Changes

After the war in Europe was over, Allan Michie returned to the pages of Reader's Digest with his "Germany Was Bombed to Defeat."<ref>Allan A. Michie, "Germany Was Bombed to Defeat," '''Reader's Digest''', August 1945, p. 77.</ref>  Michie compiles a vast array of statistics indicating the tremendous effect Allied bombs had on Germany. Within his analysis he describes how "Millions of Germans are living a troglodyte existence in cellars. Thousands of bodies still lie under piles of brick and stone."  These shameful facts are melded with his other data as reasons to interpret the bombing as a success.

After the war in Europe was over, Allan Michie returned to the pages of Reader's Digest with his "Germany Was Bombed to Defeat."<ref>Allan A. Michie, "Germany Was Bombed to Defeat," '''Reader's Digest''', August 1945, p. 77.</ref>  Michie compiles a vast array of statistics indicating the tremendous effect Allied bombs had on Germany. Within his analysis he describes how "Millions of Germans are living a troglodyte existence in cellars. Thousands of bodies still lie under piles of brick and stone."  These shameful facts are melded with his other data as reasons to interpret the bombing as a success.

During the Korean war, Francis Drake contributed again to the '''Digest'''. After a short defense of the American bombing campaign,<ref>Note: Drake argues a familiar excuse, that the Air Plan didn't finish off the Reich in short order because "it was never tried until late in 1944." This inexplicably ignores the ball-bearing raids of late 1943 and the Big Week of February 1944 where German fighter production was targeted. The Air Plan, I would argue, was in effect at least one year before Drake would like to think.</ref> his "The Facts About Strategic Bombing"<ref>Francis Vivian Drake, "The Facts About Strategic Bombing," '''Reader's Digest''',

During the Korean war, Francis Drake contributed again to the '''Digest'''. After a short defense of the American bombing campaign,<ref>Note: Drake argues a familiar excuse, that the Air Plan didn't finish off the Reich in short order because "it was never tried until late in 1944." This inexplicably ignores the ball-bearing raids of late 1943 and the Big Week of February 1944 where German fighter production was targeted. The Air Plan, I would argue, was in effect at least one year before Drake would like to think.</ref> his "The Facts About Strategic Bombing"<ref>Francis Vivian Drake, "The Facts About Strategic Bombing," '''Reader's Digest''', July 1951, p. 55.</ref> discusses the importance of World War Two's lessons on the nuclear age. Drake says,

July 1951, p. 55.</ref> discusses the importance of World War Two's lessons on the nuclear age. Drake says,

<blockquote>''The atom bomb is so destructive that one bomb on an industrial target is enough.  ...strategic bombers can overleap the Red Army and, if used under our own Air Plan, can destroy its sources of power. Though the Soviet leaders are careless of lives, they may not be eager to incur the annihilation of productive facilities it has taken 30 years to build.''</blockquote>

<blockquote>''The atom bomb is so destructive that one bomb on an industrial target is enough.  ...strategic bombers can overleap the Red Army and, if used under our own Air Plan, can destroy its sources of power. Though the Soviet leaders are careless of lives, they may not be eager to incur the annihilation of productive facilities it has taken 30 years to build.''</blockquote>

Suggesting that an atom bomb be used to destroy an "industrial target" (a ball-bearing plant? an aircraft factory?) shows a disturbing carelessness of lives. Does this mode of thinking reflect a similar careless association with conventional bombing in Europe six or seven years previous? Unfortunately, it probably does. If Drake is unburdened by the collateral civilian deaths a nuclear blast promises, then how could he possibly be troubled by the deaths caused by the high explosive and incendiary bombs dropped by B-17s and B-24s?

Suggesting that an atom bomb be used to destroy an "industrial target" (a ball-bearing plant? an aircraft factory?) shows a disturbing carelessness of lives. Does this mode of thinking reflect a similar careless association with conventional bombing in Europe six or seven years previous? Unfortunately, it probably does. If Drake is unburdened by the collateral civilian deaths a nuclear blast promises, then how could he possibly be troubled by the deaths caused by the high explosive and incendiary bombs dropped by B-17s and B-24s?

To summarize, the '''Reader's Digest''' presented to the American public the very straightforward opinions of Michie, Ziff, and Drake. By choosing these authors' works and not providing a disclaimer of any sort, the Digest itself was in effect promoting their views. The authors' words reflect not only the Digest's intent to inform average middle class America about American strategic bombing policy but also its intent to shape and direct that policy into a more indiscriminate method. This impression coupled with the fact that the '''Reader's Digest''' was the leading information journal--that it was read by perhaps fifty million Americans--sends a very discouraging ethical warning.

To summarize, the '''Reader's Digest''' presented to the American public the very straightforward opinions of Michie, Ziff, and Drake. By choosing these authors' works and not providing a disclaimer of any sort, the Digest itself was in effect promoting their views. The authors' words reflect not only the Digest's intent to inform average middle class America about American strategic bombing policy but also its intent to shape and direct that policy into a more indiscriminate method. This impression coupled with the fact that the '''Reader's Digest''' was the leading information journal -- that it was read by perhaps fifty million Americans -- sends a very discouraging ethical warning.

==References==

==References==

{{reflist}}

{{reflist}}