On Comics”, Catholic Standard (December 10, 1954), p. 6; "Irish Judge Slates American Comics”, New Ross Standard (February 13, 1953), p. 5.
[93] Ibid.; Downton, Jane A.: "Are we 'retooling illiteracy'?" Lancashire Evening Post (February 25, 1955), p. 6.
[94] Patrick, Kevin, "A Design for Depravity: Horror Comics and the Challenge of Censorship in Australia, 1950-1986”, Scipt & Print, vol. 35, no. 3, 2011, pp. 133-156; Patrick, Kevin, "The Contested Frontier: Western Comics and Australian Identity, 1945-1960”, International Journal of Comic Art, vol. 13, no. 2, 2011, pp. 220-243; Fernández Sarasola, Ignacio, “Nacionalismo, antiamericanismo and censura encubierta. Historia de la campaña anticómic en Australia”, Tebeosfera, no. 28, 2025; Fernández Sarasola, Ignacio, History of the Anti-Comic Campaign in Australia. Anti-Americanism, Nationalism, Youth Protection, and the Restriction of Freedom of the Press, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, 2026 (at press).
[95] "Horror Comics Made In Ireland”, Catholic Standard (November 19, 1954), p. 5.
[96] Ibid.
[97] Adams, Michael: Censorship.The Irish Experience, Scepter Books, Dublin, 1968.
[98] Webb, Arthur: "Crime war on 'comics'“, Daily Herald (February 19, 1949), p. 5.
[99] Ibid.
[100] J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'", Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4; "Nearly half Hull's youth see H-comics”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (November 23, 1954), p. 6; Cherryman, A. E.: "Suffer, little children”, Truth (February 25, 1955), pp. 22-23; "Barbarians within our gates”, Catholic Standard (October 8, 1954), p. 1, 12; Downton, Jane A.: "Are we 'retooling illiteracy'?" Lancashire Evening Post (February 25, 1955), p. 6; Edmonds, Richard: "The World of Books: Charlemagne to MacArthur”, The Sphere (February 26, 1955), p. 38.
[101] "Horror Comic. Disease or symptom?", Belfast Telegraph (March 28, 1955), p. 6.
[102] "Boys took plane”, Belfast News-Letter (May 22, 1948), p. 5; "Two boys up to mischief”, Daily News (London) (May 22, 1948), p. 1.
[103] "Horror comic boy on murder charge”, Bradford Observer (May 20, 1955), p. 1; "All over a comic”, Manchester Evening News (August 30, 1948), p. 8.
[104] "Parents and teachers see good and bad in 'comics'“, Worthing Herald (May 8, 1953), p. 5.
[105] "Imported Comics”, Halifax Evening Courier (December 6, 1952), p. 4; Johns, Jennifer: "American comics turn a new leaf”, Western Mail (July 4, 1956), p. 6.
[106] "Fifth Avenue 'Kelt' Annoys Scots”, Aberdeen Press and Journal (January 31, 1949), p. 2; Webb, Arthur: "Crime war on 'comics'“, Daily Herald (February 19, 1949), p. 5.
[107] "No So Comic”, Aberdeen Press and Journal (January 31, 1949), p. 2; "Fifth Avenue 'Kelt' Annoys Scots”, Aberdeen Press and Journal (January 31, 1949), p. 2; Webb, Arthur: "Crime war on 'comics'“, Daily Herald (February 19, 1949), p. 5.
[108] "H-Comic Ban”, Aberdeen Evening Express (October 8, 1954), p. 10.
[109] J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'", Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4; Murray, Kay: "America Accuses Its Comics", Sheffield Daily Telegraph (August 26, 1950), p. 2.
[110] "U.S. Enquiry Into Comics”, Birmingham Daily Post (April 22, 1954), p. 26; "Washington call to publishers of American comics”, Belfast News-Letter (February 21, 1955), p. 5.
[111] Downton, Jane A.: "Are we 'retooling illiteracy'?" Lancashire Evening Post (February 25, 1955), p. 6; "Barbarians within our gates”, Catholic Standard (October 8, 1954), p. 12; J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'" Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4; "Drive to clean up American comics”, Northern Whig (September 17, 1954), p. 1; Coulter, Leonard: "Comics Code drops horror, keeps crime”, Daily Herald (October 30, 1954), p. 3; "The Real Reason For Horror Comics”, Luton News and Bedfordshire Chronicle (November 4, 1954), p. 6; Cribb, Rodolph: "Horror Comics and the Law”, Birmingham Daily Post (November 4, 1954), p. 19; "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6; "New law is needed to stop horror comics”, Bradford Observer (December 4, 1954), p. 4.
[112] "US publisher to stop horror and crime comics”, Londonderry Sentinel (September 16, 1954), p. 3; "Poison”, Manchester Evening News (September 15, 1954), p. 6; Paul, N. S.: "Comic, or poison?”, Beds and Herts Pictorial (July 13, 1954), p. 10.
[113] "Dr. Yudkin doubts the 'comic' code”, Daily News (London) (October 29, 1954), p. 3.
[114] "The Horror Comic”, Kington Times (November 19, 1954), p. 4; "The problem of horror comics”, Shipley Times and Express (December 1, 1954), p. 18; "Ban horror comics call to parents”, Westminster & Pimlico News (November 19, 1954), p. 6; "Ban horror comics call to parents”, Chelsea News and General Advertiser (November 19, 1954), p. 6; "Cruelty cases on increase”, The Tewkesbury Register, and Agricultural Gazette (April 2, 1955), p. 1; "Horror Comics Not Funny. Hampton Vicar Warns Parents”, Birmingham Daily Post (November 22, 1954), p. 11; "Walsall move to combat the 'horror' comic”, Birmingham Daily Post (December 23, 1954), p. 20; "Pincer attack on horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (December 23, 1954), p. 7; "Dad is the culprit, says teacher”, Daily News (London) (November 20, 1954), p. 3; "Problem parent is main trouble. Head”, Western Mail (March 19, 1956), p. 3; "Horror comic fears. Laudable Government effort may fail”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (February 26, 1955), p. 6; "Horror Comics: Headmaster's Lecture to Parents”, Shipley Times and Express (March 2, 1955), p. 14; Feasa, Fear: "Searchlight On Current Topics: Eire, Sean is Nua”, Derry Journal (May 5, 1954), p. 3; "American 'Comics' Criticized”, Eastbourne Gazette (October 15, 1952), p. 17; "'Comics' a Menace But T.V. is Good. Says Headmaster”, Barnoldswick & Earby Times (October 17, 1952), p. 5; Vigilant: "Flotsam and Jetsam”, Hastings and St Leonards Observer (October 18, 1952), p. 5; "Grangemouth”, Falkirk Herald (December 8, 1951), p. 7; "Good comics a godsend, say Miss Glory”, Dundee Courier (November 8, 1954), p. 5; "Building up Tradition”, Eastbourne Herald (July 26, 1952), p. 7.
[115] "This is the Horror to which Nelson Children are Exposed”, Nelson Leader (March 4, 1955), p. 16.
[116] "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6.
[117] "A curb on the horror comic”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (February 23, 1955), p. 6.
[118] Ibid.; "New law is needed to stop horror comics”, Bradford Observer (December 4, 1954), p. 4.
[119] "A vicar attacks horror comics”, Leicester Evening Mail (December 2, 1954), p. 8; "New Library to be shut four days a week", Birmingham Daily Gazette (December 13, 1954), p. 5; "Work to Aid City's Backward Readers", Coventry Evening Telegraph (August 13, 1952), p. 2; "Fortune for new school life author. Library search to fill banned comics gap", Birmingham Daily Gazette (August 19, 1952), p. 5; "Talk on the ideal library service", Ballymena Observer (May 21, 1954), p. 3; "Protest against Library Estimate cut”, Sligo Champion (April 7, 1956), p. 5; "No 'horror comic' problem in Coventry”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (May 4, 1955), p. 11; "Library Antidote”, Catholic Standard (December 10, 1954), p. 6; "Pincer attack on horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (December 23, 1954), p. 7; "Press And Radio. A Woman's View”, Sevenoaks Chronicle and Kentish Advertiser (January 16, 1948), p. 4; "The problem of adults who read comics”, Runcorn Weekly News (December 10, 1954), p. 1; "Bede Girls' Headmistress Attacks Bad Comics”, Sunderland Daily Echo and Shipping Gazette (November 10, 1954), p. 7; "Mother blames radio, television and films”, Crawley and District Observer (December 7, 1951), p. 18; "These comics banned: 'degrading trash'. Head tells of their 'shocking influence'“, Westminster & Pimlico News (July 25, 1952), p. 2; "Head's shilling brought flood of horror comics”, Northampton Mercury (December 17, 1954), p. 16.
[120] There are countless examples, including: "Press and Radio. Effect on Family Life”, Belfast News-Letter (January 7, 1948), p. 4; "Press, Radio Dominate the Family”, Western Mail (January 7, 1948), p. 2; Wood, O.: "Readers' Views: Comic Strips”, Western Mail (January 15, 1948), p. 3; "Parents and Teachers See Good and Bad in 'Comics'“, Worthing Herald (May 8, 1953), p. 5; "This is the Horror to which Nelson Children are Exposed”, Nelson Leader (March 4, 1955), p. 16; "Ban Horror Comics”, Montrose, Arbroath and Brechin Review; and Forfar and Kincardineshire Advertiser (November 11, 1954), p. 7; "Horror With A Purpose. Head's Fight Against Crime Comics”, Liverpool Echo (May 8, 1953), p. 7.
[121] "Horror in our time. The menace to young minds...", Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette (7-VI-1955), p. 7.
[122] "Horror comic exhibition at Hayes”, Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette (January 28, 1955), p. 5.
[123] Collingwood: "Around the Town”, Shields Daily News (May 7, 1955), p. 2; "H-comics on show in Newcastle”, ibid. (June 1, 1955), p. 7.
[124] "Hull teachers offered money by book salesman”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (January 19, 1955), p. 3.
[125] "Children who clamour for good books”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (November 19, 1954), p. 3.
[126] "Let public cel with the horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (12-XI-1954), p. 2; Onlooker: "N.U.T. and horror comics”, Western Mail (27-XI-1954), p. 6.
[127] Onlooker: "N.U.T. and horror comics”, Western Mail (November 27, 1954), p. 6.
[128] J.B.: "What is the answer to the 'Horror Comic?'", Belfast Telegraph (February 14, 1955), p. 4.
[129] "Let public cel with the horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (12-XI-1954), p. 2; "Horror Comics and Good Reading for Children”, Birmingham Daily Post (May 14, 1955), p. 7; "Awful”, said Lord Mayor, Birmingham Daily Gazette (May 16, 1955), p. 6; "Mr. Manchester's Diary”, Manchester Evening News (February 7, 1955), p. 4.
[130] "Head's shilling brought flood of horror comics”, Northampton Mercury (December 17, 1954), p. 16; "Horror comic shock for the head”, Daily News (London) (December 17, 1954), p. 9; "Wholesale Horror”, Birmingham Daily Post (December 17, 1954), p. 23.
[131] Ibid.; "Horror Comics: Headmaster's Lecture to Parents”, Shipley Times and Express (March 2, 1955), p. 14..
[132] "Coventry Survey of American Comics”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (December 6, 1952), p. 7.
[133] Baistow, Tom: "Some of these Comics need cleaning up”, Daily News (London) (October 2, 1952), p. 2.
[134] "Parents told 'ban those horrors lurking in your homes'“, Daily Herald (October 9, 1952), p. 3.
[135] "Let public cel with the horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (November 12, 1954), p. 2.
[136] "Angry parents stopped 'horror' comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (July 23, 1954), p. 3; "Brutalizing Effect Of American Comics”, Aberdeen Evening Express (May 18, 1953), p. 5; "Donegal Education Committee and American 'Comics'“, Derry Journal (November 19, 1954), p. 8; "Teachers told: Ban the horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (October 22, 1954), p. 1.
[137] "U.S. comics 'corrupting thousands'“, Bradford Observer (August 20, 1954), p. 5; "Church paper attacks U.S. comics”, Northern Whig (August 20, 1954), p. 5; "Observatory”, Bradford Observer (November 11, 1954), p. 4; "H. situations”, Bradford Observer (November 11, 1954), p. 4.
[138] "Horror comic menace”, Bradford Observer (October 2, 1954), p. 4; Cribb, Rodolph: "Horror Comics and the Law”, Birmingham Daily Post (November 4, 1954), p. 19; "Young Tories discuss ban on horror comics”, Kent & Sussex Courier (November 19, 1954), p. 4.
[139] "Grangemouth”, Falkirk Herald (October 16, 1954), p. 6; "Steps taken to ban 'horror' comics”, Falkirk Herald (November 13, 1954), p. 7; "Horror Comic Ban Urged”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (November 3, 1954), p. 18; "Brutalizing Effect of American Comics”, Aberdeen Evening Express (May 18, 1953), p. 5; "Donegal Education Committee and American 'Comics'“, Derry Journal (November 19, 1954), p. 8; "Last look at London”, Daily News (London) (July 19, 1951), p. 3; Richman, Alfred: "Censor vice comics plea to Minister”, Daily Herald (February 22, 1952), p. 3.
[140] "Comics: 'A threat to nation's morals'“, Birmingham Daily Gazette (February 22, 1952), p. 3.
[141] "Milngavie”, Milngavie and Bearsden Herald (August 18, 1951), p. 2; "American 'Comics' Criticized”, Eastbourne Gazette (October 15, 1952), p. 17; "Sexy American comics ought to be banned”, says a newsagent”, Croydon Times (March 28, 1953), p. 7; "Echo Of A Question”, Catholic Standard (November 18, 1955), p. 11.
[142] "M. P. calls for ban on U.S. horror comics: Minister's concern”, Bradford Observer (October 22, 19454), p. 5; "B.o.T. chief to discuss newsprint position”, Western Mail (October 29, 1954), p. 7.
[143] "Comic problem”, Daily Herald (February 1, 1952), p. 5.
[144] "Trashy American Comics”, The Scotsman (April 13, 1949), p. 6.
[145] Cribb, Rodolph: "Horror Comics and the Law”, Birmingham Daily Post (November 4, 1954), p. 19.
[146] "Horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (October 2, 1954), p. 4.
[147] Ibid.
[148] He would go so far as to claim the existence of a genuine movement among parliamentarians aimed at controlling "American comics." "Anti-Cosh Bill Comes Before House Today”, Shields Daily News (February 12, 1953), p. 6.
[149] "Good reading for a 'big shot'“, Daily Mirror (March 12, 1947), p. 1; "Ban harmful literature-M.P.”, Northern Whig (May 23, 1952), p. 2; "Vicious comics: M.P.s protest”, Western Mail (May 23, 1952), p. 5; "Horror comic menace”, Bradford Observer (October 2, 1954), p. 4.
[150] "MPs criticize H-comics remark”, Lancashire Evening Post (October 22, 1954), p. 1.
[151] "Questions raised about objectionable American comics”, Dundee Courier (October 22, 1954), p. 5; "M.P.s ask for ban on horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Post (October 22, 1954), p. 7; "Teachers told: Ban the horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (October 22, 1954), p. 1; "Horror Comics”, Catholic Standard (October 29, 1954), p. 4; "Let public cell with the horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (November 12, 1954), p. 2; "Britain Hopes to Act Over Horror Comics”, Belfast News-Letter (November 12, 1954), p. 3.
[152] "Westminster gives second reading to 'Horror Comics' Bill”, Northern Whig (February 23, 1955), p. 1.
[153] "Horror comic menace”, Bradford Observer (October 2, 1954), p. 4; "Within the law”, Western Mail (February 24, 1955), p. 4.
[154] "Local rector condemns horror comics”, Penrith Observer (December 7, 1954), p. 3; "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6; "New law is needed to stop horror comics”, Bradford Observer (December 4, 1954), p. 4; Trethowan, Ian: "Definition problem in new Bill”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (February 12, 1955), p. 5.
[155] "The Horror Comics Bill”, Bradford Observer (February 22, 1955), p. 4; "Horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Post (March 25, 1955), p. 16; "Outlawing H-comics”, Coventry Evening Telegraph (February 11, 1955), p. 12; "Horror Comics”, Birmingham Daily Gazette (February 22, 1955), p. 4; "The newspaper strike and Parliament”, Western Mail (April 2, 1955), p. 4; "License and law”, Halifax Evening Courier (March 25, 1955), p. 8; "Horror comics”, Birmingham Daily Post (March 25, 1955), p. 4.
[156] "Echo of the Piltdown skull controversy”, Shields Daily News (April 5, 1955), p. 4; "The Week in Westminster”, Reading Standard (April 1, 1955), p. 10.
[157] "Washington call to publishers of American comics”, Belfast News-Letter (February 21, 1955), p. 5.
[158] "Horror comics bill, 'a necessary evil'“, Harrow Observer (April 14, 1955), p. 1.
[159] "Banning the horrors”, Fife Free Press, & Kirkcaldy Guardian (February 12, 1955), p. 6.
[160] "The Horror Comics”, Shields Daily News (February 14, 1955), p. 2.
[161] "A newspaper cannot be a horror comic. The Attorney General”, Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer (March 25, 1955), p. 1; "Move to Extend 'Horror Comics' Bill Fails”, Birmingham Daily Post (March 25, 1955), p. 7; "M.P. rebuked for attack on Press under privilege”, Bradford Observer (March 25, 1955), pp. 1-3; "Horror Comics Bill: No interference with Press liberty”, Belfast News-Letter (March 25, 1955), p. 10; "Sunday papers attacked in 'Horror Comics' debate”, Northern Whig (March 25, 1955), p. 1.
[162] "Bill's powers may be too wide. M.P.s' warning”, Dundee Courier (February 23, 1955), p. 3.
[163] "Westminster gives second reading to 'Horror Comics' Bill”, Northern Whig (February 23, 1955), p. 1; "Publishers in Danger”, Birmingham Daily Post (February 23, 1955), p. 25.
[164] "Horror Comics: Headmaster's Lecture to Parents”, Shipley Times and Express (March 2, 1955), p. 14.
[165] "Mr. Bell in H-comic debate: Legislation not desirable”, Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette (March 4, 1955), p. 11.
