A Framework: Background of Post-Holocaust Communication

Communication is one of the most powerful components of a nation’s identity. It fosters the relationship between the people and their country, creating a shared common identity among citizens. When viewed internationally, communication reflects the image of a nation; it influences the perceptions of its local inhabitants, while also projecting an image to the outside world. Failures in this communication system can often occur and result in grave impacts on the people and the nation as a whole. This paper intends to explore how history and identity are constructed through communication. In this case, we focus primarily on the communication issues within Germany and we identify how the country’s biggest and most historical event, the Holocaust, is communicated today. Our main focal points in Germany’s communication system will be German media and national education.  First, we will illustrate the background of this subject, how the Holocaust became a common topic of discourse in Germany and how it was initially perceived, as well as the responses and perceptions German citizens today still feel about the Holocaust and how it has distorted the national image. We will then explore the responses and distortions of the media and broadcasting system and how German and international media have depicted the Holocaust and influenced public opinion. Next, it is important to look at the challenges to the country’s educational system and how education is responsible for teaching and shaping history and national identity. Lastly, we develop implications for these communication issues, and apply them to an international context for future recommendations. We will primarily analyze this study through Silvio Waisbord with supplementary analysis from Karim H. Karim, and Manuel Castells.

Background and History of Post-Holocaust Communication

Post World War II Holocaust communication was primarily a political issue and there was little discourse about it in the public sphere. In the early post-war years, Germans did not confront individual guilt and collective wrongdoing; instead, they repressed it. The main controversy with post-Holocaust communication in Germany during this time was the issue of responsibility, guilt, and the nation having to “come to terms” with their Nazi past. The controversial phrase “coming to terms” became popular within the Federal Republic of Germany in the beginning of the 1950’s and was used to address Germany’s responsibility to deal with its Nationalist Socialist Dictatorship and its crimes (Mayerhofer, 2009). However, the term was extremely controversial and raised various questions, such as, “Can the past be ‘come to terms with?’” and “Should it be come to terms with?” It is arguably more reasonable for a new democracy to leave the past alone (Mayerhofer, 2009). The President responded to these questions in a speech commemorating the 40th anniversary of the German capitulation. He stated, “It is not a question of coming to terms with the past. That cannot be done. The past cannot be retroactively changed or made undone. But whoever shuts his eyes to the past will be blind in the present” (Mayerhofer, 2009). In order for Germany to have proper communication about the Holocaust through media, education, or simply public discourse, the nation must first openly recognize its past and use communication as a way to reshape its nation’s identity instead of evading it. 

Much of the German narrative about the subject of the Holocaust was very limited throughout the country. For decades, the nation remained in a conspiracy of silence. It wasn’t until the broadcast of the TV series “Holocaust” in 1979 that public discourse began to emerge. This TV series sparked a transformation throughout the nation, changing the way in which Holocaust memory would be preserved and initiating the first step to Holocaust remembrance and incorporation into the historical and national German identity. One of the primary aftermaths of the TV series was the conversation of “remembering and forgetting” and “learning from the past.” These key concepts inspired much national debate and were responsible for citizens to have a radical and direct confrontation with their country’s past (Markovits, 2006). Public rejections of responsibility, liability, and other forms of mitigating German guilt were now in the forefront of public discourse, and the negative portrayal of Germany was projected globally.

The rise in Holocaust communication became more and more prevalent as the country began to construct memorials and museums in commemoration. It additionally led to the inclusion of Holocaust remembrance in the German educational system, one that was previously ignored and neglected in the textbooks and curriculum. Public discourse on the Nazi past further intensified after the German unification in 1990. German’s reactions towards their nation’s history became more public and it was evident that many citizens still harbored conflicting views regarding the emerging attention of Holocaust remembrance. Right-wing extremism and anti-Semitism have steadily increased since 1990. One survey found that 23 percent of the population are openly anti-Semitic and about 30-40 percent harbor hidden anti-Semitism (Urban, 2008). In 2005, 48 percent of Germans said Jews still “talk too much” about the “Shoah” and 65 percent would like to stop dealing with the years 1933-1945 altogether (Urban, 2008).

Background of Post-Holocaust Education

With the inclusion of the Holocaust now in the German educational system, the attitudes of the younger generations who were not around during that time were largely influenced by public discourse and felt detached from their nation’s past. Although the subject of the Holocaust is now present in the history books of the German school system, the teaching of the subject still lacks conviction. Scholars argue that the Holocaust is not accurately represented in the educational system and teachers fail to bridge a connection between the students and their nation’s past. This lack of substantial Holocaust education further leads to misunderstanding and misrepresentation about German history and responsibility in the event, best summarized by scholar Susanne Urban (2008) of the Jewish Political Studies Review: 

The mixture of a lack of knowledge, feeling fed up with the subject, and the discomfort many students experience toward it leads, together with the public discourse, to anti-Semitic stereotypes, comparisons between Israelis and Nazis and between Israel and Nazi Germany, and to the belief that Jews profit from the Holocaust.

 The deficient education and communication about the Holocaust during the decades of silence has resulted in a skewed perception of German history by its citizens overtime. Most Germans now believe there is too much talking and teaching about the Holocaust and want to set a limit. At the same time, mainstream Germany has produced a fairytale about the role of society at large during the Nazi period. In addition, the result of deeply rooted German narratives, media portrayals and myths regarding the nation’s history is that less than ten percent of Germans believe that their relatives were members of the Nazi party (Markovits, 2006). This desire to be removed from responsibility and guilt has played a major role in how the Holocaust has been communicated within the country. Decades of silence have contributed to the recent rise in discourse about the subject, but the way in which the Holocaust is communicated and taught today is still being challenged.