1. McQuail, Denis, ‘Foreign Affairs Content in National Daily and 2 Scottish Newspapers 1975’, Analysis of Newspaper Content (London, 1977)Google Scholar, Research Series 4 of the Royal Commission on the Press.

2. Glasgow University Media Group, War and Peace News (Milton Keynes, 1985).Google Scholar

3. Barber, James, Who Makes British Foreign Policy! (Milton Keynes, 1976)Google Scholar, chapter xii; Hill, Christopher, ‘Public Opinion and British Foreign Policy since 1945: Research in Progress’, Millennium, x (1981).Google Scholar

4. Tunstall, Jeremy, Journalists at Work (London, 1971).Google Scholar

5. Schlesinger, Philip, Putting reality together: BBC News (London, 1978).Google Scholar

6. Morrison, David E. and lumber, Howard, ‘The foreign correspondent: date-line London’, Media, Culture and Society, xii (1985).Google Scholar

7. Barrett, Oliver Boyd, The international news agencies (London, 1980).Google Scholar

8. Boyce, David G., ‘Government and the News Media: The British Experience’, in Nimmo, Dan and Mansfield, Michael W. (eds), Government and News Media: Comparative Dimensions (Texas, 1982).Google Scholar

9. Cockerell, Michael, Hennessy, Peter and Walker, David, Sources close to the Prime Minister (London, 1984).Google Scholar

10. Franck, Thomas and Weisband, Edward (eds), Secrecy and Foreign Policy (New York, 1974).Google Scholar

11. May, Annabelle and Rowan, Kathryn (eds), Inside information: British government and the media (London, 1982).Google Scholar

12. Hooper, Alan, The Military and the Media (Aldershot, 1982).Google Scholar

13. Harris, Robert, Gotcha! The Media, the Government and the Falklands Crisis (London, 1982).Google Scholar

14. Clutterbuck, Richard, The Media and Political Violence (London, 1981).Google Scholar

15. Schlesinger, Philip, Murdock, Graham and Elliott, Philip, Televising ‘Terrorism’: political violence and popular culture (London, 1983).Google Scholar

16. Barber, op. cit., discusses the image of the world conveyed by the media, and the relationship between the media, and the relationship between the media and public opinion. Bishop, Donald, The Administration of British Foreign Relations (Syracuse, 1961)Google Scholar, whose book is based on historical sources, considers the past influence of public opinion. Philip Elliott and Peter Golding in Boardman, Robert and Groom, A. J. R. (eds), The Management of Britain's External Relations (London, 1972)Google Scholar concentrate on the British media's image of the world.

17. Seymour-Ure, Colin, The Press, Politics and the Media (London, 1968), pp. 260–263.Google Scholar

18. Jones, Kennedy, Fleet Street and Downing Street (London, 1919), pp. 96–97Google Scholar; Tilley, Sir John and Gaselee, Stephen, The Foreign Office (London, 1933).Google Scholar

19. Whyte, W. E. H., ‘The FCO and the media’, in May and Rowan, op. cit., p. 195.Google Scholar

20. The House of Commons Defence Committee, The Handling of Press and Public Information during the Falklands War, II (London, 1982)Google Scholar, paragraph 1489.

21. The guidance section has had a history of mergers and separations from the Information Policy Department since the Second World War, suggesting that its correct place in the FCO structure has yet to be found. Marett, Sir Douglas, Through the Back Door (Oxford, 1968), p. 175.Google Scholar

22. The FCO sent diplomatic posts details of the talks in the second week of February but the first details appeared in Le Figaro and Le Soir only on Thursday, 20 February. On Friday, 21 February the FCO told No. 10 that the French had leaked the details and argued that it was now important for the British side to get its position on record. Mr Wilson told Mr Richard Grossman on the Friday that ‘I got a proposal from the Foreign Office that in view of the French leaks we should publish. I gave my consent. I am not so sure that it was wise.’ In fact, according to Terence Prittie, the Guardian's diplomatic correspondent, ‘on Thursday, 20 February we were given a little information by the News Department about the nature of the Soames-de Gaulle meeting. We would have to wear this story (i.e. not give it any attribution—Author) at our own risk, but were assured that it was authentic’ The incident encouraged Mr Wilson to favour making a political appointment to the post of head of the News Department. Alan Campbell, ‘Anglo-French relations: A Decade ago: A New Assessment (I)’, International Affairs, 58 (1982), pp. 243–4; Grossman, Richard, The Diaries of a Cabinet Minister, iii (London, 1977), pp. 378–379Google Scholar; Haines, Jo, The Politics of Power (London, 1977), pp. 75–76Google Scholar, 92–3; Prittie, Terence, Through Irish eyes: a journalist's memoirs (London, 1977), p. 269.Google Scholar

23. The House of Commons Defence Committee, The Handling of Press and Public Information during the Falklands War, op. cit., paragraph 1676.

24. The Ministry of Defence, The Handling of Press and Public Information during the Falklands War: Observations presented by the Secretary of State for Defence on the 1st Report from the Defence Committee of the House of Commons (London, 1983).Google Scholar

25. Clark, William, ‘Cabinet Secrecy, Collective Responsibility and the British Public's Right to Know and Participate in Foreign Policy’, in Franck and Weisband, op. cit., p. 207.Google Scholar

26. Sampson, Anthony, ‘Secrecy, News Management, and the British Press’, in Franck and Weisband, op. cit., p. 221.Google Scholar

27. Tunstall, Jeremy, The Westminster Lobby Correspondents (London, 1970), p. 107.Google Scholar

28. The United Kingdom's Overseas Representation (London, 1978), pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

29. Social and Community Planning Research, Attitudes to the Press (London, 1977)Google Scholar, Research Series 3 of the Royal Commission on the Press, p. 31.

30. Adams, William C. (ed.), Television Coverage of International Affairs (New Jersey, 1982), pp. 3–4.Google Scholar

31. The State Department Correspondents' Association withdrew from giving credentials to journalists after it was threatened with lawsuits. Press passes now merely require a letter from a news organization, or in the case of a foreign correspondent from an embassy. Hess, Stephen, The Government/Press. Connection (Washington, DC, 1984), p. 71.Google Scholar

32. Review Committee on Overseas Representation (London, 1969), 8:15.Google Scholar

33. Central Policy Review Staff, Review of Overseas Representation (London, 1977), 14:33.

34. Memorandum of the Foreign Press Association to the House of Commons Defence Committee, The Handling of Press and Public Information during the Falklands War, op. cit., p. 127.

35. Ibid.

36. Morrison and Tumber, op. cit., p. 466.

37. One researcher of the State Department's relations with the media found that the daily briefings had become necessary if only to correct the previous day's misunderstandings. Stephen Hess, ‘The Golden Triangle: The Press at the White House, State and Defense’, The Brookings Review (1983).

38. On one occasion a BBC reporter, standing in for the diplomatic correspondent, inadvertently attended the European correspondents' briefing instead of the diplomatic correspondents' briefing. He noted that ‘after the six o'clock broadcast, all hell broke loose because two different versions of the story were available—one for British journalists, another for Continental journalists. Quite by accident I had stumbled on the correct version and not the one intended for the home market.’ Cockerell, Hennessy and Walker, op. cit., p. 62.

39. Sigal, Leon V., Reporters and Officials (Lexington, 1973)Google Scholar, chapter 8.

40. The Guardian, 24 and 26 January 1978.

41. Davison, W. Phillips, ‘News media and international negotiation’, Public Opinion Quarterly (1974), p. 179.Google Scholar

42. A related case is where information is leaked to the media to pressure parties to agree quickly before pressures, whether domestic or external, result from the disclosure making an agreement impossible: For example, during the 1979 Commonwealth conference in Lusaka the Australian delegation leaked a draft formula for solving the Zimbabwe-Rhodesia crisis in order that its disclosure would pressure the British Conservative government to agree quickly to it before a reaction from Conservative back-benchers would make one impossible. Lord Carrington, fearing such a reaction, told Shridath Ramphal, secretary-general of the Commonwealth, that ‘We're in deep trouble. So far as I am concerned the deal's off.’ He told Mrs Thatcher ‘I'm quite satisfied that the Australians gave the draft to the press. We have to release it now and give a press briefing this evening—but only as a draft on which we took no decision.’ The Australians appeared to miscalculate and rather than edge towards an agreement the leak almost caused Britain's withdrawal. But Ramphal persuaded Thatcher ‘to seek the concurrence of the other leaders to the draft formula. We can then get it out—as an already agreed text—before any further press briefings by leaders.’ David Martin and Laurence Marks, ‘Man who saved Rhodesia deal’, Observer, 9 December 1979.

43. The role of the media in contributing to the flow of information has been the subject of consideration by government enquiries on Britain's overseas representation. The Duncan Report was hesitant about the role of the media. The number of foreign correspondents is smaller than is presupposed and in any case the media have their own needs to serve and cannot act as the British government's only source of international political information. Review Committee on Overseas Representation, op. cit., p. 54. But the Berrill Report divided the information flow between that information required for Britain's bilateral and multilateral relations and that required as a store of background information. It recommended that the media could supplement embassy reporting in the case of the latter. Central Policy Review Staff, Review of Overseas Representation, op. cit., 15:19, 7:24.

44. Cohen, Bernard C., The Public's Impact on Foreign Policy (Boston, 1973), p. 45.Google Scholar

45. Office, Home, Departmental Committee on Section 2 of the Official Secrets Act 1911 (London, 1972), i, p. 49.Google Scholar

46. Cockerell, Hennessy and Walker, op. cit., p. 235.

47. Hetherington, Alastair, Guardian Years (London, 1981), p. 48.Google Scholar