 Hi, I'm Mark Williams associate professor of film and media studies at Dartmouth College and director of the media ecology project at Dartmouth. We work to create a virtuous cycle of access to archival content, and are delighted to be working in close participation with the National Archives regarding their one of a kind collection of a really important and yet fugitive archive of materials produced and distributed by the US Information Agency during the Cold War. I'm delighted to be sharing this panel and facilitate conversation with the participants, each of whom have agreed to participate in our project about us a activities, each of whom have deep knowledge and expertise regarding different parts of the world. About not only us a activities but but a great deal of film and media history. Our first major intervention into this work was last month with panelists, Professor Hansang Kim from Azure University, who co sponsored with me and greatly facilitated an important conference, just last month in March of 2021 called excavated footage that involves really brilliant participants from the US and from different parts of East Asia. So it's a great pleasure to commemorate that work and also to put forward new work and new associations regarding these extraordinary scholarly and archival opportunities. So thank you very much for attending. And I know that you will enjoy and learn a great deal from our panelists. First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the organizers of this conference. I'm greatly honored to be part of this historic event. Today, I will talk about the two series of newsreels that the US Information Service in Korea made and distributed during the 1950s, 60s and early 70s. I'm currently working on my second book manuscript on archival approaches to US government films based on my doctoral dissertation about USIS Korea's film propaganda activities during the Cold War. I conducted archival research at US National Archive for several months from 2009 to 2012 and collected more than 200 film items produced in South Korea by either USIS or US Army. Today's topic is on the transitional period of the late 1960s and early 70s. That's the USIS Korea's radical change in propaganda policy embodied in the two representative newsreels series, Liberty News and Screen Report. In July 1966, USIS Korea requested the Regional Research Center of USIS Manila to undertake a study on Liberty News and compare it with South Korea's government newsreels series, Daehan News. It was a pressing task for USIS Korea since they were threatened with a curtailment in their budget for newsreels production by the US Congress. A survey was conducted in 10 big South Korean cities, interviewing 2,074 moviegoers aged 16 and over until October the same year. Being conscious of the US Congress, the survey reporters suggested that, quote, Liberty News be continued and strengthened, unquote, in a summary of the result. However, a detailed research results clearly indicate that Liberty News did not arouse audience interest as differentiated from Daehan News. So this is a part of the summary, which says, quote, relatively few moviegoers were able to articulate perceived difference between Liberty and Daehan News, unquote. It also says, quote, only 30% of moviegoers expressed a preference for one or the other, unquote, and Liberty News was more popular in larger cities, whereas Daehan News was more popular in smaller cities. This result does not seem to have justified the reason for the existence of the longstanding weekly film series, Liberty News. Therefore, despite some positive evaluation in the summary, it is highly probable that this report was an unfavorable factor for the retention of Liberty News. The series officially ended on June 1, 1967, with issue number 721 as its last release. During the 15 years of service, Liberty News was the key product of USIS Korea's film production, Liberty Production. Liberty Production hired South Korean staff members such as directors, cinematographers, recordists, and editors. Liberty News was in full Korean and had this Korean version Liberty Bell image as the logo for opening and ending credits. Each issue comprised of two major sections, domestic news and foreign news. Each section usually had three to four news items that had headlines on intertitles. Liberty News, however, fails to construct its own uniqueness and originality compared to its South Korean counterpart Daehan News. In fact, in the 1950s, Daehan News was falling behind Liberty News in information quantity and news quality. USIS Korea at the time had its own studios in Sangnam since 1952, which was superior to any South Korean film production in its budget, equipment, and resources. With this environment, USIS Korea's Liberty Production trained and developed high-quality person power. What overturned this situation was the rapid development of South Korean domestic film industry in the 1960s, as well as the then Park Jung-hee government's emphasis on film propaganda. Several filmmakers and specialists who were trained by USIS moved to commercial industry or to the South Korean government for a piece of public information and each succeeding body, the Ministry of Public Information. The Park Jung-hee Hunter that started with the military coup in 1961 established the National Film Production Center under the Ministry of Public Information and sponsored newsreel and documentary filmmaking. The 1966 USIS survey result that says few moviegoers could notice difference between Liberty and Daehan News reflects this change in media environment. The year 1967 saw the end of Liberty News and the closure of the Liberty Production film studios in Sangnam. This meant that USIS Korea would not stick to the propaganda policy they adopted by then. By then, they showed Liberty News to the random audiences who visited commercial cinemas. By then, they operated mobile projection units that were dispatched from USIS Korea's local branch in big cities to rural areas and schools that did not have cinemas in town. Liberty News and other USIS films were in and of themselves attraction and therefore were distributed widely and randomly. However, the rapid growth of South Korean film industry in both production and distribution contributed to the refinement of audience taste and newsreels like Liberty News no longer remained attraction. USIS Korea on the occasion of the end of Liberty News put in more efforts on focus interaction and face-to-face opportunities than unfocused random propaganda activities. The 1968 film American Cultural Center and Community provides a good example of such face-to-face opportunities. It introduces four American cultural centers in Seoul, Busan, Daegu and Gwangju. Those centers were equipped with books, book and film libraries, assembly halls and meeting rooms. These centers had changed their scope of activity from direct and popular events to quote indirect practices toward individuals and groups who could exercise influences on the public unquote. The film shows the location of a new center of gravity within the social sphere. When depicting academic events such as Americana Symposium, the camera captures the serious expressions, facial expressions among the attendees who seem to be college students and intellectuals. In designing, I mean, in designating the target audience of film screenings, it appears that more emphasis was placed on intellectuals and opinion leaders than previously. In August 1968, a major newspaper company Donga Ilbo and USIS Korea co-sponsored an international conference titled Community Action in Changing World, during which was shown an American documentary to touch a child. After the successful screening of the film, there was another show in the House of Deputy Director of USIS Korea at a time at the request of participants of the conference who wanted to invite eminent persons from various circles. This case shows the direct influence of USIS Korea film activities on opinion leaders of South Korea. After Sangnam Studio's closure, a few liberty production films were produced in Seoul. They were shown in USIS branch showing rooms and individuals and institutions who had screening equipment and facilities used loan service. Therefore, films of USIS Korea were no longer random attractions, but rather special products for specific target audiences. The follow-up newsreel series of liberty production was titled Screen Report and ran from 1968 to 1972. It took a so-called magazine format that had only three to four news items per issue with in-depth reports. We can presume that Screen Report rather targeted those intellectuals and college students who personally visited the agency's library and viewing rooms, eager to learn from the foreign knowledge repository. Indeed, there is no record that Screen Report competed with Daehan News in commercial cinemas. This local USIS history leads us to thinking of the USIS film material's signification differently, context by context. In South Korea, Liberty News provided audiences with cinematic experiences at the latest until mid-to-late 1960s. And in the era of Screen Report, USIS Korea film did not have the same meaning for the audience anymore. Thank you very much. Hello, dear colleagues. It's a great pleasure for me to be in your company today to discuss some of the implications of the opening up of access to moving images from the US National Archives, in particular those from the United States Information Agency. I hope to provide a view from Africa on this initiative. I should start by saying that I, like some of you, have not had a chance to look at them closely and will therefore be speaking more in general terms. So I should also say that having worked as a film curator in Washington DC at the Smithsonian Institution in the late 1990s and early 2000s, and having done research at the Library of Congress, and therefore having some knowledge also of the holding of the Smithsonian Archives, I often walk by NARA on Pennsylvania Avenue, wondering what they might have in terms of moving images that may relate to Africa, to their history of the relationship between the continent and the US. Indeed, one of the first outcomes of these initiatives towards accessibility opens up the very possibility of standing for its own sake in its own positivity, the relationship between Africa and the US via the moving image. It must be said, this has not often been the case. Indeed, histories of the moving image in Africa often tend to emphasize the Africa-Europe axis, in particular because at the end of the 19th century, when the moving image emerged, Europe was occupying or beginning to occupy much of the African continent. As we often say, the moving image came to Africa in the suitcase of colonialism. Thus, we often look at the history of cinema in Africa through that axis by examining the role in particular of the major colonial empires in cinema on the continent. So I think of Britain and France, but also Portugal, Italy, Belgium, Spain, etc. I personally had a chance to study the work of the Lumiere brothers in Africa, for instance, as well as study the role of the French and British colonial states in the advent of the cinema on the continent through the discourses, the institutions, their policies, the film works, etc. In that sense, one of the research questions the present moment raises for me is whether some of the patterns found in the colonial states cinematic intervention in Africa. Parallel to those of the United States. This is an important question, of course, because their presence overlap. It would be strange if there were no resonances. Indeed, even if we were to do the USIA as our point of entry, in terms of the cinematic presence of the US state in Africa, there's nothing yet to tell you that this was the first. The fact that it was created in the era of the colonization in the post World War two era intimates that they would be conversations competition. At once adversarial and potentially collaborative relationships in the US and other colonizing countries. Indeed, the post war era means both the decline of European imperialism as we know it, and the rise of both the US and Soviet Union has the main superpower so would go on to set many of the terms of discourse on the for the second half of the 20th century. Similarly, just as culture and the moving image were used at the service of colonialism throughout the first 70 years of the existence of the medium. Likewise, the moving image would be deployed throughout another grand narrative of the 10th century, that of the ideological battle between liberal capitalist and socialist communist product also known as the Cold War. So the research question would be there for what different, for example, exist between cultural diplomacy and colonial cinema. Do the two terms in do the two terms envelope really different states or sets of realities or, for instance, do they envelope different sets of practices. If so, where do they meet, where do they part ways. We are preparing this text a couple of minutes ago I took a quick look at the Wikipedia entry on the USA and found out that his project was spelled out as that is one of the elements of his project. He said he was written that the USA existed as much to provide a view of the world to the United States as it did to give a view to give the world a view of America. Now this for those of you that will study colonial cinema reminds us reminds us of of course the Empire marketing board mantra. We start to make the colonize the colonies know to know to Britain and Britain known to the colonies. So the beginning of overlaps already seems to be to exist here. That's it to these are also opens up other questions. For example, how would we insert the work of the USA in the long during of the relationship between Africa and the US through the lens of the moving image whether state, state or not. We know for example that one of the first moving image apparatus is to make it to Africa, the South Africa in particular, was Edison's Kinetoscope of course remade by R. W. Paul. So in 1895. We know also that William K. L. Dickson affirm the ball war for example in around 1899, writing a book called the biograph at war. We know that DW Griffith during his biograph days made a film called the Zulu's heart in 1908. We know that President. The field of Roswell was in Africa in 1910. Of course, no Hollywood participation in the colonial if we steam till today in many ways. We know also of course of the participation of US businesses slash philanthropic institutions to colonial cinema via missionary initiative think of Carnegie and Rockefeller et cetera. In other words, an entire history can be threaded in which the USA becomes, but one additional step so to speak in the relationship between Africa and the US from the standpoint of moving in. In a sense, one of the questions that one would seek to answer would be what exactly were some of the specificity that the USA in the long history of the US cinematic presence in Africa. Naturally, Hollywood is the elephant in the room and what might be the relationship between the USA and Hollywood in Africa in the period from 1953 to 1999. To what extent were they always congruent. Now when incongruent to what extent was such incongruent resonance with all the colonial states relationship to Hollywood. We must also remember that the lifespan of the USA coincide with important historical milestones for the African continent. And of course it does include colonialism the experience of colonialism decolonization obviously independence, nation building continent building various political ideological experiments, ranging from liberal democracy, the one party system socialism, African socialism apartheid and Africanism developmentalism neoliberalism et cetera. This raises a number of questions. What was the place of Africa in the USA global hegemony, like was how did African countries strategically use the USA for their own benefits. In order to navigate the complexities of both Cold War politics and decolonization politics. How did this work at the level of the moving image in the training of filmmaking personnel in the screening of USA films in Africa, how did the USA enable all for store this political experiment. How did it position itself in relation to the debate. In many ways the history of African cinema is in part the history or also the history of cultural diplomacy in Africa, whether through friend Britain, friend Britain, Germany, etc. In that context, therefore what role the American culture diplomacy play in the emergence of African cinema. Did it play a role in the fact that some African filmmakers and personnel will train in the US film schools for example. Central involvement with Hollywood, for example, in the very existence of African cinema in its growth or lack thereof. What relation to the USA have with African cultural institutions, cinematic institution, think of the cartoon film festival in Tunisia or the pan African film festival of what I do go in Burkina Faso. What relations with the World Festival of Black Arts in Dacar in 1966. It would be great to find out what role the USA played in the involvement of artists who would make it to that car. I'm thinking of Duke Ellington, Louis Armstrong, Josephine Baker, for example, and others at the invitation of Leopold Sengler. We know that William Greaves, the great documentary African American documentaries filmed in 1966 festival. What more can be found about this. What of the Pan-Af in our years in 1969. What of the Lagos Pan-African Festival in 1977, with the USA able to shape some of the ideas there, or conversely some of the ideas they're able to shape the USA. These are some of the ideas that I will investigate. But then, what kind of film did the USA make in and about Africa? To what ends? Who is involved on the African side? What were the films about? How were the films received in Africa? How were they received in the US? What kind of production, exhibition, circulation, research and histories could be written in the process? How could they help complexify our understanding of the history of Africa, of cinema in Africa, the history of African cinema, and of course of America's own cinematic history in Africa. In short, this may well be an important event in shared historiography, making it possible for us to understand additional aspects of African and American film history. It may also help us develop lateral methodologies to understand the complex forms and modalities through the moving image, operative, let's say, throughout important moments of its history. I should end, of course, by the personal narrative, so to speak, because of course the project is a personal interest to me because I have firsthand experience of the USA's actions in Burkina Faso. When I was a student of English at the University of Wale-Dubu, and I'm a graduate student of English, that is, so between the late 1980s and early 1990s. In that context, I was able to participate in activities related to the USIA cultural diplomacy, where it's designated institution, USIS. It's in fact one of the first places where I read my very first poems, for example. So this involvement, including attending film screenings, the film screening they organized, involved borrowing films from their library. In fact, my very baby steps of film programming may have started there because as a leader of the English language society, I used to program some films there. There's, of course, watching weekly US news through ABC news, for example, the Gulf War, I cannot think the Gulf War without thinking that experience at USA is. The first Gulf War that is in 1991, the election of Bill Clinton, for example, which we followed till, I don't know, early, early, late, late, late, late night, around 2, 3 a.m. Attending, for example, cultural events, think of the visit of writer Alice Walker, singer Tracy Chapman, director Dan Singleton at Vestraco. I think of accessing books and articles as part of studying for my American studies major with a focus on African American studies. I think of taking courses with full right visiting professors, watching American film that the festival. So there's a panoply, in other words, of the event and activities that one was able to take part in the framework of the USA that makes visible, so to speak, element of the cultural apparatus of the USA in the single African country. One can only wonder how much more it's possible to understand on the continental scale in more than 50 other countries. How much money could be produced by accessing the organizations on films and documents and a global scale. So these are some of the reflections that this initiative inspires in me. Therefore, very much looking forward to taking part in this fantastic conference. And, you know, just discovering more in the process. Hello everyone. My name is Yuka Tsuchiya. I'm going to present on the USIS films in Japan. I'll focus on some 50 USIS films produced in Japan by Japanese filmmakers under the supervision of the Allied occupation forces. Japan was occupied by the Allied powers from August 1955 to April 1952. And most of the occupation forces was actually the US Army. The civil information and education section CIE of the occupation forces was in charge of USIS film showing. So the films were called the CIE films instead of USIS films in occupied Japan. The US Army brought 1,300 mobile 16mm projectors to Japan, which were formally used for the training and entertainment of US soldiers. Those projectors were manufactured by the national company in Chicago, and the company's logo, Nattoko, was printed on the body of the projectors. So the Japanese audiences nicknamed the films Nattoko films. The films were selected and imported by the Army's New York Field Office. And the first nine titles of the films were wartime films produced by OWI and ICAA, the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs. From 1948 until the end of the occupation, more than 400 CIE films were imported to Japan. The year 1948 was a watershed in the US Overseas Information Program. A Smith-Mundt Act or the US Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 marked the new era of US information policies overseas. This is the list of some 400 CIE films shown in occupied Japan, included in my 2009 book titled Constructing Pro-US Japan. Free films showing by the occupation forces were greatly welcomed by the Japanese people because they were starving for entertainment and cultural activities during the long war. This is the list of some 50 titles of CIE films which were locally produced in Japan by Japanese filmmakers under the supervision and instruction of the CIE. Why did they produce CIE films locally? First, the Department of State's Overseas Film Section encouraged local production, both for the reasons of effectiveness and cost reduction. Second, the occupation forces needed films portraying democratic reforms carried out under their supervision. Third, Japanese educators wanted films which fit in the Japanese context. I will introduce three examples of locally produced films, Bent with the Ears, Men Who Fish and Japanese Bride in America. The first film, Bent with the Ears, released in 1949 was a 20-minute fiction. Aizaku, a traditional Japanese husband, always complains about his wives participating in rural co-op meetings. His wife, Omitsu, is a quiet but spiritually independent woman. She is actively involved in the co-op activities to modernize and democratize the village. Aizaku's mother helps her by taking care of her children. Aizaku later changes his mind and becomes a good husband, cooperating with his wife's good cause. The second film, Men Who Fish, was filmed by Okazaki Kozo, who would later become one of the leading cameraman of Japan. He was unemployed after the war and Shu Taguchi, manager of a Japanese newsreel company, asked him if he was interested in shooting CIA films. It was a dream job for young Okazaki because CIA provided plenty of films and an American camera. He had no intention of shooting an educational film, but actually the film was intended to teach Japanese fishermen about newly established fisheries cooperative. In 2004, I interviewed Okazaki and three film technicians who adapted and printed CIA films in occupied Japan. The third film, Japanese Bride in America, was not produced locally in the exact sense, but it was produced for local audiences in Japan. During the occupation, so-called interracial marriage between American GIs and Japanese women and the children born between them were stigmatized both in Japan and the US. Some of the Japanese women who accompanied their husbands to the US had returned home because of misadaptation and discrimination. The US government decided to produce a film to portray a happy international couple, and Walter and Miyako, who were a real-life couple, were chosen. After the occupation, the CIA films were called the USIS films and managed by the American cultural centers located in major cities in Japan. The old opening title, that is, CIA Presents, was deleted and the new one, USIS Presents, was inserted. The three films introduced in my presentation were all included in the 1959 USIS catalog in Japan, which means they were shown at least for eight years after the occupation. The locally produced USIS films complicate the meaning of state-sponsored films because they represent not only US government's political objectives, but also local filmmakers' agency.