What do you think?
Rate this book
Reporting on Hitler: Rothay Reynolds and the British Press in Nazi Germany
Reporting on Hitler uncovers the thrilling, untold story of Reynolds, a former clergyman and intelligence officer, who reported on some of the twentieth century’s most momentous events. It reveals in gripping detail what life was like for foreign correspondents in Hitler’s Berlin and uncovers how British journalists reported the rise of the Third Reich.
384 pages, Hardcover
First published February 2, 2017
10 people are currently reading
56 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 6, 2022
Reporting on Hitler is a competent and quick-paced historical account hindered by two near-fatal things. Firstly, Rothay Reynolds is not the most compelling character to focus on; and secondly, Will Wainewright is not the most compelling writer of his story.
Reporting on Hitler is a decent overview of how the British press behaved during Hitler's rise to power and the run-up to war, with pro-Nazi sentiment surprisingly accepted – and beyond just a commitment to appeasement and the 'peace' such a policy would bring. It is interesting to analyse how even seasoned reporters and diplomats struggled to weigh Hitler, back when he was a mere radical firebrand who had not yet done the evil things he would do, or – as in the disturbing stories about press intimidation and oppression of minorities – the evil things he was doing but the importance of which was not yet apparent.
It is striking, as I read the book in March 2022, to be reminded that ordinary Germans seized on reports from the London Times as they did not know what was happening in their own country (pg. 158), that Hitler kept his geopolitical opponents guessing and delayed some of his military adventurism in order to avoid the Winter Olympics (pg. 167), and that so many people were fleeing Germany in the run-up to war that the German customs could not keep track (pg. 240). I'm not entirely in sync with some of the reporting on Russia and Ukraine which has consumed the last couple of weeks, and recognise the triteness of the Putin/Hitler comparison, but some of the echoes have given me pause. Certainly, we can see how civilized countries can, in peacetime, be nudged haphazardly but inexorably towards the insanity of a needless war.
Reporting on Hitler, however, does not survive much beyond its utility as an introduction to the behaviour of the British press corps in the 1930s. Author Will Wainewright orients his book around Rothay Reynolds, a correspondent for the pro-Nazi Daily Mail, and the book is in part a biography of this man. He is, however, not the most arresting character. Old, ascetic and reserved, Reynolds is an anti-Nazi working for the most pro-Nazi British paper of the time. The book, however, is not a courageous account of one crusading reporter standing up against a reactionary press baron; on the contrary, Wainewright notes how Reynolds "accepted too easily the official Nazi line" (pg. 139) and his dispatches from Germany are often muted in their condemnation of the regime, seemingly with little pushback from Reynolds towards his censorious pro-Nazi boss, Lord Rothermere. He is in Berlin from the early 1920s until 1939, but doesn't bring his writing guns truly to bear on the regime until he leaves the Mail and publishes a book called When Freedom Shrieked in the early months of the war. He regrets his censored reportage on the Nazi years but it is a passive regret, and though he was clearly a man of principle he did not often stand on it. Far be it from me to sit here and pass judgement, from a comfy chair and with the hindsight of history, but all I mean to say is that, with respect, Reynolds is a strange and unsatisfying hero to build a book around.
This dissatisfaction is also in part the fault of Wainewright. The book is solid and sober throughout, but it does not often penetrate deeply into Reynolds' crisis of conscience. It often abandons the autobiographical approach completely, and discusses other reporters and their responses to Hitler, but when Wainewright does return to Reynolds he does not do enough to bring us the man and give us reason to pay attention. We are told that Reynolds helped hundreds of victims of Nazi persecution during his time in Berlin (pg. 211), but this is not elaborated on. It would have been of great help in emphasising the tension and tyranny of the years in Nazi Germany, and the battle of conscience going on inside Reynolds, had this been explored. Similarly, we are told throughout that Reynolds was a committed Catholic and that his religion was "a useful source of comfort in dark times" (pg. 261), but again no detail is given. Reynolds was evidently a reserved man, not given to outbursts even in his private notes, but if there was little research material available it only compounds the question of why Reynolds was chosen as the subject of a book.
The answer, unfortunately, isn't a great one. Reynolds is a distant relation to Wainewright (pg. xix) and the latter, also a journalist, clearly feels a kinship to the man. This is all well and good, as far as it goes, but it does mean the project pushes up against limiters rather quickly. Driven by his own family history, Wainewright's interest in Reynolds quite frankly goes that little bit further than any reader's would. There is no reason to choose him above any number of other correspondents of the 1930s, and there are some other reasons – his reserved manner, his muted resistance to towing the pro-Nazi line – that greatly limit his story in the eyes of a general readership. The research material for Reynolds appears quite thin on the ground and, at the end, Wainewright feels obliged to invent details of what was going through the man's mind as he died (pg. 270). He, of course, cannot know this, and it is one final attempt by the author to add a bit of flair to a stubbornly solid story. While well-researched and competently written, Reporting on Hitler can only be considered a contribution to history, and falls short of being a recommended text.
Reporting on Hitler is a decent overview of how the British press behaved during Hitler's rise to power and the run-up to war, with pro-Nazi sentiment surprisingly accepted – and beyond just a commitment to appeasement and the 'peace' such a policy would bring. It is interesting to analyse how even seasoned reporters and diplomats struggled to weigh Hitler, back when he was a mere radical firebrand who had not yet done the evil things he would do, or – as in the disturbing stories about press intimidation and oppression of minorities – the evil things he was doing but the importance of which was not yet apparent.
It is striking, as I read the book in March 2022, to be reminded that ordinary Germans seized on reports from the London Times as they did not know what was happening in their own country (pg. 158), that Hitler kept his geopolitical opponents guessing and delayed some of his military adventurism in order to avoid the Winter Olympics (pg. 167), and that so many people were fleeing Germany in the run-up to war that the German customs could not keep track (pg. 240). I'm not entirely in sync with some of the reporting on Russia and Ukraine which has consumed the last couple of weeks, and recognise the triteness of the Putin/Hitler comparison, but some of the echoes have given me pause. Certainly, we can see how civilized countries can, in peacetime, be nudged haphazardly but inexorably towards the insanity of a needless war.
Reporting on Hitler, however, does not survive much beyond its utility as an introduction to the behaviour of the British press corps in the 1930s. Author Will Wainewright orients his book around Rothay Reynolds, a correspondent for the pro-Nazi Daily Mail, and the book is in part a biography of this man. He is, however, not the most arresting character. Old, ascetic and reserved, Reynolds is an anti-Nazi working for the most pro-Nazi British paper of the time. The book, however, is not a courageous account of one crusading reporter standing up against a reactionary press baron; on the contrary, Wainewright notes how Reynolds "accepted too easily the official Nazi line" (pg. 139) and his dispatches from Germany are often muted in their condemnation of the regime, seemingly with little pushback from Reynolds towards his censorious pro-Nazi boss, Lord Rothermere. He is in Berlin from the early 1920s until 1939, but doesn't bring his writing guns truly to bear on the regime until he leaves the Mail and publishes a book called When Freedom Shrieked in the early months of the war. He regrets his censored reportage on the Nazi years but it is a passive regret, and though he was clearly a man of principle he did not often stand on it. Far be it from me to sit here and pass judgement, from a comfy chair and with the hindsight of history, but all I mean to say is that, with respect, Reynolds is a strange and unsatisfying hero to build a book around.
This dissatisfaction is also in part the fault of Wainewright. The book is solid and sober throughout, but it does not often penetrate deeply into Reynolds' crisis of conscience. It often abandons the autobiographical approach completely, and discusses other reporters and their responses to Hitler, but when Wainewright does return to Reynolds he does not do enough to bring us the man and give us reason to pay attention. We are told that Reynolds helped hundreds of victims of Nazi persecution during his time in Berlin (pg. 211), but this is not elaborated on. It would have been of great help in emphasising the tension and tyranny of the years in Nazi Germany, and the battle of conscience going on inside Reynolds, had this been explored. Similarly, we are told throughout that Reynolds was a committed Catholic and that his religion was "a useful source of comfort in dark times" (pg. 261), but again no detail is given. Reynolds was evidently a reserved man, not given to outbursts even in his private notes, but if there was little research material available it only compounds the question of why Reynolds was chosen as the subject of a book.
The answer, unfortunately, isn't a great one. Reynolds is a distant relation to Wainewright (pg. xix) and the latter, also a journalist, clearly feels a kinship to the man. This is all well and good, as far as it goes, but it does mean the project pushes up against limiters rather quickly. Driven by his own family history, Wainewright's interest in Reynolds quite frankly goes that little bit further than any reader's would. There is no reason to choose him above any number of other correspondents of the 1930s, and there are some other reasons – his reserved manner, his muted resistance to towing the pro-Nazi line – that greatly limit his story in the eyes of a general readership. The research material for Reynolds appears quite thin on the ground and, at the end, Wainewright feels obliged to invent details of what was going through the man's mind as he died (pg. 270). He, of course, cannot know this, and it is one final attempt by the author to add a bit of flair to a stubbornly solid story. While well-researched and competently written, Reporting on Hitler can only be considered a contribution to history, and falls short of being a recommended text.
October 31, 2018
An outstanding account of a group of courageous newspaper reporters who dared to report the true conditions in Germany under the Nazis, particularly Rothay Reynolds, who led an amazing life as a reporter in Germany. Their task was often made more difficult by the newspaper owners or "press barons" who favoured the appeasement policies of Chamberlain and who looked with favour upon Hitler as a bulwark against communism which they all hated. It was ironic that in the end, the greatest communist state of the time, the Soviet Union, became their ally , after Hitler attacked the Soviet Union.
May 11, 2020
A crisis of conscience underlies this narrative that’s a valuable insight into Nazi Germany. It is an account of foreign journalists working in Berlin in the 1920s and 1930s, particularly Rothay Reynolds, an English cleric and writer. Reynolds first career was a cleric, first in Britain and later in Russia before becoming the Berlin bureau chief for the British newspaper, the Daily Mail .
Wainewright gives a fascinating insight into Germany during the time the Nazi party went from a small group of extremists not taken seriously to the single party of government that everyone had to take seriously or suffer the consequences. Rising tension in society was commensurate with the Nazi’s rise in political influence.
Reynolds and other foreign correspondents witnessed first-hand the bashing and persecution of Jews and other Nazi opponents by Nazi stormtroopers. The Nazis regime hamstrung journalists from reporting what was happening and expelled journalists who published articles deemed too critical. They imprisoned some before extradition. British newspapers supported the government’s appeasement policy of the 1930s because they thought it to be the best way to avoid another world war. Another reason was the belief that Communism was a bigger threat to Britain than Nazism. The Daily Mail went further; it’s proprietor, Lord Rothermere, Harold Harmsworth, was an ardent Nazi supporter.
Reynolds interviewed Hitler twice: the first time in 1923, just before the failed Munich beerhall putsch, and in 1932. Hitler stared people down, and at the start of the first interview there was a 45-second stand-off in which Reynolds maintained the Nazi leader’s stare. Reynolds thought Hitler was full of bitterness about how World War One had ended, a “non-entity”, “not be taken seriously”.
“I went away thinking no more of the encounter than it had given me a chance of seeing an odd type of unbalanced fanatic … When I left the headquarters, I felt as if I had left a madhouse.”
Reynolds left Germany in 1939 and said later he regretted not doing more to expose the Nazis.
Wainewright has contributed valuably to our understanding of Germany in the twenties and thirties. He shows the pressure on foreign correspondents with an oppressive regime using bullying tactics, some of which involved the Gestapo, on one hand and on the other the newspaper proprietors whose editors watered down or didn’t run stories.
Wainewright gives a fascinating insight into Germany during the time the Nazi party went from a small group of extremists not taken seriously to the single party of government that everyone had to take seriously or suffer the consequences. Rising tension in society was commensurate with the Nazi’s rise in political influence.
Reynolds and other foreign correspondents witnessed first-hand the bashing and persecution of Jews and other Nazi opponents by Nazi stormtroopers. The Nazis regime hamstrung journalists from reporting what was happening and expelled journalists who published articles deemed too critical. They imprisoned some before extradition. British newspapers supported the government’s appeasement policy of the 1930s because they thought it to be the best way to avoid another world war. Another reason was the belief that Communism was a bigger threat to Britain than Nazism. The Daily Mail went further; it’s proprietor, Lord Rothermere, Harold Harmsworth, was an ardent Nazi supporter.
Reynolds interviewed Hitler twice: the first time in 1923, just before the failed Munich beerhall putsch, and in 1932. Hitler stared people down, and at the start of the first interview there was a 45-second stand-off in which Reynolds maintained the Nazi leader’s stare. Reynolds thought Hitler was full of bitterness about how World War One had ended, a “non-entity”, “not be taken seriously”.
“I went away thinking no more of the encounter than it had given me a chance of seeing an odd type of unbalanced fanatic … When I left the headquarters, I felt as if I had left a madhouse.”
Reynolds left Germany in 1939 and said later he regretted not doing more to expose the Nazis.
Wainewright has contributed valuably to our understanding of Germany in the twenties and thirties. He shows the pressure on foreign correspondents with an oppressive regime using bullying tactics, some of which involved the Gestapo, on one hand and on the other the newspaper proprietors whose editors watered down or didn’t run stories.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews