How does the film Lee present journalism as a product of society and the very thing that shapes it?

Introduction

“Whatever we know about our society, or indeed about the world in which we live, we know through the mass media.” (Luhmann, 2000,p.6) When hand-written letters first began travelling around the world via trade routes, they became the first source of global communication. They paved the way for the mass media, which emerged through the penny press - small papers that began in the 1830s, written for and read by working-class audiences to broaden their access to information. Soon after, political parties and unions created their own papers to cover the topics that suited their agendas, promote their values and shape society.  This is the mass media dynamic: the media influences the thinking of numerous individuals, but is itself influenced by society. This dynamic is explored through the biographical film Lee. Directed by Ellen Kuras and released in 2024,  it follows the story of Lee Miller. Born on April 23, 1902, in New York, Lee Miller began modelling at a young age; she was the subject of her father’s photography before she stumbled into the publisher of Vogue and became one of the most sought-after models in New York. Then, deciding one day that she would ‘rather take a picture than be one,’ she started her photography career. During the outbreak of the Second World War, she became a freelance photographer and correspondent for Vogue, accredited to the U.S Army. In her Savile Row uniform, she joined the U.S troops overseas after D-Day, and was one of only a few women combat photojournalists to cover the front-line war in Europe. The war dramatically altered society, creating increased government control and propaganda efforts, which played a role in shaping journalism. The British government established the Ministry of Information, which was responsible for issuing ‘National Propaganda’ and censoring the press. The Ministry worked from the Senate House, where a press room was set up, “On a dais extending right round the room are fifty to sixty telephone boxes, most of them with direct lines to Fleet Street Offices.” (Riley, 1940, p.44) The Ministry also identified women’s magazines - Vogue in particular - as key outlets. Men were away, serving in the forces, while women carried the responsibility of family life and turned to the pages of magazines for information. Lee Miller utilised Vogue’s power, despite gender bias, censorship and other societal norms; she documented the truth. She captured photos of the experiences of war and the horrors of concentration camps, which were then cabled to Vogue and became partially responsible for shaping public understanding about war and its human cost. This essay aims to critically explore how journalism is in many ways a product of society, but also the very thing that alters society. More specifically, this essay will explore how the ideologies of censorship and masculism, within biographical journalism films such as Lee, act as huge societal constraints that individual journalists must tackle to prompt change. Through a detailed analysis of historical events, the role of the media and the role of individual journalists, it will highlight the ways journalists worked with and against societal norms during crucial moments in history to shape public understanding. 

Journalism and censorship in a time of war 

To understand how journalism functions as a product of society and as a force that shapes it, it is essential to analyse the societal context prior to and during Miller’s time as a war photographer. “Journalism plays an important, possibly essential part in the collective life of a community or nation. In consequence, the press itself has to be governed.” (McQuail,2013, p.14) The British government established the Ministry of Information during the war, which was responsible for issuing ‘National Propaganda’, and censoring military information in the press. Newspapers were issued with ‘Defence Notices’ which outlined topics considered harmful to the war effort, such as military movements and weather reports. The press were then invited to submit any stories that might be covered by these guidelines to be scrutinised by the censor. If suitable for publication, it would be returned with an official stamp, while any changes deemed necessary were marked in blue pencil. The government appropriated and controlled all forms of communication. “I cannot help having grave doubts whether the Press … realise the implications of the drastic and detailed regulations which have been drafted. If they do, all I can personally say is God help them and this country.” (Mclaine, 2021, p.42) The vast outpour of propaganda and manipulation of truth caused the public to become sceptical and dismissive of written reports about the atrocities. Journalism, though often referred to as the ‘fourth estate’ due to its watchdog role and influence on society, became subordinate to the government and, with that, society itself. 

Within the film, Lee is portrayed as a resilient female protagonist who challenges societal norms and fights the battle of censorship. Accredited to the U.S forces, as a war correspondent, she documented sites of destruction and loss; most prominently the Buchenwald and Dachau Concentration Camps. As illustrated in the film, they were sites of execution, torture and piles of bodies. As Miller, played by Kate Winslet, captures these moments, the camera lingers on her face, allowing viewers to understand the emotional toll this had and the trauma it led to. With every harrowing photo of an emaciated prisoner near death, she captured the truth and the juxtaposition between her journalism and the dismissed wartime propaganda. ‘I implore you to believe this is true,’ is what she wrote in a telegram to her editor, Audrey Withers at Vogue. However, the government’s control over the media extended to maintaining the morale of citizens. In the film, Miller can be seen destroying her photographs after realising they hadn’t been published, while Withers commented that “the ministry thought they might disturb people.” (Lee, 2022) The photos were later published in American Vogue with the headline ‘Believe It’. By resisting censorship, Miller’s photos served as irrefutable evidence of the horrors of war, and transformed public understanding - the press shifted from being a disregarded outlet of propaganda to a source of truth which demanded people's attention. Even in contemporary societies, her work demands to be seen. Holiday and Cressman (2016, p.23) said: 

When we think of the aerial photos, the mountainous terrain, the washed-out beaches, the frosty battlefields, the skies filled with paratroopers, the concentration camps, and the last fallen soldier - all of which exemplified the courage, fear, heroism, violence, humanity and atrocities of World War Two - it is directly attributed to the skilled photojournalists and photo editors who captured a monumental part of history.

Feminist journalism as social disruption

Figure 1: Lee Miller in Hitler's bathtub

Lee Miller’s most famous photo has been recreated within this film. The one where she took a bath in Hitler’s tub. That day she had been among the first to enter the newly liberated Dachau camp which she described as ‘great dusty spaces that had been trampled by so many thousands of condemned feet - feet which ached and shuffled and stamped away the cold and shifted to relieve the pain and finally became useless except to walk them to the death chamber’, she witnessed and photographed the horrors that those people had been subjected to. Then later that day carried that dust on her boots into Hitler’s seized apartment and onto his white bath mat. That same day, in a bunker in Berlin, Hitler and his wife, Eva Braun, took their own lives. The photo became symbolic of the end of the war and change. 

The LA Times wrote, ‘In the context of the film, it all makes sense: after witnessing the human toll of Hitler’s murderous wake, it seems apt to humiliate or dominate him in this specifically feminine way’. The film conveys the ideology of feminism through a female gaze and an emphasis on how Lee defied societal expectations through the courage and determination to navigate the then male-dominated world. Before World War II, and due to prominent social expectations, women were mostly homemakers.“Women faced multiple obstacles to entering the professions (apart from nursing and teaching) in the early twentieth century: notably the lack of educational opportunities, the prevailing view that a woman’s place was in the home and a fierce resistance from male colleagues.” (Lonsdale, 2016, p.230). Journalism at the time reflected societal views on gender and reinforced traditional gender roles. During the war, over five million women were sent to work, and some became journalists. Although they received backlash due to being ‘too emotional’ or ‘not smart enough’ to report on the conflict and Lee Miller’s entry into photojournalism was no exception. Miller had to navigate and resist gender norms to be taken seriously, hence the name Lee - a gender-neutral abbreviation of her name Elizabeth, which allowed her press accreditation on the frontline. 

In many respects, her life before World War Two had been defined by her femininity. When she was 19, she was a high-fashion model, and before that, she was the muse and subject of her father’s (Theodore Miller’s) photos, where she was forced to pose nude from as young as eight years old.“Theodore relished the opportunity to do as many nude studies as he could schedule.” (Burke, 2005) Prior to this, when Lee was seven and staying with a family friend, she was raped and infected with gonorrhea. The film's narrative explores these themes and subverts Laura Mulvey’s theory of the male gaze, allowing Miller to reclaim her narrative. Her use of photojournalism and mark of femininity in the bathtub, which contrasts with a space associated with one of history’s most violent male leaders, portrays her strength as a woman in confronting and surviving war. Holiday and Cressman (2026, p.2)wrote: 

The process that brought the war front to the home front required the involvement of a number of different people, but at its very foundational level, it required the mutualistic partnership of the photojournalist who waded into action and wielded the new device that made the war ‘journalistic, emotive, and episodic’ and the editor who managed the assignments, chose the most representative photos, often wrote the captions, and handled the logistics of transmitting the images.

Miller’s editor, Audrey Withers, also utilised her role as a female journalist to spark change. Writing in British Vogue’s ‘Victory’ edition, Withers (1945) paid tribute to women’s wartime contribution, “... how long before a grateful nation (or, anyhow, the men of the nation) forget what women accomplished when the country needed them? It is up to all women to see to it that there is no regression - that they go right on from here.” 

Society following Lee Miller’s Photos 

1945 marked the end of the worst military conflict in history, but the years that followed were a period of great economic growth and social progress in Europe. Journalism at this time also changed. Journalism in both Britain and America gained more independence towards the government, and even the state-controlled British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) became less deferential toward government leaders. Through her battle of censorship and feminism, Lee paved the way for journalists like Megan Twohey and Jodi Kantor, New York Times journalists who exposed the Harvey Weinstein scandal and whose stories are told through the biographical film She Said. However, the case of censorship and feminism in Lee is not isolated. Twohey and Kantor were also confronted with the battle of gender norms, censorship and the decision to conform to society or challenge it.

Figure 2: Cover of Ms Magazine, November 1977

The cover of the November 1977 issue of Ms Magazine shows two puppets: a boss inappropriately touching his female employee. The article reveals several stories of sexual harassment and includes a survey in which 88 per cent of women claimed to have been harassed at work. The writer highlights the extent of the problem and suggests that it’s particularly significant in Hollywood and is only the tip of the iceberg. This is an example of journalists noticing an issue in society, raising it, and it having little impact at the time. While a lot had changed since the Second World War and women’s rights were gaining more recognition, it wasn’t until fairly recently that workplace harassment was considered a thing. Women had been mistreated and sexually abused in the workplace for centuries, and often silenced. 

She Said focuses on the New York Times journalists, Megan Twohey and Jodi Kantor, who accused Harvey Weinstein of sexually harassing multiple female employees and actresses. Their journey to report this story required dealing with ethics and a new variant of censorship: the censorship of sexual harassment. While some media outlets discussed surveys and recorded facts, the overall census at the time was that it wasn’t talked about, and survivors couldn’t share their experiences. As uncovered in the article, this was largely due to non-disclosure agreements and settlement agreements, which were used to silence those who had been harassed. One person besides Harvey Weinstein who used this method was Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News. In 2016, a sexual harassment lawsuit against Ailes was filed by former Fox journalist, Gretchen Carlson. Following an internal investigation, it was revealed that over 20 women had accused Ailes. “Along with other destructive workplace behaviours such as sex-based harassment and sex/gender discrimination, sexual harassment is widely argued to be associated with broader problems of gender inequality and ‘cultural misogyny,” (Gailey and Prohaska, 2006, p.31). Ideologies of censorship and gender-bias once again proved to be societal constraints that individual journalists had to tackle to prompt change.

The case of Roger Ailes was adapted for film and released in 2020, titled Bombshell and in 2022, the film adaptation of She Said was released. Both of these films happened subsequent to the work of Kantor and Twohey and their New York Times report in 201,7, which invigorated the #MeToo movement and unleashed a wave of additional allegations against scores of powerful men in Hollywood, the media, and the state. 

Society at the time of the films’ release

While biopics aren’t considered journalism, it is still worth noting the years that these films were released and the society at the time. Lee, She Said, and Bombshell were all released in the 21st century, from the year 2020 onwards, which has significance. These films have all emerged following Lee’s photos being published and the #MeToo movement, which shifted public consciousness and allowed for more female legacies to be remembered. The production and popularity of these films, by a contemporary audience, signify a cultural appetite for stories that honour the individuals who have helped mould the modern world. 

Like biopics, Journalism is also shaped by society at a particular time. When reporters and editors select stories to publish and assemble their hierarchy or headlines, they determine the importance and appeal of news based on news values. “News value consists of that aspect of an event which is in accordance with the timeliness, interest, importance, etc. of the event's relationship to its context.” (Caple, Bednarek, 2013, p.4) This means that journalists assess a story's power by how well it will resonate with the concerns and priorities of society at the time. These biopics, like the journalism they cover, reflect society while also influencing change through the information they provide. 

Conclusion

To conclude, the findings in this essay have determined that Journalism is shaped by the cultural norms, historical moments and institutional pressures of its time, but that journalists who defy constraints relating to masculism, censorship and other oppressive forces have the ability to shape society. What Poepsel (2018) wrote is true:  

Social structures are too powerful for mass media to completely govern how they operate. Neither is it accurate to say that the mass media are contained within societies. Many mass media products transcend social structures to influence multiple societies, and even in societies that heavily censor their mass media, the news of scandals and corruption can get out.

Lee Miller, Megan Twohey and Jodi Kantor were constrained by their society but defied it, influencing history through their work. Lee reclaimed her femininity by capturing significant photos and defying the expectation that female photojournalists could only take portraits and work in fashion. While the film displays her vibrant past in bright colours and beautiful scenery, it's when the colours change that the viewer witnesses the most crucial decade of her career. The Second World War elicited a massive response from the free press around the world, and Lee was involved. She sought out the women in war, not just because she was forced out of male spaces but because she felt compelled to document their strength, too. Through a detailed analysis of historical events, the role of the media and the role of individual journalists, most significantly Lee Miller,  this essay has highlighted the ways journalists worked with and against societal norms during crucial moments in history to shape public understanding.

While the 21st century and digital age have created new avenues for journalism, censorship is ever-present. The internet has become a host of misinformation and disinformation, which has undermined some of the more traditional media. Andy Samberg, who portrayed David E. Scherman in the film Lee, said in an interview, “I think it’s good that people learn about Lee Miller and who she was and what she went through. We’ve come a long way and learnt a lot, and technology’s advanced a lot, but at the same time, there are still horrible things happening all the time. There are still women being treated the way Lee was treated in this movie all over the world, and the more we can keep talking about it and learning from what’s happened before, the better off we’ll be.” The ideologies of censorship and masculism, though on a smaller scale, are still present in society today and therefore remain as an obstacle for journalists. However, through the analysis of these biographical films, we can see that it is possible for journalists to defy these restrictions and create change. 

Bibliography

Burke, C. (2005) Lee Miller: A life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 

Caple, H. and Bednerek, M. (2013) Delving into the Discourse: Approaches to News values in Journalism Studies and Beyond. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. 

Holiday, H. and Cressman, D. (2016) What Deepest Remains: How Photojournalistic Mutualism Between Robert Capa and Elma W. Lower Shaped Modern Concepts of World War II. American Journalism, 33(4), p. 23. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08821127.2016.1241644

Gailey, J. and Prohaska, A. (2006) Knocking off a fat girl: an exploration of hogging, male sexuality, and neutralizations. Deviant Behaviour, 27(1), pp. 31-49. doi: 10.1080/016396290968353 

Lonsdale, S. (2016) The journalist in British fiction and film: guarding the guardians from 1900 to the present. London: Bloomsbury Academic. 

Luhmann, N. (2000) The Reality of the Mass Media. England: Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 

McLaine, I. (2021) Ministry of Morale: Home Front Morale and the Ministry of Information in World War II. London:Taylor & Francis Group. 

McQuail, D. (2013) Journalism and Society. London: SAGE Publications Inc. 

Poepsel, M. (2018) Media, Society, Culture and You. Rebus Community.

Riley, N. (1940) 999 And All That. London: V. Gollancz Limited. 

Withers, A. (1945) ‘Peace and Reconstruction’, Vogue