Journalism at War

William Wright Bryan, 1905-1991

In the early hours of June 6, 1944, a Douglas C-47 “Skytrain” transport, carrying 19 passengers, took off from an airfield in Greenham Common, in southern England. Piloted by Lieutenant John E. Peters, the C-47—nicknamed “Snooty”—joined in with other similarly-laden aircraft for a journey across the English Channel, toward Normandy, France, where they would deliver their human cargo—American paratroopers from the 3rd Battalion, 502nd Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101st “Screaming Eagles” Airborne Division. Led by Lt. Col. Robert Cole, the men of the 3/502 PIR served as the spearhead of a massive invasion force whose mission was to begin the liberation of France and, together with the armies of the Soviet Union, Great Britain, France and other allied nations, the defeat of Nazi Germany. (Cole would receive the Medal of Honor for leading a bayonet charge against German forces while fighting in Normandy. He was later killed in the Netherlands during “Operation Market Garden.”)

On board “Snooty” was a 39-year-old journalist from The Atlanta Journal named William Wright Bryan. When Peters landed “Snooty” a few hours later, 18 of the passengers—all paratroopers—were gone, having jumped into Normandy. Only Bryan remained. The journalist was rushed off to London, where he typed up his report while the press aide to General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the commander of the allied invasion force, announced to the world that the liberation of France had begun. Shortly afterwards, Bryan, his report in hand, spoke into the same microphone. Jointly accredited with The Atlanta Journal and NBC News, Bryan delivered the first eye-witness account of the invasion to a waiting world:

“The first spearhead of Allied forces for the liberation of Europe landed by parachute in northern France. I rode with the first group of planes to take our fighting men into Europe and watched from the rear door of our plane, named ‘Snooty,’ as 18 American paratroopers led by a lieutenant colonel jumped with their arms, ammunition and equipment into German-occupied France.”

The journey from the desk of an associate editor at The Atlanta Journal to witnessing the initial stages of the Normandy Invasion was, in comparison with the ride aboard “Snooty,” unspectacular. Born in 1905, Bryan was raised in Clemson, South Carolina, eventually graduating from Clemson University in 1926 with a degree in civil engineering. But journalism was his passion. While at Clemson, Bryan worked on the campus newspaper—The Tiger—for four years and served as its editor his senior year. After graduation, Bryan worked as a stringer for the Greenville Piedmont, which served the community of Greenville, South Carolina. In August 1927 Bran began working at The Atlanta Journal, where he served as city hall reporter, city editor, and managing editor. In 1943 Bryan was promoted to associate and managing editor, the position he held when he boarded “Snooty” on the morning of June 6, 1944.

Scott Ritter will discuss this article and answer audience questions on Ep. 71 of Ask the Inspector.

Bryan went on to cover the war in Europe, filing reports for The Atlanta Journal while broadcasting for NBC News. Typical of Bryan’s reporting was his work during the battle for Caen, in Normandy, published in the July 9, 1944, edition of the Atlanta Journal. “From an orchard some miles back,” Bryan wrote, “I watched the big planes make their bombing run through angry puffs of German ack-ack, then make sharp turns and streak for the Channel coast, escorted by swarms of fighters above and below them. On all sides of us, the big guns began to rumble.”

Bryan continued to report on the war in France. On September 12, 1944, while covering the advance of General George Patton’s Third Army toward Germany, Bryan and two other journalists received a tip that some German troops were preparing to surrender to the American forces. Bryan and his colleagues raced toward Châtillon-sur-Seine, where some 20,000 German troops reportedly were ready to surrender. Near the town of Chaumont, they ran into a German roadblock, which opened fire on the jeep carrying the three American journalists, wounding Bryan in the left calf. “Instead of covering the surrender of 20,000 German troops, I covered the surrender of three journalists,” Bryan later said of the incident.

Bryan was sent to a military hospital affiliated with the Stalag IX-C prisoner of war camp in Obermassfeld, northeast of Frankfurt. He was able to send letters home to his family, informing them of his fate. Shortly after Christmas, Bryan was transferred to Oflag 64, a prisoner of war camp in Szubin, Poland.  On January 21, 1945, Oflag 64 held a total of 1,471 prisoners of war, mostly American officers captured in North Africa and France. As the Soviet army drew closer, the Germans evacuated most of the prisoners, marching them toward Germany. Around 200 sick or wounded prisoners remained, including Bryan, who was liberated when the Soviet soldiers occupied the camp on January 22, 1945.

With the help of a Soviet correspondent for Izvestia, Bryan was able to cable home stories to The Atlanta Journal beginning in February 1945. But it wasn’t until March that he was able to make his way to Odessa, and then to Paris. In June Bryan finally was able to be flown home, where he landed on June 25, 1945.

In 1947, Bryan received the Medal of Freedom, America’s highest award for civilians, from NATO Supreme Commander General Dwight D. Eisenhower. Eisenhower remembered with fondness the impact Bryan’s reporting on D-Day had on the morale of America and the free world. William Wright Bryan passed away on February 15, 1991, having lived a full life in service of his nation and his passion—journalism. It was a life well lived, and his deeds will never be forgotten.

William Wright Bryant receiving the Medal of Freedom from Dwight Eisenhower, 1947.

Today, some 79 years later, America finds itself in a conflict every bit as important as the one covered by men and women like William Wright Bryan. This conflict does not involve warring armies, but rather warring ideas. It is a conflict which deserves the same dedication to the craft of journalism as shown by Bryan and others in covering the Second World War. The stakes are every bit as high, because like the struggle against Nazi Germany, a defeat in the current conflict has existential consequences.

The war I am speaking about is the ongoing struggle against Russophobia. This disease of the mind has infected the United States and its citizens for some time now and has been given a new boost through the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine. I recently returned from a 26-day tour of Russia. One of the primary goals of this trip was to gain a better insight and understanding of the Russian nation and the Russian people, and that which defines and guides them—the “Russian Soul.” Given the level of animosity which exists today in the United States about all things Russian, one could liken my journey as an excursion into an ideological war zone, where the reality of Russia clashed with the prejudices of the collective West.

I was challenged at every turn to explain to a friendly yet skeptical Russian audience why the notion of improved US-Russian relations was worth the considerable effort it would take to turn such a theory into reality. I participated in 15 town-hall style meetings where I was asked questions about a wide variety of issues, including US-Russian relations. I likewise participated in more than 30 television and radio appearances where the hosts subjected me to the same. All these events were broadcast to the public, making my every word available for public scrutiny. As someone who earnestly advocates for fact-based discussion, dialogue, and debate on difficult issues to better understand the underlying issues involved, and to help guide the participants to an equitable solution, I welcomed the opportunity to participate in these interactions, and looked forward to the opportunity to continue the discussion, dialogue, and debate with an American audience upon my return.

I was approached by an individual employed by the local Hearst-owned Newspaper, who indicated that they were interested in interviewing me for a possible column to be published in that newspaper. This individual had previously reached out to me back in February of this year, at the height of the controversy surrounding my on-again, off-again invitation to speak at the “Rage Against the War Machine” rally in Washington, DC. At that time this individual showed little interest in the issues underpinning the rally—namely opposition to the grip the military-industrial complex has on American politics. Instead, the individual was focused on my past conviction, and the question of why people should be willing to listen to someone who had been accused and convicted of such crimes. We spoke for more than an hour, during which time I forcefully pushed back against this person’s fact-free narrative. I overwhelmed him with data points that challenged and contradicted the basis of this narrative, and this individual opted not to write a column at that time.

Upon my return to the United States from Russia, however, this individual and the corporate masters who guided him, had apparently had a change of mind. I received a call where the individual indicated that my visit to Russia had renewed interest in this story, which was cast as “local personality in the news” in terms of its editorial direction. While I have a history with the newspaper in question that dates to the Iraq War that sends alarm bells sounding whenever they come knocking, I decided to give this person an opportunity to redeem his paper’s checkered past. My country was locked in an ideological war which is linked to its national security, given the direct relationship between Russophobia and stalled nuclear arms control talks. While I didn’t expect either the writer or the editors of this newspaper to have undergone a complete transformation, I was hoping that they would, collectively, be willing to at least engage in the process of debate, discussion, and dialogue necessary to overcome the prejudice inherent in Russophobia.

I was wrong. Living up to the standards for yellow journalism perfected by William Randolf Hearst, the writer churned out a hit piece filled with lies, distortions, half-truths and misconceptions. Several things became clear upon publication of this piece—first, nothing I said mattered. The piece had been written before the individual had picked up the phone to speak with me. Second, the individual had not done any research about any aspect of the story, whether on Russia, or about my past conviction. The individual exhibited no knowledge of Russian reality, and no desire to hear anything that did not fit the preconceived parameters of the narrative his editors had pre-approved. Nor did this individual have anything more than the most rudimentary understanding of my criminal case—when I challenged him about flaws in their framing of the story, and suggested that they contact the prosecutor directly, they did not even know the name of the prosecutor, even though a simple Google search would reveal his name and how to reach him.

When I picked up the phone to speak to this individual, I had hoped that he would have had the same kind of dedication to journalism that was shown by William Wright Bryan. I had invited him to climb aboard the modern-day version of the “Snooty,” to have a birds-eye perch on the ideological conflict of our time, to participate in a struggle bigger than all of us, which could well define the fate of the world.

This person opted out.

This is why I do not mention either this person’s name, or the paper they are affiliated with. History should not record the names of people and organizations of such base character. They are small thinkers, unable to grasp the bigger picture. And like all small thinkers, they will be forgotten, the stories they write destined to do little more than line the bottoms of bird cages.

The American people should forever remember William Wright Bryant and the work he did in the name of journalism. Nor should they forget people like Cynthia Pooler, an Albany, New York-based journalist who hosts a YouTube channel, “Issues that Matter.” The struggle against the disease of Russophobia, and my efforts to overcome it through fact-based analysis, is very much an issue that matters. Cynthia’s initial show on this issue has garnered 90,000 views in four days. One could only imagine the kind of positive feedback that could have been generated if the practitioners of yellow journalism had taken a different path.

We shall never know.

Cynthia Pooler

But what I do know is this—there is an army of good, open-minded journalists such as Cynthia Pooler who are interested in fact-based discussions about difficult issues. And if America is going to have any chance to overcome the scourge of ignorance perpetrated by Russophobia, their message is going to need to be seen and heard by as many people as possible.

American journalism is at war with itself. As such, it is only fitting that on this 79^th anniversary of D-Day, we not only offer a salute to William Wright Bryan, but also those like Cynthia Pooler who are not afraid to climb aboard their version of “Snooty,” putting their lives and reputations on the line to investigate a story to better report it. They should be honored as the true practitioners of a profession that, when properly and professionally executed, gives meaning to the notion of a free press, a free people, and a free society.

Please support Waging Peace, Scott’s film and campaign for nuclear disarmament.