The Rise of Orson Welles and 'Citizen Kane'

Orson Welles' 'Citizen Kane' is a cinematic masterpiece that forever changed the landscape of filmmaking. First released in 1941, the film's narrative and artistic merits quickly made it a talking point among critics and audiences alike. Among those astounded by the film was the influential newspaper magnate, William Randolph Hearst. This article delves into the mechanisms by which Hearst became aware of 'Citizen Kane' and his reaction, exploring the power dynamics of the media landscape of the 1930s and 40s.

A Media Mogul Takes Notice

William Randolph Hearst was not just a newspaper publisher; he was a media titan with a vast empire that controlled numerous publications. With his extensive network of reporters and columnists working for him, it was virtually impossible for him to miss significant cultural events or sensitive topics. Hearst’s keen eye and ear for the latest news rendered him a formidable figure in the media world.

The Unflattering Depiction and Hearst’s Reaction

Hearst was outraged by the unflattering depiction of himself in 'Citizen Kane.' He felt that the film unfairly and inaccurately portrayed him, which directly affected his public image and reputation. To address this, Hearst took swift and dramatic action.

He made every effort to have the movie blocked or at least to dissuade audiences from watching it. He also enlisted the help of influential columnists to warn readers about the film, urging them not to see it.

The film's financial flop further justified Hearst's actions. Despite the lack of commercial success, 'Citizen Kane' was nominated for nine Academy Awards, winning one. It's worth noting that it's quite possible Hearst's influence played a role in limiting the film's awards recognition.

A Criticism of the Media Landscape

In the 1930s and 40s, the newspaper was the primary source of information for the public. Movies were still considered a novelty, but major studios often created newsreels to inform viewers about their films. Hearst, being the biggest player in this industry, ensured that his influence extended far and wide, making it virtually impossible for anything of significance to slip past his notice.

Furthermore, news columnists who worked for Hearst were central in shaping public opinion. This system of control allowed Hearst to wield significant influence over the media landscape. The reaction to 'Citizen Kane' highlighted how powerful these media barriers could be in shaping both content and public perception.

Was the Film Truly a Depiction of Hearst?

There is an ongoing debate around whether 'Citizen Kane' truly depicted Hearst. One article cites Orson Welles' own admission that only one scene in the film was actually a direct portrayal of Hearst. Despite this, the mere idea that the film could have such a significant impact was enough to infuriate Hearst.

Another story emerged about Hearst's involvement in the film's portrayal of a woman, which he claimed was an offense to Marion Davies, a prominent actress and former mistress. This personal stake further fueled Hearst's desire to silence the film.

Legacy of the Media and 'Citizen Kane'

The story of 'Citizen Kane' and Hearst illustrates the substantial influence that media moguls could wield in their day. While the film ultimately failed to achieve box office success, its critical acclaim and cultural significance have endured. Hearst's reaction to the film serves as a case study in the power of media and the lengths to which powerful figures would go to control narratives.

In the context of today's media landscape, the story of Hearst and 'Citizen Kane' remains relevant. It serves as a reminder of the importance of journalism integrity and the enduring impact of media on public perception.