http://ann.sagepub.

com/
of Political and Social Science
The ANNALS of the American Academy
http://ann.sagepub.com/content/179/1/201.citation
The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/000271623517900126
1935 179: 201 The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
O.W. Riegel
Propaganda and the Press

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:

American Academy of Political and Social Science

can be found at: Science
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Additional services and information for

http://ann.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://ann.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:

What is This?

- Jan 1, 1935 Version of Record >>

by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from by Iurii Melnyk on October 22, 2013 ann.sagepub.com Downloaded from
201
Propaganda
and the Press
By
O. W. RIEGEL
I F
ONE asks a
group
of literate
Americans whether
they
believe in
the
reliability
of what
they
read in the
newspapers,
he is
very likely
to be an-
swered in the
negative.
The state of
mind which such a test illustrates is
extremely painful
to a
large
number of
responsible
and efficient
newspaper
men who do not believe that the Amer-
ican
press,
on the
whole,
merits this
shocking
lack of
respect. They point
out,
with a
good
deal of
justification,
that here and there
newspapers
are
doing
a
corking good job
of
reporting
the news
honestly
and
accurately,
and
that the American
press
is a
paragon
of virtue
compared
with the
corrupt
and muzzled
press
of
nearly every
other
country
in the world. Never-
theless,
whether the
public
attitude is
based
upon
evidence or
upon preju-
dice,
whether the reasons for disfaith
are authentic or
captious,
the marked
lack of
sympathy
of
many
Americans
for the American
newspaper
is an in-
teresting phenomenon
to
study
in con-
nection with mass circulations and the
institution of the free
press
in a mod-
ern
democracy.
THE PROPAGANDA MONSTER
Among
the reasons
(and
there are
many)
for an attitude of
suspicion
toward the
newspapers
is a
growing
awareness in the
public
of that awe-
some
monster, Propaganda.
While
the effort to influence
opinion by
con-
cealed and
carefully
studied means is
not a modern
invention, technological
devices,
professional skill,
and a con-
centration of mass and
group
effort
have
greatly
increased the amount of
propaganda activity
in the modern
world.
&dquo;Propaganda&dquo;
has become one
of the hardest-worked words in the
language; yet
it is doubtful whether
the
public
would have become
acutely
propaganda-conscious
without the aid
of a
growing
number of
students,
crit-
ics,
and
professional exposers
of
propa-
ganda.
The
propaganda
monster is
mainly
their
creation,
and
they
have
made of him one of the most formida-
ble beasties in the modern
menagerie
of
phobias. Indeed,
there is some
danger
of an
epidemic
of a new nerv-
ous
malady, propaganditis,
which
might
be
diagnosed
as a
paranoiac
hallucination of the citizen that the
whole world is
conspiring
to
put
some-
thing
over on him.
The American
press
has
grounds
for
complaining
that it has been victim-
ized
by
the assiduous
ferreting
for
propaganda.
In the matter of its
form,
the
newspaper
is more conven-
ient to
propaganda
hunters for
study
and criticism than most of the other
media of communication.
Speeches
and
whispering campaigns,
conversa-
tions, letters,
and the multitudinous
and
important
environmental influ-
ences of
family, school, church,
and
community,
do not
generally
leave the
compact
and accessible record of the
newspaper
file.
Moreover,
that hor-
rendous
monster,
Propaganda,
is
rarely
comprehensible
to the
average
man as
an abstraction. He must reduce its
vague
menace to
something
concrete
and
tangible,
such as the mass of read-
ing
matter offered him in the ink and
newsprint
of his
daily newspaper.
The
association in the
popular
mind be-
tween the
newspaper
and
propaganda
is therefore
close,
and it is often
felt,
not
always
with
justice,
that the mak-
ers of
newspapers,
from the
publisher
202
down to the cub
reporter,
are
deeply
involved in the nefarious
conspiracy
to
poison
the
public
mind.
ARE THE NEWSPAPERS GUILTY?
To what extent is this attitude based
upon
demonstrable evidence? To
what
degree
is the American
press
guilty
of
lending
itself to dishonest
propaganda?
Bold indeed is he who
attempts
to measure and define the
degree
of
culpability.
From the stand-
point
of size
alone,
it is doubtful
whether
any
amount of
painstaking
analysis
can succeed in
making
satis-
factory generalizations
based
upon
a
national
press
which includes some
twenty-one
hundred
daily newspapers,
more than five hundred
Sunday
news-
papers,
and a
weekly press numbering
nearly
twelve thousand
newspapers.
The
practices
of these
newspapers
change
from month to month and from
day
to
day
with
changes
in
political
and social life and with shifts in owner-
ship
and
personnel.
Moreover,
the various &dquo;scientific&dquo;
attempts
to measure the
propaganda
content of
newspapers, quantitatively
or
qualitatively,
are based
upon
stand-
ards of reference which are
obviously
subjective, ephemeral,
and uncertain.
How does one determine whether a
specific
news
story
or editorial is dis-
honest
propaganda?
Is it
possible
to
pass judgment
without
implying
the
existence of a &dquo;truth&dquo; norm which is
based
upon
a naive
faith, especially
revered in
America,
that truth can
easily
be
distinguished
from untruth?
In the
physical sciences, perhaps,
one
may permit
himself to believe in a
body
of
objective
fact the
accuracy
of
which has been demonstrated in hun-
dreds of corroborative
experiments.
But what of the data of
politics,
eco-
nomics,
and social
policy?
What are
the &dquo;facts&dquo;
regarding
the San Fran-
cisco
general strike,
or
pending
social
security legislation,
or the hundreds of
other issues in which the truthfulness
of &dquo;facts&dquo; is determined
by point
of
view?
Where,
outside of official rec-
ords such as of births and
deaths, may
we find a
body
of
objective
fact as uni-
versally
and as
permanently applicable
as the laws of
gravitation
and of chem-
ical reaction?
The
question
of
honesty
is still more
formidable. Dishonest
propaganda
has been defined
by
some one as &dquo;the
-ologies
of those with whom we dis-
agree.&dquo;
In
spite
of the
impulse
to be-
lieve that those who
disagree
with us
are
viciously dishonest,
scholars must
admit in their moments of
repose
from
analysis
that the
compulsions
and
compunctions
of ethical considerations
do not
readily
lend themselves to sci-
entific measurement. Until the in-
vention of a lie-detector under which
newspaper pages may
be examined
(to
the embarrassment of
reporters
and
editors),
the measurement of ethics
must rest
upon
a basis that is
highly
subjective
and fallible.
In
citing
these
pitfalls
which make
hazardous the
path
of hunters for
propaganda
in
newspapers,
it is not
contended that
newspapers
have not
published
a
great
deal of dishonest
propaganda,
nor that much of this
propaganda may
not be
exposed,
for
much of it has been. The
point
that
will be
argued
here is that the
majority
of these
expos6s
of
newspaper propa-
ganda,
some of which will be
specifi-
cally
cited
later,
have been based
upon
idealistic and
imaginary systems
of
newspaper
behavior. There are
grounds
for
suspecting
that the hue
and
cry against newspapers
as
propa-
ganda
instruments
may
be based
upon
teleological assumptions
which disre-
gard
the
practical
realities of our social
organization
and of the functions of
the
press.
Perhaps
it is time to admit that what
203
we call
propaganda
is an
inescapable
fact of modern life. Is it
possible,
or
even
desirable,
for
newspapers
to
cling
to the belief that
they
are
impartial
re-
positories
of truth? In the
light
of
social thrusts and
pressures,
is it not
inevitable that the
press
establish its
functional
validity by printing
more
&dquo;propaganda&dquo;
instead of less? The
attitude of
suspicion
toward the
press
may
result from
attempting
to
apply
an outworn and fictitious
ideology
to
an institution which is
merely respond-
ing
to
political
and social influences
against
which it could not
possibly
be
insulated. More basic than the hunt
for evidence of a sinister
propaganda
menace,
is a consideration of the fac-
tors which account for
propaganda
and
which establish its
inevitability,
and
even
desirability,
from the
standpoint
of the function of the
newspaper
in
modern
society.
The
following pages
will be addressed to a consideration of
that
problem.
FREE PUBLICITY
The
charges
of
propaganda brought
against newspapers generally
fall un-
der one of two heads:
first, propaganda
for
particular
commercial
interests,
and, second, propaganda
for
political,
economic,
or social
policies. Propa-
ganda
of the first
type,
which seeks to
advance trade and industrial interests
with more or less concealment of
pur-
pose,
is more obvious and measurable
than the
second,
and it has
produced
an amount of hostile criticism of the
press
out of
proportion
to the
amount of social harm that has been
done.
Propaganda
of this
type ap-
pears
in
newspaper
articles which ad-
vise the
drinking
of more
milk,
or
sug-
gest
the
building
of houses out of brick
instead of out of wood or stone or some
other
competitive
construction mate-
rial,
or articles which celebrate the
glamour
of the latest &dquo;movie&dquo;
queen
or
the newest streamlined automobile.
Some of the
propaganda
for commer-
cial concerns is so
transparent,
in
fact,
that it is doubtful whether it could be
called
propaganda
at
all;
as in the case
of motion
picture &dquo;readers,&dquo;
which
any
but the
very stupid recognize
as ad-
vertising
matter.
Newspaper
men are aware that a
considerable
percentage
of the matter
which
gets
into
newspapers
comes from
interested sources.
Occasionally
the
propaganda
for a business or
industry
will be so
skillfully disguised
that the
men who select and edit the news of
the
day
will
fail, through ignorance
or
carelessness,
to
recognize
its ulterior
purpose. Recently,
for
example,
a let-
ter from an American in Paris who
handles
publicity
for several French
industries
catering
to the tourist
trade,
was
printed
in several New York news-
papers
on the same
day.
It is
prob-
able that no one on the New York
staffs knew that their
correspondent,
who wrote on the
cheapness
of
good
living
in
Paris,
was
being paid
to make
Americans Paris-and-de-luxe-hotel-
conscious.
Newspaper
men cannot be
expected
to remember the
name,
the
style,
and the stock in trade of
every
one of the thousands of
publicity
men
and
propagandists
who
lay
down a
daily barrage
of items of so-called
&dquo;news.&dquo;
The vast bulk of such
propaganda
and
publicity
material finds its
way
to
the
wastebasket, partly
because it
lacks sufficient
general
interest to war-
rant
publication,
and
partly
because
the
newspaper recognizes
in the &dquo;free
publicity&dquo;
racket a threat to its rev-
enue from
paid advertising.
Never-
theless,
in terms of the total column
inches of
newspaper space,
a
fairly high
percentage
of news and editorial con-
tent is
frequently
donated to commer-
cial
propaganda
with the
knowledge
of
the men who
produce
the
newspaper.
204
The business office &dquo;must&dquo; is familiar
to the editorial
departments
of most
American
newspapers.
Certain items
must be
published
in the interests of
advertising
or circulation
promotion.
There are few cases on record where
indignant
editorial workers have re-
signed
because of these
mandatory
requests
from the
departments
which
supply
the
salary
checks.
Newspaper
men will
frankly
defend the
practice
on
the
grounds
that the
publishing
of a
newspaper
is a
business,
and that com-
mercial
strength
is a
safeguard
of the
political integrity
of the news columns.
A similar defense is made for the
commercial
propaganda
which
appears
on
womans, society, and
fashion
pages,
and in certain
highly exploited
news-
paper
features. News columns are
readily procured
for
publicizing
the
rapid style changes
which are so essen-
tial in modern
mercantiling. Tilly
the
Toiler is
promoted
to
prospective
news-
paper
clients as a stimulant to con-
spicuous consumption
which no woman
can resist. The
newspapers
will
argue
that this sort of
propaganda
is a shot-in-
the-arm for
trade,
and that
money
in
circulation means
greater prosperity
for the
community
in
general
as well as
for the
newspaper.
Increased adver-
tising
revenues for
newspapers
are
only
incidental to the social service. The
criticism of the economics of this
argu-
ment is not within the
province
of this
article.
SUBSIDIZED NEWS
Commercial
propaganda appears
in
another
type
of
story,
created
by
a
method described
by
one of its most dis-
tinguishedpractitionersas
the
&dquo;shaping
of events and circumstances.&dquo; This
method consists of
arranging
an event
or
condition,
or series of events or con-
ditions,
of such
newsworthy
character
that the
newspapers
are unable to
ig-
nore them. A recent
example
of this
was the much
publicized nonstop flight
of Miss Amelia Earhart from Hawaii
to California. Before the
flight,
while
Miss Earhart was still
enjoying
the
superb scenery
of Hawaiis mountain
roads and the
glamorous
surf of Wai-
kiki,
the news leaked out that the flier
was
receiving $10,000
from the Pan-
Pacific Press
Bureau,
allied with the
Bowman, Deute, Cummings, Inc.,
ad-
vertising agency,
to advance the
sugar
and tourist interests of Hawaii. Miss
Earhart was
supposed
to stimulate
tourism,
as well as to
suggest
that
Hawaii was an
&dquo;integral part
of the
United States&dquo; and hence not
properly
subject
to tariff
charges
on
sugar.
The
untimely
revelation
gave
the
pro-
moters a few bad
moments,
but the
flight
was
eventually
made with as
much fanfare of
publicity
as the Pan-
Pacific Press Bureau could have
hoped
for.
The
newspaper angle
of this
episode
helps
to
explain why
news columns are
sometimes
regarded
with
suspicion,
and
suggests
a means
by
which news-
papers might
be able to
protect
them-
selves
against
attacks on their
integ-
rity. Obviously
Miss Ea.rharts
flight
was
news,
whatever commercial inter-
ests
inspired
it. The facts
regarding
the
payment
to Miss Earhart
by
the
Pan-Pacific Press Bureau were
printed
in Editor and
Publisher,
trade
journal
of the
daily newspaper publishing
busi-
ness,
well in advance of the
flight.
Yet
apparently only
two
newspapers
in the
country
mentioned the transac-
tion at the time it became known.
After the
flight,
the whole business was
exposed by propaganda
hunters writ-
ing
for The Nation and other
periodi-
cals. The
impression
was
likely
to be
carried
away
that if the
newspapers
were not actual
accomplices
in the
&dquo;stunt,&dquo; they
had at least shown
great
gullibility
in
falling
for it. The fact
that a few
newspapers subsequently
205
condemned Miss Earhart and her
backers
editorially
for
having staged
a
dangerous flight
for
publicity pur-
poses, strengthened,
if
anything,
the
conviction that the
newspapers
had
allowed themselves to be &dquo;used.&dquo;
The
affair,
which is
typical
of a
great
many
instances of
creating
news
by
shaping
events and
circumstances,
suggests
that the alertness of the
propaganda
hunters and the
general
prevalence
of the
malady, propagan-
ditis, may
make it
imperative
that
newspapers print
all the facts
regard-
ing
the
news, especially
how the
story
originated
and who
supplied
the infor-
mation. The identification of inter-
ested sources should
help
to assure the
newspaper reading public
that the
press
is
vigilant
in
detecting
commer-
cial
propaganda.
The
public
has a
right
to
expect
the
newspaper
to exer-
cise this function. Would it cause a
revolution in American
newspaper
practice
if the Earhart
story
had be-
gun :
&dquo;Amelia
Earhart,
whose
nonstop
flight
from Honolulu to California was
subsidized
by
the Pan-Pacific Press
Bureau,
landed
safely
at 1:31 P.M.
(4:31
P.M. New York
time)
at Oak-
land
Airport&dquo;?
Would it reflect
any
more on the
honesty
of the
press
to
preface
the
story exalting
the
prowess
of the football
players
of Siwash Col-
lege
with the
phrase,
&dquo;From the Siwash
College
Press
Bureau,&dquo;
than to
try
to
maintain the
present myth
that the
news columns are written
by
the news-
papers
own
correspondents,
all of
whom are trained to detect and delete
propaganda
with as much ease as the
daring young
man of the
flying trapeze
is
reputed
to
fly through
the air?
COMMERCIAL AND POLITICAL PROP-
AGANDA COMPARED
The
suggestion
has
already
been
made that it is doubtful whether the
commercial
type
of
propaganda repre-
sents a serious abuse from a social
standpoint.
One
may
be irked that
fellow citizens are
disingenuously per-
suaded to eat more bread and less
meat,
and are
frightened
into
refraining
from
the
economy
of
lighting
three
ciga-
rettes on one
match,
and are made to
believe that
Ginger Rogers
is the
great-
est actress since
Duse;
but if
propa-
ganda
were restricted to the field of
competitive merchandising,
it
might
be considered one of the lesser afflic-
tions.
Ironically,
the chief
danger
of
commercial
propaganda
is the
danger
to the
press
itself. A
multiplicity
of
incidents such as the ones cited here
helps
to lessen
public
confidence in the
press.
In order to fulfill its
proper
and
more
important functions,
the
press
cannot afford to
impair
its
reputation
for
integrity.
And it is
possible
that
the
press,
as in the
examples
cited
above,
is
needlessly exposing
itself to
unfavorable criticism. No one desires
the
segregation
of commercial
public-
ity
to the
paid advertising
columns
more than the
newspapers.
The
implications
of the other
general
type
of
propaganda,
that which
urges,
with more or less
furtiveness,
the
po-
litical, economic,
and social
policies
of
special groups,
are more numerous and
serious. For the sake of
brevity,
this
kind of
propaganda
will henceforth be
called
&dquo;political,&dquo; basing
the term on a
recent and realistic definition of
pol-
itics as the science of &dquo;who
gets what,
when,
and how.&dquo;
SOCIAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE PRESS
In
theory,
the
press
is a
socially
use-
ful institution because of its concern
with
politics
as
reporter
and critic of
political
conditions and
practices.
The constitutional
guarantees
of free-
dom of the
press,
reaffirmed
by
court
decisions,
have been based
upon
the
theory
that the
newspaper plays
an
important part
in democratic
govern-
206
ment
by representing
the will of the
people, serving
as a check
upon politi-
cal
power,
and
taking
an active
part
in
public
debate. While the entertain-
ment and
advertising
functions of the
newspaper may
also be considered so-
cially useful, they
are
generally
as-
sumed to constitute the modus vivendi
by
which the
newspaper
is able to
pur-
sue its
higher objectives.
The
peculiar
privileges
which the
press
has tradi-
tionally enjoyed
have been based on
the idea that the
newspaper
is of serv-
ice to the
public
as counselor and advo-
cate.
From this
point
of
view,
that news-
paper
is best
fulfilling
its social
obliga-
tions which is most alert in
interpreting
the
significance
of
events,
is most so-
licitous for the
public welfare,
and
strives with the most enthusiasm and
energy
to
bring
into existence a state of
society
which it believes to be most
advantageous
to the
people
it serves.
The
prevalence
of
high pressure propa-
ganda
in both
journalistic
and non-
journalistic
forms seems to demand
that the substantial
press
of the coun-
try
dedicate itself to its
political
func-
tion with redoubled
vigor.
Political
propaganda
assails the
public through
radio, public speeches, billboards,
whispering campaigns, pressure organ-
izations,
and numerous other channels.
Does a situation in which
large
num-
bers of
people
are
being compelled
to
radical
political
action call for a
press
whose chief characteristics are
impar-
tiality
and
neutrality?
It
may
now
seriously
be asked
whether,
in
fulfilling
its duties and
responsibilities,
the
press
is not
obligated
to
print &dquo;propaganda.&dquo;
To combat
propaganda requires
the
adoption
of methods which are no less
pra.ctical
and effective. The
newspa-
per
must &dquo;educate&dquo; even at the risk of
crossing
that nebulous line that
demarks &dquo;education&dquo; from
&dquo;propa-
ganda.&dquo;
Are the contents of the
Daily
Worker education or
propaganda?
Are the contents of Hearsts New York
Evening
Journal education or
propa-
ganda ?
The
propaganda
of Hearst
and Father
Coughlin
is
given
a
large
share of the credit for the defeat of the
proposal
for American adherence to
the World Court. The vote
might
have been different if the substantial
segment
of the
press favoring
the
World Court adherence had marshaled
its
propaganda
as
efficiently
and ruth-
lessly
as Hearst.
THE EDITORIAL FUNCTION
The
theory
that
opinion may
be
segregated
to the editorial
page
is not a
practical
one.
&dquo;Truth,&dquo; especially
in
news of controversial
political issues,
is
in
large
measure
subjective.
News-
papers
have admitted as much in their
widespread
use of the
signed
news
story,
which
acknowledges
the
person-
ality through
whom the news has fil-
tered. The
newspaper
cannot even do
an
intelligent job
of
purveying
so-
called &dquo;facts&dquo; without
having opinions
and
taking
sides. The
process
of news
selection alone
implies
a standard of
values
regarding public
events that is
in essence
political.
Even if a record
of
&dquo;objective
facts&dquo; were
possible,
the
newspaper
which sacrificed its intelli-
gence
and
opinions
and became a min-
ute book of unrelated incidents and
statistics would be able to claim no
privileges
and would deserve no
pres-
tige except
as a
public utility
on a
par
with the
telephone
and
gas companies.
This
approach
to the
problem
of
propaganda
renders less relevant the
revelations of the
propaganda
hunters
who base their studies on the
assump-
tion that
propaganda
is
ipso facto
evil.
The
analysis by Lippmann
and Merz
of the
reports
of the New York Times
on Russian news between 1917 and
1920 showed that the Times had an
anti-Communist
bias,
and
placed
more
207
confidence in its
correspondents
in
Riga
and Warsaw than in Soviet
sources. In
spite
of these
revelations,
there are still a
variety
of brands
of &dquo;truth&dquo; about Soviet
Russia,
as
there are about
Germany, Italy,
and
Japan.
A laborious measurement of Ameri-
can
newspaper
ethics
recently
con-
ducted
by
Susan M.
Kingsbury
and
Hornell Hart disclosed the obvious
fact that some
newspapers gave
rela-
tively
more
space
to one side in a
typi-
cal
public controversy,
and that other
newspapers gave relatively
more
space
to the other side. It was also discov-
ered that there were
signs
of editorial
discrimination in
selecting
certain
parts
of the Associated Press
report
for
publication.2
2
Why
should there not
have been? Do the
propaganda
hunt-
ers wish all
newspapers
to
print
identi-
cal news and edit it in an identical
fashion? If such is
desired,
a half
dozen
newspapers,
or even
one,
would
suffice for national and international
news.
It is not difficult to detect instances
of bias in the news content of a
large
number of American
newspapers. Op-
position
to the New Deal is reflected in
the news columns of the
Chicago
Trib-
une,
the
Chicago Daily News,
and
dozens of other
papers; hostility
to
radical and labor movements is bla-
zoned in the California
press;
the
policies
of David Stern could not be
said to be
inconspicuously presented
in the selection and
display
of news in
the New York
Evening
Post and the
Philadelphia
Record;
the Hearst
press
is a
gold
mine for seekers of slanted
news
stories;
even the New York
Times,
which is
supposed
to
approxi-
mate
objective
news
standards,
has its
Frederick
Birchall,
Arnaldo
Cortesi,
Clarence
Streit,
and Hallett Abend.
Newspapers
which
print propa-
ganda
are
unwilling
to
accept
the com-
placent assumption
that truth will
eventually prevail.
Militant
pressure
groups employing
skilled
propagan-
dists are
seeking
to introduce new
forms of
political control,
some of
which,
like Fascism and
Communism,
make the destruction of
liberty
of ex-
pression
one of their first
objectives.
Propaganda
must be met with counter-
propaganda.
To maintain its influ-
ence and social
usefulness,
the
press
must
adapt
itself to modern realities
by employing
methods which
propa-
gandists
have found effective in
guid-
ing public opinion.
The role of leader-
ship
in
political controversy
should not
be abandoned
by
the
independent
press
because of a failure to
recognize
and utilize the
weapons
with which
modern
political
conflict is
waged.
FREEDOM OF PROPAGANDA
This devils
advocacy
of
bigger
and
better
propaganda
is based
upon
the
assumption
that there will be freedom
of
propaganda, by
which is meant that
a
great many
shades and varieties of
propaganda
will be in existence simul-
taneously.
Freedom for
only
one kind
of
propaganda
is
dictatorship.
The
1Walter
Lippmann
and Charles Merz, "A
Test of the
News,"
New
Republic,
Vol.
XXIII,
No.
296, Aug. 4, 1990, Part II.
2Susan M.
Kingsbury,
Hornell
Hart, and as-
sociates, "Measuring
the Ethics of American
Newspapers,"
Journalism
Quarterly,
Vol.
X,
Nos. 2, 3,
and
4, June, Sept.,
and Dec.
1933;
Vol.
XI, Nos. 2, 3,
and
4, June, Sept.,
and Dec. 1934.
Other recent studies of
propaganda
in news-
papers
include: Marcus M. Wilkerson,
Public
Opinion
and the
Spanish-American War,
Louis-
iana State
University Press, 1932; Joseph
E.
Wisan,
The Cuban Crisis as
Reflected
in the
New York Press
(1895-1898 ) ,
Columbia Uni-
versity Press, 1934;
H.
Schuyler Foster, Jr.,
"How America Became
Belligerent:
A
Quantita-
tive
Study
of War
News, 1914-17,"
American
Journal
of Sociology,
Vol.
XL, No. 4,
Jan.
1935;
Reuel R. Barlow, "Research Man
Says Heavy
Volume of New Deal News
Mostly Unbiased,"
Editor &
Publisher,
Feb.
23,
1935.
208
disappearance
of
democracy
in West-
ern
Europe
and elsewhere has been
accompanied by
the elimination of
every
kind of
propaganda
but that of
the
party
in
power.
A
monopoly
in
propaganda prepares
the
way
for Fas-
cism,
and maintains Fascism after it is
once established.
The real and fundamental
propa-
ganda
menace in the American
press
today
lies in the
danger
that the
range
of
propagandas
will
narrow,
and that
the standard commercial
press
will
come to
represent only
a
very
small
number of the
many political philoso-
phies
which
press
for articulation.
There is
danger
that the
press
will lose
its
versatility
and cease to function as
a
public
forum for
widely divergent
political
theories.
The
key
to the menace which
threatens the American
newspaper
may
be found in the definition of
pol-
itics
already quoted.
The commercial
newspaper
has a
very important
stake
in the
question
of who
gets
what,
when,
and how. The
newspaper
is a
private
business
enterprise. Newspa-
per
establishments
represent great
in-
vestments of
capital, many
of which
exceed one million dollars. It is inevi-
table, therefore,
that the
newspaper
should
sympathize
with those
political
doctrines which will assure it the
great-
est freedom in an economic
sense,
or
freedom to earn
profits
without
asking
favors of
political
rulers or
standing
in
continuous dread of
political
move-
ments that
might jeopardize
invest-
ments or
profits. Newspapers are,
therefore, by
their
very nature, politi-
cal,
and
subject
to
political bias,
which
is to
say
that their
political sympathies
are influenced
by
the desire for eco-
nomic
self-preservation.
THE NEWSPAPERS HARASSED
While there is
nothing
new in this
paradox
between the
public
service
functions of
journalism
and its identifi-
cation with the desires and
aspirations
of
capitalism,
the course of recent
events has
sharpened
what
might
be
termed the
newspapers
institutional
self-consciousness. A
variety
of at-
tacks have aroused the
apprehension
of
publishers
and caused them to move
in the direction of
consolidating
their
forces. The economic
paternalism
of
the New Deal seems to have
kinship
with the
political
influences which have
reduced the
press, along
with other in-
dustries,
to economic subservience to
the state in Western
Europe.
After a
good
deal of
bickering
with the Admin-
istration,
the
daily newspaper pub-
lishing industry
was able to obtain a
relatively
innocuous
code,
which in-
dividual
newspapers,
unlike units in
other coded
industries,
did not neces-
sarily
have to
accept.
Although
a
paragraph reaffirming
the constitutional
right
of freedom of
the
press
was forced into the code
upon
newspaper insistence,
it is a serious
question
whether the
argument
of the
newspapers public
service function
will remain a secure bulwark
against
encroachments
upon
the
newspapers
freedom of action.
Huey Long
has
resurrected a device introduced
by
the
good Queen
Anne to coerce and
regu-
late the
press,
and is
attempting
to im-
pose
an
advertising
tax
upon
the con-
servative
daily newspapers
of his state.
A militant
organization
of editorial
workers,
the American
Newspaper
Guild,
is
exerting pressure
on the news-
papers
from the
inside, and,
incident-
ally,
is
sharpening
the class conscious-
ness of
publishers
and
managers
on the
one
hand,
and of editorial workers on
the other. The Federal Government
is
showing
a
disposition
to
regulate
the
contents of
advertising columns,
hours
and
wages
of
labor,
and the
employ-
ment of carrier
boys.
Radical
po-
litical
parties
are
denouncing
the
209
&dquo;capitalistic press&dquo;
and
promising
re-
taliatory
or
repressive
measures if
they
come into
power.
To add to the dis-
comfort of
publishers, radio, already
under a
licensing system,
and a
poten-
tial
propaganda
instrument for a Fas-
cistically
inclined
Government,
is
lay-
ing
a fire under the
daily newspaper
publishing
business and threatens to
usurp
some of the news and
public
service functions of the
press.
These
developments
have tended to
clarify
the basic conflicts between the
press
and other interests. The defense
tactics of
publishers,
which include
increasing activity
of the American
Newspaper
Publishers Association and
various
regional publishers
associa-
tions,
with the maintenance of a
pow-
erful
lobby
in
Washington,
seem to
indicate a keener awareness of the con-
ditions of economic and
political
life
which will be most
salutary
to the in-
terests of the
press.
It is
possible
that
the future will see an even
greater crys-
tallization of the class interests of the
publisher group,
with
greater unity
of
action.
PRESS MONOPOLY
Not the least
disturbing
factor in the
situation is the fact that concentration
and consolidations have
greatly
de-
creased the number of
individually
owned
newspapers.
In
1933,
of
1,305
cities in the United States under
100,000 population, only
163 had two
or three dailies
published by independ-
ent
companies;
and in
1,142
of the
cities,
or 87
per
cent of the
total,
one
paper
or one
company
had a
monop-
oly.3
In the
weekly field,
the &dquo;one-
paper places&dquo;
increased from 66.1
per
cent of the total number of
places
in
which
papers
were
published
in 1900 to
86.5
per
cent of the total in 1930.4
4
A
rapid
check of the 1935 edition of the
Editor and Publisher Year Book shows
that 63
newspaper
chains in this coun-
try publish
341
newspapers.5
The
implications
of this decrease in
the number of
newspaper propaganda
channels are realized
by many
consci-
entious
newspaper publishers.
It is
apparent
that the
publisher
in a &dquo;one-
paper place&dquo;
has the
opportunity
to
distort or
suppress
news without fear
of
dissenting opinions
or counter-
propaganda
from
opposition organs.
Many publishers
in
one-newspaper
cities are imbued with a
high
sense of
public responsibility,
and
try
to
please
all
political
factions
by
the
impartial-
ity
of their news
coverage.
But is
impartiality enough?
Does not the
responsibility
of the
press imply
a more
aggressive
concern for
public
a.ffairs
than is revealed in the
equitable
allo-
cation of column inches to various
political
factions?
There is
danger
in the
tendency
of
even the most
responsible newspapers
to defend the status
quo
and
pull
punches.
In a
period
of
political
fer-
ment,
this kind of
political
ossification
may
reveal to the
public
the innate
sympathy
of the commercial
newspa-
per
for the ultra-conservative forces
which are even now
flirting
with the
idea of Fascism.
Moreover,
while
conservative, impartial publishing
may
command
respect
on ethical
grounds,
it
may
not be the kind of
pub-
lishing
which
safeguards
a free
press
and convinces the
public
of the news-
papers
social usefulness. If
publish-
ers choose a
passive
role and devote
themselves to the
preservation
of their
business interests instead of
throwing
themselves into the
political arena,
they may
find their liberties and
pre-
3
Willard Grosvenor
Bleyer,
"Freedom of the
Press and the New
Deal," Journalism
Quarterly,
Vol.
XI,
No.
1, p. 29,
March 1934.
4Malcolm M.
Willey
and William
Weinfield,
"The
Country Weekly
and the
Emergence
of
One-Newspaper Places,
"
Journalism
Quarterly,
Vol. XI, No. 3, p. 250, Sept.
1934.
5Editor and Publisher Year
Book, 1935, p. 119.
210
rogatives slipping away
while the
pub-
lic looks on with indifference.
ACTIVE POLITICAL PARTICIPATION
The
newspaper
behavior described
in the
preceding paragraph may
be
termed
passive propaganda,
or
propa-
ganda by
understatement and omis-
sion. There is also an active
propa-
ganda
abroad in the
land,
which
aggressively
advocates a
political sys-
tem which is favorable to the success
of
newspaper properties. During Up-
ton Sinclairs recent
campaign
in Cali-
fornia,
for
instance,
the
unity
of
political
interest
among
all commercial
newspapers
of the State
appeared
with
startling clarity.
The California
Newspaper
Publishers Association,
one of the most
highly organized
and
politically
active associations of news-
paper proprietors
in the
country,
openly engaged
in the distribution of
anti-Sinclair
propaganda.
The united
action of California
newspapers
is also
credited with the
breaking
of the San
Francisco
general
strike.
From a
pragmatic point
of
view,
the
united action of the California
pub-
lishers
against
Sinclair was
justified,
for
they
succeeded in
stopping
a move-
ment which
might
have
seriously
in-
jured
the free
press
as it now exists in
California. Yet in this
instance,
as in
instances elsewhere in the
country,
there is
grave danger
in too
great
a
unanimity
in
publishers groups.
If
this is a
portent
of the
future,
it means
that
newspapers
will no
longer
assure
freedom of
propaganda, upon
which
our democratic
processes depend.
If
newspapers
are
compelled by political
circumstances to become more
aggres-
sive
propagandists
in defense of a fa-
vorable
system,
as Hearst and Colonel
Robert R. ll~TcCormick and the Cali-
fornia
publishers
seem to think that
they are,
their future is uncertain.
Should their views and their
propa-
ganda prevail,
Fascism would not be
an
improbable prospect.
Should
they
fail,
it is conceivable that
they might
expect
retaliation from those
political
groups
whose
aspirations they
had so
aggressively opposed.
These observations have
proceeded
from
present
realities to
speculations
regarding
the
unpredictable
future.
Yet,
with the
press
of two thirds of the
world
serving
a
dictatorship
of
propa-
ganda,
it
may
be well to look for
signs
to chart the American drift. Analo-
gies may
be drawn between recent de-
velopments
in the United States and
the course of events in nations in which
a
dictatorship
of
propaganda
has de-
stroyed
the
principle
of freedom of
propaganda.
If our democratic insti-
tutions, including
the
press,
are to be
preserved,
there must be
many voices,
and
they
must
speak
with
vigor,
even
though
their words invoke the
image
of that awesome
monster, Propa-
ganda.
O. W.
Riegel
is director
of journalism
at
Washington
and Lee
University, Lexington, Virginia.
He has
worked
for newspapers
in Wisconsin and
Pennsylvania
and
for
the
Chicago
Tribune in
Paris, France, and was
formerly
a member
of the faculty of
Dartmouth
College.
He is a member
of
the Council on Research in Journal-
ism and
of
the
Legislative
Committee
of
the
Virginia
Press Association.
Publications include "An
Analy-
sis
of
Some
Virginia Daily Newspapers" (1932 )
and
"Mobilizing for Chaos,
The
Story of
the New
Propa-
ganda" (1934 ).