Reporting in the Crimean War

- lack of censorship meant newspaper articles were more exciting to read, immersed British people in the news for the first time. Active involvement in how the war should be fought. 

- WILLIAM HOWARD RUSSELL was the biggest war correspondent in Crimea - worked for The Times. Irish so may have been less sympathetic towards Britain - but his harrowing reports on the three battles of Crimea and the Siege of Sevastapol left many in Britain shocked. 

- Russell chose to focus more on the life of ordinary soldiers, wouldn't hesitate to slate officers. 

- THOMAS CHENERY was also in Crimea, the first reporter to write about conditions at Scutari. 

- Raglan and his officers despised Russell, claiming that his reports gave military secrets to the enemy. Tsar Nicholas read The Times everyday, so this was true. Told officers not to talk to him. 

- he focussed mostly on the suffering faced during the harsh winter of 1854-55, more specifically diseases such as cholera and malaria which plagued the men. Prince Albert described him as a 'miserable scribbler' - disliked by aristocracy and higher-ups. 

- the outcry caused by Russell's reporting forced the government to act.

- Lord Aberdeen (PM) was exposed as being inadequate - replaced by Lord Palmerston in 1855, who improved conditions in Crimea massively. 

- Roger Fenton (the world's first war photographer) was also sent to Crimea, albeit in 1855 when the worst of the war was mostly over. Supported by monarchy, sent with an agenda of making the war look less horrific - but his photos still illuminated conditions in visual sense. 

- primitive photography technology (bulky camera which took ages to take a photo and then develop it) not good. Some photos were staged for propaganda purposes. 

- never collaborated with Russell, most probably due to different aims. Fenton avoided taking photos of dead/injured soldiers for example. 350 photos total. 

- sketches were also used to show conditions on the front.