_The Weinstock Lectures on The Morals of Trade_

THE CONFLICT BETWEEN PRIVATE MONOPOLY AND GOOD CITIZENSHIP. By JOHN GRAHAM BROOKS. 

COMMERCIALISM AND JOURNALISM. By HAMILTON HOLT. 

THE BUSINESS CAREER IN ITS PUBLIC RELATIONS. By ALBERT SHAW. 

COMMERCIALISM AND JOURNALISM

By

HAMILTON HOLT

MANAGING EDITOR OF THE INDEPENDENT

BOSTON AND NEW YORKHOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY_The Riverside Press Cambridge_1909

COPYRIGHT, 1909, BY THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

_Published December 1909_

BARBARA WEINSTOCKLECTURES ON THE MORALS OF TRADE

This series will contain essays by representative scholars and men ofaffairs dealing with the various phases of the moral law in its bearingon business life under the new economic order, first delivered at theUniversity of California on the Weinstock foundation. 

COMMERCIALISM AND JOURNALISM

In the United States of America, public opinion prevails. It is anaxiom of the old political economy, as well as of the new sociology, that no man, or set of men, may with impunity defy public opinion; nolaw can be enforced contrary to its behests; and even life itself isscarcely worth living without its approbation. Public opinion is theultimate force that controls the destiny of our democracy. 

By common consent we editors are called the "moulders of publicopinion. " Writing in our easy chairs or making suave speeches over thewalnuts and wine, we take scrupulous care to expatiate on this phase ofour function. But the real question is: who "moulds" us? for assuredlythe hand that moulds the editor moulds the world. 

I propose to discuss this evening the ultimate power in control of ourjournals. And this as you will see implies such vital questions as: Arewe editors free to say what we believe? Do we believe what we say? Dowe fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all thetime, or only ourselves? Is advertising or circulation--profits orpopularity--our secret solicitude? Or do we follow faithfully the sterndaughter of the voice of God? In short, is journalism a profession or abusiness?

There are almost as many answers to these questions as there are peopleto ask them. There are those of us who jubilantly burst into poetry, singing:--

 "Here shall the press the people's rights maintain, Unawed by influence and unbribed by gain. "

On the other hand there are some of us quite ready to corroborate fromour own experience the confessions of one New York journalist whowrote:--

 There is no such thing in America as an independent press. I am paid for keeping honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. If I should allow honest opinions to be printed in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation, like Othello's, would be gone. The business of a New York journalist is to distort the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the foot of Mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. We are the tools or vassals of the rich men behind the scenes. Our time, our talents, our lives, our possibilities, are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes. 

I come to California, therefore, to tell you with all sincerity andcandor the real conditions under which we editors do our work, and theforces that help and hinder us in the discharge of our duties tosociety and to the journals that we control or that control us. 

And, first, let me give you succinctly some idea of the magnitude ofthe industry that we are to discuss. The Census, in its latest bulletinon "Printing and Publishing in the United States, " truly and tritelyremarks that "Printing occupies a unique position among industries, andin certain aspects excels all others in interest, since the printedpage has done more to advance civilization than any other humanagency. "

But not only does the printing industry excel all other industries inhuman interest, it excels them in the relative progress it is making. The latest available figures, published in 1905 by the Government, showthat the capital invested in the publishing business had doubled in thepreceding half decade, despite the fact that publishing is almostunique among industries in the diffusion of its establishments, and inthe tenacity with which it still clings to competition in an age ofcombination. Since 1850 the whole industry has increased overthirty-fold, while all other industries have increased onlyfifteen-fold. The number of publications in the country, as given, is21, 394. These are capitalized at $239, 505, 949; they employ 48, 781salaried officers, and 96, 857 wage-earners. Their aggregate circulationper issue is 139, 939, 229; and their aggregate number of copies issuedduring the year is 10, 325, 143, 188. They consume 2, 730, 000 tons ofpaper, manufactured from 100, 000 acres of timber. These 21, 394periodicals receive $145, 517, 591, or 47 per cent of their receipts, from advertising, and $111, 298, 691, or 36 per cent of the receipts fromsales and subscriptions. They are divided into 2452 dailies, of whichabout one third are issued in the morning and two thirds in theevening; 15, 046 weeklies; 2500 monthlies, and a few bi-weeklies, semi-weeklies, quarterlies, etc. 

The number of these periodicals has doubled in the last twenty-fiveyears, but at the present moment the monthlies are increasing thefastest, next, the weeklies, and last, the dailies. The dailies issueenough copies to supply every inhabitant of the United States with oneevery fourth issue, the weeklies with one every other issue, and themonthlies with one copy of each issue for nine months of the year. Onethird of all these papers are devoted to trade and special interests. The remaining two thirds are devoted to news, politics, and familyreading. 

Undoubtedly there are many contributing causes which have made theperiodical industry grow faster than all other industries of thecountry. I shall mention only six. 

First. The cheapening of the postal, telephone, and telegraph rates, and the introduction of such conveniences as the rural free delivery, so that news and general information can be collected and distributedcheaply and with dispatch. 

Second. The introduction of the linotype machines, rapid and multiplepresses, and other mechanical devices, which vastly increase the outputof every shop that adopts them. 

Third. The photo-process of illustrating, which threatens to makewood- and steel-engraving a lost art, and which, on account of itscheapness and attractiveness, has made possible literally thousandsof pictured publications that never could have existed before. 

Fourth. The growing diffusion of education throughout the country. Ourhigh schools, to say nothing of our colleges and universities, alonegraduate 125, 000 pupils a year, --all of them fit objects of solicitudeto the newsdealer and subscription-agent. 

Fifth. The use of wood pulp in the manufacture of paper, by which thelargest item in the cost of production has been greatly diminished. 

Sixth. The phenomenal growth of advertising. 

I shall not attempt to amplify the first five of these causesresponsible for the unparalleled growth of periodical literature. Butthe sixth I shall discuss at some length, for advertising is by allodds the greatest factor in the case. 

In olden times the dailies carried only a very little advertising--afew legal notices, an appeal for the return of a strayed cow, or ahouse for sale. It is only within the past fifty years that advertisingas a means of bringing together the producer and consumer began. And, curiously enough, the men who first began to appreciate the immenseselling-power that lay in the printed advertisement were "makers" or"fakirs, " of patent medicines. The beginning of modern advertising isin fact synchronous with the beginnings of the patent-medicinebusiness. 

Even magazine advertising, which is now the most profitable andefficacious of all kinds, did not originate until February, 1860, when"The Atlantic Monthly" printed its first "ad. " "Harper's" was foundedsimply as a medium for selling the books issued from the FranklinSquare House, and all advertisements from outsiders were declined. George P. Rowell, the dean of advertising agents, in his amusingautobiography, tells how Harper & Brothers in the early seventiesrefused an offer of $18, 000 from the Howe Sewing Machine Company for ayear's use of the last page of the magazine; and Mr. Rowell adds thathe had this information from a member of the firm, of whose veracity hehad no doubt, though at the same sitting he heard Mr. Harper tellanother man about the peculiarities of that section of Long Islandwhere the Harpers originated, assuring him the ague prevailed there tosuch an extent that all his ancestors had quinine put into their gravesto keep the corpses from shaking the sand off. 

Before the Civil War it is said that the largest advertisement thatever appeared in a newspaper was given by the E. & T. FairbanksCompany, and published in the New York "Tribune, " which charged $3000for it. Now the twenty large department stores alone of New York Cityspend, so it is estimated, $4, 000, 000 a year for advertising, while oneChicago house is said to appropriate $500, 000 a year for publicity inorder to sell $15, 000, 000 worth of goods. Those products which arebelieved to be advertised to the extent of $750, 000 or more a yearinclude the Uneeda Biscuits, Royal Baking Powder, Grape Nuts, Force, Fairy Soap and Gold Dust, Swift's Hams and Bacon, the Ralston Millsfood-products, Sapolio, Ivory Soap, and Armour's Extract of Beef. Therailroads are also very large general advertisers. In 1903 they spentover a million and a quarter dollars in publicity, though this did notinclude free passes for editors, who, I may parenthetically remark, thanks to the recent Hepburn Act, are now forced to pay their wayacross the continent just like ordinary American citizens. 

It is computed that there are about 20, 000 general advertisers in thecountry and about a million local advertisers. Between the two, $145, 517, 591 was spent in 1905 to get their products before the public. The Census gives only the totals and does not classify the advertisingthat appears in the dailies, weeklies, and monthlies. The Rev. CyrusTownsend Brady, however, has made a very illuminating study[1] of theadvertising and circulation conditions of 39 of the leading monthlymagazines published in the United States. The first thing that struckhis attention was the fact that candid and courteous replies to hisrequests for information were vouchsafed by all the publishers--quite acontrast to what would have happened from a similar inquiry ageneration ago. He next discovered that these 39 magazines, which hadan aggregate circulation of over 10, 000, 000 copies per month, could puta full-page advertisement into the hands of 600, 000, 000 readers, orseven times the population of the United States, for the astonishinglyinsignificant sum of $12, 000, or for two thousandths of a cent for eachreader. 

 [1] _The Critic_, August, 1905. 

The amount paid by the purchasers of these 39 magazines was$15, 000, 000, for which they received 36, 000 pages of text and pictures, and 25, 000 pages of advertisements. Magazine advertisements are betterwritten and better illustrated than the reading matter. This is becausethey are of no use to the man who pays for their insertion if they donot attract attention, whereas the contributor's interest in hisarticle after its acceptance is mostly nominal. That is, the advertisermust win several thousand readers; the contributor has to win but oneeditor. 

These 39 magazines were found to receive $18, 000, 000 a year from theiradvertisements and $15, 000, 000 from their sales and subscriptions. Thisshows that in monthly magazines the receipts from advertising andsubscriptions are about the same. In weeklies the receipts fromadvertising are often four times as much as the receipts from sales andsubscriptions, while in the dailies the proportion is even greater. Theowner of one of the leading evening papers in New York told me that 90per cent of its total receipts came from advertising. From whateverstandpoint you approach the subject, it is the advertisements that arebecoming the most important factor in publishing. Indeed, some studentsin Yale University carried this out to its logical conclusion lastautumn by launching a college daily supported wholly by the revenuesfrom advertisements. They put a free copy every morning on the door-matbefore each student's room. If it were not for the postal prohibitionmany dailies and other periodicals would make money by being givenaway. 

Thus you see that if there were no advertisements and the publishershad to rely on their sales and subscriptions for their receipts, themonthlies would have to double their price, and the weeklies anddailies multiply theirs from four to ten times. This advantage to thereading public must certainly be put to the credit of advertising. 

The preponderance of advertising over subscription receipts, however, is of comparatively recent occurrence. Thirty years ago the receiptsfrom subscriptions and sales of all the American periodicals exceededthose from advertising by $11, 000, 000; twenty years ago they were aboutequal; and to-day the advertising exceeds the subscriptions and salesby $35, 000, 000. 

In 1880 the total amount of advertising was equivalent to theexpenditure of 78 cents for every inhabitant in the United States; in1905 it was $1. 79. On the other hand, the per capita value ofsubscriptions has increased hardly at all. The reason of this is thefall of the price of subscriptions. We take more papers but pay less--acent a copy. Comparatively few buy the New York "Evening Post" forthree cents. This is all the more remarkable, because advertising isthe most sensitive feature of a most sensitive business and is sure tosuffer first in any industrial crisis or depression. 

No wonder that the man who realizes the significance of all thesefigures and the trend disclosed by them is coming to look upon theeditorial department of the newspaper as merely a necessary means ofgiving a literary tone to the publication, thus helping business menget their wares before the proper people. Mr. Trueman A. DeWeese, inhis recent significant volume, "Practical Publicity, " thinks that thisis about what Mr. Curtis, the proprietor of "The Ladies' Home Journal, "would say if he ventured to say what he really thought:--

 It is not my primary purpose to edify, entertain, or instruct a million women with poems, stories, and fashion-hints. Mr. Bok may think it is. He is merely the innocent victim of a harmless delusion, and he draws a salary for being deluded. To be frank and confidential with you, "The Ladies' Home Journal" is published expressly for the advertisers. The reason I can put something in the magazines that will catch the artistic eye and make glad the soul of the reader is because a good advertiser finds that it pays to give me $4000 a page, or $6 an agate line, for advertising space. 

Yes, the tremendous power of advertising is the most significant thingabout modern journalism. It is advertising that has enabled the pressto outdistance its old rivals, the pulpit and the platform, and thusbecome the chief ally of public opinion. It has also economizedbusiness by bringing the producer and consumer into more directcontact, and in many cases has actually abolished the middle man anddrummer. 

As an example of the passing of the salesman, due to advertising, "TheSaturday Evening Post" of Philadelphia, in its interesting series ofarticles on modern advertising exploits, recently told the story of howthe N. H. Fairbanks Co. Made a test of the relative value ofadvertising and salesmen. A belt of counties in Illinois were set asidefor the experiment, in which the company was selling a certain brand ofsoap by salesmen and making a fair profit. It was proposed that theidentical soap be put up under another brand and advertised in aconservative way in this particular section, and at the same time thesalesmen should continue their efforts with the old soap. Within sixmonths the advertised brand was outselling its rival at the rate of$8000 a year. 

The Douglas Shoe is another product that is sold entirely by generaladvertising. So successful has the business become that the company hasestablished retail stores all over the country, in which only men'sshoes are sold at $3. 50 a pair. Now other shoe-manufacturers haveadopted this plan, and in most of our large cities there are severalchains of rival retail shoe stores. 

But all the advertising is not in the advertising columns. A UnitedStates Senator said last winter that, when a bill he introduced in theSenate was up for discussion, the publicity given it through an articlehe wrote for "The Independent" had more to do with its passage thananything he said in its behalf on the floor of the upper house;--thatis, his article was a paying advertisement of the bill. And inmentioning the incident to you, I give "The Independent" a goodadvertisement. 

Universities advertise themselves in many and devious ways--sometimesby the remarkable utterances of their professors, as at Chicago;sometimes by the victories of their athletes, as at Yale; and sometimesby the treatment of their women students, as at Wesleyan. But perhapsthe most extraordinary case of university advertising that has come tomy attention was when, not so very long ago, a certain stateinstitution of the Middle West bought editorials in the country pressat advertising rates for the sole purpose of influencing the statelegislature to make them a larger appropriation. In other words theUniversity authorities took money forced from a reluctant legislatureto make the legislature give them still more money. 

The charitable organizations are now beginning to advertise in thepublic press for donations, and even churches are falling into line. The Rev. Charles Stelzle, one of the most conspicuous leaders of thePresbyterian Church, has just published a book entitled "Principles ofSuccessful Church Advertising, " in which he says:--

 From all parts of the world there come stories of losses in [church] membership, either comparative or actual. In the face of this, dare the Church sit back and leave untried a single method which may win men to Christ, provided that this method be legitimate?. . . The Church should advertise because of the greatness of its commission, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. " To fulfill this command does not mean that Christian men are to confine themselves to the methods of those who first heard the commission. 

The question whether advertising pays will never be known in theindividual case, for, like marriage, you can't tell till you try it. But in the aggregate, also like marriage, there is no doubt of itsvalue. The tremendous power of persistent advertising to carry an ideaof almost any kind into the minds of the people and stamp it there, isamazing. How many "Sunny Jims, " for instance, are there in thisaudience? If there are none, it is singular; for learned judges havereferred to him in their decisions, sermons have been preached, andvolumes written about him, though it took a million dollars and twoyears of persistent work to introduce this modern "Mark Tapley" to thepublic. Have you a little fairy in your home? Do you live in SpotlessTown? Do you use any of the 57 varieties? "There's a reason. " "That'sall. " Formerly a speaker used a quotation from the Bible or Shakespearewhen he wanted to strike a common chord. Nowadays he works in anallusion to some advertising phrase, and is sure of instant anduniversal recognition. 

The Socialists and other utopian critics, who are supposed to drill tothe bedrock of questions, have looked upon advertising as essentially aparasite upon the production and distribution of wealth. They tell usthat in the good time coming, advertising will be relegated to thescrap-heap of outworn social machinery, along with war, race prejudice, millionaires, the lower education of women, and other things of anundesirable nature. This has not been the experience, however, of those"sinister offenders" who have come nearest to the coöperative ownershipof wealth in this country--I refer of course to "The Trusts. " When thebreakfast food trust was formed, one of the chief reasons for thecombination was that the rival companies thus hoped to save the cost ofadvertising that had hitherto been required when they sold theirfood-stuffs in competition with each other. But they very soon foundthat their sales fell off after they stopped advertising, and they kepton falling off until the advertising was resumed. This teaches us thatthe American people have not enough gumption to buy even the stapleproducts they need except through the stimulus of hypnoticsuggestion--which is nothing but another name for advertising. Evensuch a benevolent institution as a great life insurance company couldnot get much new business on its own merits. If all the money now spenton agents' commissions, advertising, yellow-dog funds, and palatialoffices were devoted sacredly to the reduction of the rates ofinsurance, probably fewer rather than more persons would insure. TheAmerican people have to pay to be told what is good for them, otherwisethey would soon abolish editors, professors, and all the rest of us whoget paid for preaching what others practice. 

Now while advertising pays the consumer who buys, the advertiser whosells, and the publisher who brings both together, there is a limit tothe amount of advertising which can be "carried" by a certain amount ofreading matter. In newspapers we see the result of this in the vastSunday editions, with sometimes fifty or a hundred detachable pages. Inthe magazines the case is different. Interesting and attractive asmagazine advertising has become--it certainly should be so, consideringthe advertisers pay good money to put it before the people--it is notenough alone to sell a magazine, and when it forms more than half ortwo thirds of the number the issue becomes too bulky and the value ofthe advertising pages themselves decreases. In making sandwiches theham must not be sliced too thin. That necessitates starting a newmagazine; and so we find from three to a dozen periodicals issued bythe same house, often similar in character and apparently rivals. Thisaccounts for the multiplication of magazines. It is not a yearning formore love stories. 

Thus you see advertising has made possible the great complex papers andmagazines of the day with their corps of trained editors, reporters, and advertising writers, in numbers and intellectual calibre comparablewith the faculty of a good-sized university. Advertising makes itpossible to issue a paper far below the cost of manufacturing--all tothe benefit of the consumer. So far as I know there is not an importantdaily, weekly, or monthly in America that can be manufactured at theselling price. But, on the other hand, with the growth of advertising adepartment had to be created in every paper for its handling. Asadvertising still further increased, rival papers competed for it andthe professional solicitor became a necessary adjunct of every paper, until now the advertising department is the most important branch ofthe publication business, for it is the real source of the profits. Because the solicitor seeks the advertiser, and, therefore, is in theposition of one asking for favors, he puts himself under obligations tothe advertiser, and so in his keenness to bring in revenue for hispaper, he is often tempted to ask the aid of the editor in appeasingthe advertiser. Thus the advertiser tends to control the policy of thepaper. 

And this is the explanation of the condition that confronts mostpublications to-day. By throwing the preponderating weight ofcommercialism into the scales of production, advertising is at thepresent moment by far the greatest menace to the disinterested practiceof a profession upon which the diffusion of intelligence most largelydepends. If journalism is no longer a profession, but a commercialenterprise, it is due to the growth of advertising, and nothing else. 

There was a time, not so very long ago, when journalism was on theverge of developing a system of professional ethics, based on otherconsiderations than those of the cash register. Then a Greeley, Bowles, Medill, Dana, or Raymond, with a hand-press and a printer's devil, could start a paper as good as any university consisting of MarkHopkins, a student, and a log. In those days the universal questionwas, "What does old Greeley have to say?" because old Greeley was theultimate source of his own utterances. Imagine the rage he would haveflown into if any one had dared insinuate that the advertisers dictateda single sentence in "The Tribune"! But now the advertisers areaggressive. They are becoming organized. They look upon the giving ofan advertisement to a publisher as something of a favor, for which theyhave a right to expect additional courtesies in the news and editorialcolumns. 

Advertising is also responsible for the fact that our papers are nolonger organs but organizations. The individuality of the great editor, once supreme, has become less and less a power, till finally itvanishes into mere innocuous anonymity. To show you how far the editorhas receded into public obscurity, it is only necessary to try torecall the portrayal of a modern editor in a recent play. Stagelawyers, stage physicians, and stage preachers abound; when you thinkof them your mind calls up a very definite image. But no one has yetattempted to portray the typical editor, and it is doubtful if thepopulace would recognize him if he were portrayed, for the moderneditor is a mystery. 

Despite the editorial impersonality which controls modern newspapers, the editors still touch life in more points than any other class ofmen. And for this reason, if for no other, it is important to know thelimitations under which they work. I leave aside the limitations thatcome from within the editor himself; for manifestly ignorance, prejudice, venality and the like, in the editor are in no wisedifferent from similar faults in other men. 

There are just two temptations, however, peculiar to the editor, thattend to limit his freedom: first, the fear of the advertisers, andsecond, the fear of the subscribers. The advertisers when offended stoptheir advertisements; the readers, their subscriptions. The editor whois afraid to offend both must make a colorless paper indeed. He mustdiscuss only those things about which every one agrees or nobody cares. The attitude of such an editor to his readers is, "Gape, sinner, andswallow, " and to his advertisers, as Senator Brandegee said at a recentYale Commencement in regard to a proposed Rockefeller bequest, "Bringon your tainted money. " As a rule, the yellows are most in awe of themob, while the so-called respectables fear the advertising interests. 

Now let me take up in some detail the influences brought to bear uponus which tend to make us swerve from the straight and narrow path. Iinvite your attention first of all to the Press Agent, thatindispensable adjunct of all projects that have something to gain or tofear from publicity. I have seen the claim made in print, thoughdoubtless it is a press agent's story, that there are ten thousandpress agents in the city of New York, --that is, men and women employedto boom people and enterprises in the papers and magazines. You arefamiliar with the theatrical press agent, the most harmless, jovial, inventive, and resourceful of his kind. He is the one who writes thearticles signed by Grand Opera singers which appear in the magazines. It is he who gets up stories about Miss "Pansy Pinktoes, " hermilk-baths, the loss of her diamonds, the rich men who follow her. Itis he who got for me an interview with a Filipino chief at Coney Islandthree summers ago, whose unconventional remarks and original philosophyon America and the inhabitants thereof startled me no less than ourreaders. 

When the press agent has no news, he manufactures it. The readers ofthe New York papers the other day read that a prominent Socialist, whooccupied a box in the theatre where a play was given in which Socialismis attacked, stood up and offered to harangue the audience between theacts. The actor who played the rôle of the wicked capitalist came onthe stage and invited the audience to vote whether they cared to hearthe Socialist or him. The audience thereupon voted both down. But themanagement the next Sunday evening very kindly offered the use of thestage for a debate on Socialism, to which the leading Socialists andanti-Socialists of the city were invited. The meeting was a greatsuccess, and all the reporters in town were present, just as by somesingular coincidence they happened to be on the first night. 

One of our most successful operatic managers--impressario, I believe, is the more correct appellation--was about to produce the opera of"Salome, " which had been taken off the rival stage after its firstperformance, on the assumption that New York was shocked. The singerwas not only to sing the part, if one can sing a Strauss opera, but wasalso to dance it. Finally, about a week before the opera was produced, a new soprano was engaged to sing another rôle hitherto taken by theprospective Salome. Instantly the dread headlines on all the frontpages of the metropolitan press announced that Miss Garden would resignbefore Madame Cavalieri should sing in any of _her_ rôles. Mr. Hammerstein's "eyes twinkled, " as the reporters besieged him. He saidhe guessed he could untangle matters. Out of the kindness of his hearthe had thought the rehearsals of "Salome" were too fatiguing for MissGarden, and so got assistance for her. After a three or four days'operatic war, in which literally columns of printers' ink was shed, the_entente cordiale_ was resumed, and the song-birds became doves ofpeace again. The New York "Evening Post" printed the next day aneditorial entitled, "Genius in Advertising"; and a week later theopera, or rather the song and dance of "Salome, " was given, with seatsselling at ten dollars apiece, and "standing room only" signs at thebox-office. 

This desire for publicity on the part of the histrionic profession goesso far, that often absolute fakes are sent out to the poor, unsuspecting editor. Here is a statement that was printed, let us hopein good faith, in one of the Brooklyn papers not long ago. It referredto the leading lady in a popular stock company. 

 Miss S. Has a remarkably fine collection of miniatures painted on ivory. Her attention was attracted to them several years ago by a miniature of one of her ancestors, painted by Edward Greene Malbone, which came into her possession. The delicate quality of the painter's art that was of necessity lavished upon the ivory pleased her as an amateur and she began to collect. Miss S. Has haunted the antique shops of Manhattan and Brooklyn during the few leisure moments that came to her, in her search after miniatures. She now owns something like one hundred examples of famous miniatures. One of her greatest treasures is a portrait of John Dray, by that master-painter of miniatures, Richard Cosway. 

The publication of this article brought such a number of requests fromthe friends of Miss S. To see her collection, that the ingenious pressagent was obliged to invent and publish another fabrication--this timeof a midnight robbery in which the collection disappeared. Thisshameless story was told me by the press agent himself, and he gave mefrom his scrap-book the fake clipping I have just read. 

Similarly the imitation riots, and protests from delegations ofnegroes, where Thomas Dixon's Ku-Klux play, "The Clansman, " was to beproduced, were often due to the initiative of the enterprising pressagent--at least so he told me. 

I would not have you think, however, that the press bureau is not inmany instances a perfectly legitimate institution, and cannot be usedwith all propriety by religious, reform, political, and otherorganizations. The woman's suffrage movement, for instance, has awell-equipped and organized bureau; while the two great politicalparties during campaign times have sent out for many years news-articlesand editorials of great value to the country and partisan press. 

Perhaps the most efficacious press bureau of the legitimate kind isthat of the Christian Scientists. Every time an editor prints anythingderogatory to the Rev. Mary Baker G. Eddy, or her influential cult, asuave and professionally happy gentleman immediately sends his cardinto the sanctum, and, holding the offensive clipping in one hand, together with a brief and well-written reply, says with the utmostcourtesy:--

 "Inasmuch, my good sir, as you deemed it worth while to devote so much of your valuable space to spreading broadcast before your intelligent audience an error about Christian Science, I feel sure that your sense of justice will make plain to you the privilege of giving us space to demonstrate the real truth of the matter. "

To the editor with a conscience--and some of us still have the vestigesof one--this is a hard argument to evade; and as a result ChristianScience gets twice as much notice in the papers as it would were thereno smiling press agent to follow up every unfavorable reference, nomatter how obscure the publication. The next time the editor wants topoint a jest at the expense of Christian Science, he thinks twice andthen substitutes some other cause that does not employ an editorialrectifier. 

But perhaps the best use of a publicity bureau was made recently by thestreet-railway company of Roanoke, Virginia, and the water company ofScranton, Pennsylvania. Both of these companies had become veryunpopular, one as a result of poor street-car service, and the other onaccount of a typhoid epidemic supposed to have been started from thepollution of the company's reservoir. Both companies appropriated agood sum of money, hired a press agent, and bought advertising space inthe local papers every day for a month or more. These advertisementsgave the companies' side of the case with such candor and convincingfairness that they soon became the talk of the town, personal letterswere written to the papers about them, and the hostility toward themvery quickly turned to a feeling of good-will. It pays to take thepublic into your confidence. 

And now the staid "Rail-Road Age-Gazette" has sounded the call for agreat press agent to arise and stem the growing public hostility to therailroads. The "Age-Gazette" did not use the phrase "press agent, " asthe appellation has not as yet come into its full dignity. It employedthe more euphonious term "Railroad Diplomatist. " Still, high-soundingtitles have their use, as when some of my brother editors call their"reporters" "Special Commissioners, " and their foreign correspondents"Journalistic Ambassadors. "

We had a Peace and Arbitration Congress in New York two years ago. Being chairman of the Press Committee, I employed a firm of pressagents to get for us the maximum amount of publicity. As a result wereceived over ten thousand clippings from the papers of the UnitedStates alone. I do not mean to claim that the Congress would not havebeen extensively noticed without the deft work of the agents; but theyunquestionably helped a great deal. The newspapers welcome them whenthey represent such well-known philanthropic institutions as the PeaceSociety, the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and thePeople's Institute, because the copy they "turn in" requires little orno further editing before it is sent to the printer. But when they areemployed to promote financial ventures, wars on labor unions, anti-municipal ownership campaigns, or other private and classinterests, then the editors discount what they provide and theyactually do more harm than good to the cause they are intended topromote. 

Press agents, however, are sometimes enabled to get illegitimate matterinto our best papers. I recall to your memory the reports favorable tothe companies sent out during the great insurance investigations in NewYork. "Collier's" has told the whole story. [2] One of the agentsemployed testified on the witness-stand that a great insurance companyagreed to pay a dollar a line for what he could get into the papers. Hemade his own arrangements with the journals that took his stuff, andthe difference between the price he had to pay and the dollar a line hegot from the insurance company was to be his private rake-off. Hesucceeded in securing the publication of six dispatches of about twohundred and fifty words, in such well-known newspapers as the St. Paul"Pioneer Press, " the Boston "Herald, " the Toledo "Blade, " the Buffalo"Courier, " the Florida "Times-Union, " the Atlanta "Constitution, " andthe Wilmington "News. " It is only fair to state, however, that therewas nothing in the evidence to show whether the papers went into thearrangement on a business basis, or were fooled into thinking thedispatches they published were genuine reports of the proceedingsbefore the committee. 

 [2] _Collier's_, Nov. 11, 1905. 

Examples of the use of press agents for both legitimate andillegitimate purposes could be extended almost indefinitely. TheStandard Oil Company, I understand, now issues all its manifestoes tothe public through a trained press-representative; and the fightagainst Messrs. Gompers, Mitchell, and Morrison, in the Buck Stovecontroversy, was conducted with the aid of a press bureau, as one ofthe lawyers in the case informed me. Whenever such a question comesbefore the people as the choice between the Nicaragua and Panama routesfor the interoceanic canal, a press bureau is usually an importantfactor in the campaign. The big navy craze and the Japan war cry canhardly be accounted for except on the theory that it has been forsomebody's interest to agitate them through the press. Whenever theNaval appropriation bill comes before Congress, the Far-Easternwar-clouds threaten in thousands of newspaper sanctums, while all of usshudder at the danger of war, for the benefit of ordnancemanufacturers, battleship builders, and every incipient "Fighting Bob"who hopes some day to command another American Armada on itsgastronomic voyage around the world. 

Fortunately none of our papers are subsidized by the government itself, as is so often the case with the semi-official organs of Europe. Norare any of our papers directly in the pay of foreign governments, though the espousal of the infamous reactionary régime in Russia bysome of them is at least open to suspicion. The danger of manufacturedpublic opinion in this country comes not from governments. Even thepolitical parties are losing the allegiance of the press. The days whenthe Republican organs told the people the worst Republican was betterthan the best Democrat, and the Democratic papers said the same aboutthe Republicans, have happily passed, never to return again, though thespirit still lingers in the organs of the Socialist, Populist, andProhibition parties. The growth of the great politically-independentpress is one of the most hopeful signs of the times. 

But we have only jumped out of the frying-pan of politics into the fireof commercialism, and the fight of the future will therefore be toextricate ourselves from the fetters of commercialism, just as we havealready broken away from the bonds of party politics. 

But the press agent has come to stay. Indeed, his business has nowassumed such proportions that the profession of anti-press agent willdoubtless soon come into existence. I know already of one gentleman inNew York whose aid has been invoked when people want things kept out ofthe papers. On more than one occasion he has prevented good spicy bitsof scandal from seeing the light; though in his case I can aver that itwas his personal influence with the editors, rather than any improperlubricant, that kept the papers silent. 

Now let me turn from the press agent to the advertiser as a twister ofeditorial opinion. Here let me say at once, and with all emphasis, thatthe vast majority of advertisements are not only honest but dependable. Leaving out of account a few stock phrases which deceive nobody, suchas "the most for the money, " "the cheapest in the market, " etc. , whatis said about the goods to be sold is not in the least overdrawn. Ihave taken the pains to go over the advertising columns of the leadingpapers and periodicals of New York during the month of February, and, with the exception of a few medical, financial, and perhaps real-estateadvertisements, I could find absolutely nothing that on the face of itseemed fraudulent, and very little that was misleading. The advertisershave at last come to realize that for the long run, whatever the rulemay be for the short run, it does not pay to overstate the qualities oftheir merchandise. You can now order your purchases by mail from theadvertising pages of any reputable publication about as safely as overthe counter of a store. At all events the phenomenal growth of themail-order houses and their sales through advertising, lend strength tothis opinion. On the 15th of March, 1909, a single Chicago mail-orderhouse sent to the Post Office six million catalogues, weighing fourhundred and fifty tons, and all were to be distributed within a week. 

Many periodicals now claim that they will not take advertisements thatlook fraudulent or even misleading. Some papers, like the London"Times, " have a guaranteed list of advertisements which they haveinvestigated and vouch for, though naturally the advertisers have topay extra for the guarantee. 

"The Sunday School Times" printed, several weeks ago, a long list ofsecular papers that were "going dry, " as so many of our Southernstates. The fact that our best periodicals no longer accept liquoradvertisements is another one of the encouraging signs of the coming ofthe new journalism. 

The vigorous fight that "The Ladies' Home Journal" and "Collier's"waged against the patent-medicine concerns is too fresh in the publicmemory to need recounting here. The two pictures printed cheek by jowlin "The Ladies' Home Journal, "--one, of the tombstone above the mortalremains of Lydia E. Pinkham, whose inscription showed that she had beendead since 1883, and the other an advertisement representing Lydia in1905, sitting in her laboratory at Lynn, Massachusetts, engrossed inassuaging the sufferings of ailing womanhood, --these are eloquent ofthe type of fraud perpetrated through the press upon a gullible public. 

Similarly, in the negro papers the favorite advertisements are thosethat claim to straighten kinky hair and bleach complexions--all fakes, of course. Perhaps the most fraudulent advertisements, however, arethose which purpose to sell mines in Brazil, Mexico, Alaska, orwherever else the investor is unlikely to go. These offer their sharesoften as low as ten cents each, and guarantee fabulous profits. I havea college classmate who is extensively interested in Mexican mines, andhe tells me that literally 99 per cent of all the mining companies thatfloat their shares through advertisements are pure, or rather impure, swindles. I am not in the least surprised, for I know how many letterscome to a financial editor from the dupes of these slick minepromoters, asking advice as to how they can get their money back. 

The most demoralizing advertisements are those paid for by loan-sharks, clairvoyants, medical quacks, and the votaries of vice. The New York"Herald" has recently stopped printing its vicious personals. It alsorefuses fortune-tellers the hospitality of its columns, though it isnot so squeamish in regard to loan-agencies and patent medicines. Howmany papers still publish the advertisement of Mrs. Laudanum's soothingsyrup for babies? When you remember that the proprietary medicineconcerns have been accustomed to spend forty million dollars a year, which is distributed among the papers of the land, you can see that itrequires considerable financial independence for a publisher to foregoa taste of their patronage. 

It is a curious fact that, aside from the country weeklies, the papersmost plentifully besprinkled with medical advertisements are the yellowjournals, the religious weeklies, the socialistic and other propagandaorgans, and in general those which preach most vociferously reform andthe brotherhood of man. 

The danger from the advertising columns is not, as I have said, thatthe advertisements misrepresent the goods, but that the terms on whichthey are solicited tend to commercialize the whole tone of the paperand make the editor afraid to say what he believes. The advertiser iscoming more and more to look on his patronage as a favor, and he seldomhesitates to withdraw his advertisement if anything appears that mayinjure his business or interfere with his personal fad or politicalambition. 

Let me give you some examples of the withdrawal of advertisements topunish too daring and independent editors. 

A few weeks ago the paper which, in my opinion, has the ablesteditorial page in the country lost some very valuable musicaladvertising because it had published letters of a decidedlycompromising nature, written by a man high in the musical world to alady who was suing him for damages. Another paper, which many considerthe brightest in America, discharged its dramatic critic after atheatrical firm had taken out all their advertising. But strange tosay, as soon as a new critic was engaged, the advertising was forthwithresumed. I refrain from giving the name of this newspaper because onebrave and witty little weekly published the story with names and dates, and is now being sued for libel. 

"Life" states that in Cincinnati, lately, every theatricaladvertisement in all other newspapers carried this line:--

 "We do not advertise in 'The Times-Star. '"

The paralyzing power of advertising is again exemplified in the case ofa New York evening paper which was so much interested in thepopularization of bicycles that it organized the first bicycle paradeever held in the city. Just before the day of the parade, however, itprinted an article telling the people that it cost only some fifteen ortwenty dollars to manufacture bicycles that sold at from seventy-fiveto one hundred and twenty-five dollars. Instantly all the bicycleadvertising was withdrawn, and the paper lost thousands of dollars. 

The New York "Evening Post" some years ago offended the departmentstores by some utterance it made about the tariff, and they withdrewtheir advertising. The "Evening Post, " instead of quietly backing down, started in to fight single-handed, calling on the public for aid. Thepersonal friends of the editor, Mr. Godkin, and a few loyal readersrallied to its support, and threatened to boycott the stores. But thepublic as a whole and all the "Post's" esteemed contemporaries, asmight have been anticipated, enjoyed the conflict from a safe distanceand minded their own business. The department stores not only refusedto make terms, but in some instances carried the war into the enemy'sterritory by stopping the credit accounts of those customers who tookthe "Post's" side. It was only after a very great financial loss andmany years of estrangement, that most of the stores came back to the"Post, " and it was long before the old relations of cordiality wereentirely reëstablished. 

The department stores are seldom or never referred to unfavorably bythe New York papers. When an elevator falls down in an office-buildingand somebody is injured, the headlines ring to heaven. A similarcatastrophe in a department store is considered of hardly sufficienthuman interest to publish. The name and shame of a woman caughtshoplifting in a department store can seldom be kept out of the papers. A department store caught overworking and underpaying itssales-girls--well, that is of no public concern. One of the moststriking articles I ever printed recounted the experiences of asales-girl in one of New York's department stores, yet it was unnoticedby the New York papers, which are quick enough to republish and commenton such articles when we print them, as "Graft in Panama, " "Peonage inGeorgia, " or "Race-Prejudice in California. "

Four years ago, in our annual vacation number, we advised our readersto go back to their boyhood village, buy the old homestead, and take avacation on the farm, abjuring the summer hotels with their temptationsto spend money, their vapidities and artificialities, manufacturedlovers' lanes, and old cats on the piazza. This so offended a fewhotels that they have never since advertised in "The Independent. " Iwill not tell you their names, but you can find out by noticing whathotels are not represented in our advertising pages. 

Three years ago I printed the life-story of a girl then on strike in afactory. It was a simple, straightforward autobiography, giving theemployés' side of the case. Although we printed subsequently--as we arealways glad to do--a statement from the company giving their side ofthe controversy, we must still be on their "We Don't Patronize" list, judging by the amount of advertising with which they have since favoredus. Other papers have suffered still more, I understand, from the samefactory. 

The great book-publishing firms are about the only class of advertisersI know of who do not directly or indirectly seem to object to havetheir wares damned in the editorial pages. Whether they have attainedmore than other men to the Christian ideal of turning the other cheek;whether they think that nobody pays any attention to a scathingbook-review, or whether they hold that the "best seller" is theoffspring of hostile criticism, I do not know. But again and again wedenounce books in our literary department that the publishers pay goodmoney to praise in the advertising pages of the same issue. I know ofonly one prominent publishing firm which is an exception to this rulein that it sometimes attempts to influence the reviews of its books bymeans of its patronage. 

But with the small book-houses this happy relationship does not alwaysexist. It would surprise you to know how many of them badger andthreaten us. Some, I understand, have a rule not to advertise wheretheir books are not indiscriminately puffed. It is a poor Maxim, however, that won't shoot both ways; for I am sorry to report that somepapers adopt the equally bad rule of not reviewing the books of thesefirms who do not keep an advertising account with them. 

I once dined at a public banquet where the guests were both whites andnegroes, and made some harmless and well-meaning remarks. APhiladelphia advertiser subsequently said he would never do businesswith a paper that employed such an editor. 

Last year an insurance company withdrew its advertising from thecolumns of a great weekly because it repeated a disagreeable truthabout one of its directors. 

Recently San Francisco has gone through one of the most importantstruggles for civic betterment ever waged in an American city. Thewhole nation stood at attention. The issue was clear and unequivocal. The story of how San Francisco was redeeming her fair name, as everynewspaper man knows, was sensational enough to be featured day by dayon the front pages of every great paper in the land. The Easterndailies started in bravely enough, but soon cut down their reportsuntil they became so meagre and inadequate as to cause people in theEast to surmise that some influence hostile to the prosecution hadpoisoned the sources of their information. 

The Archbold letters, given to the press by Mr. Hearst in the latecampaign, are further examples of commercialism in journalism. How theStandard Oil Company sent its certificates of deposit and giantsubscriptions to sundry editors and public-opinion promoters, and how amember of Congress from the great state of Pennsylvania actuallysuggested to Mr. Archbold that it might be a good plan to obtain "apermanent and healthy control" of that very fountain-head ofpublicity, --the Associated Press, --these sinister transactions andsuggestions have been so fully discussed as to need no further commentfrom me. 

From the standpoint of journalistic ethics, the only thing morereprehensible than selling your opinions is offering them for sale. This is editorial prostitution. The mere getting out of winter-resortnumbers, automobile numbers, financial numbers, and Alaska-Yukon-PacificExposition numbers is not at all to be condemned, though the motive maybe commercial, as the swollen advertising pages in such special numbersattest. 

But what shall we suspect when a paper which claims a million readersdevotes a long editorial to praising a poor play, and then in asubsequent issue there appears a full-page advertisement of that play?What does it mean when not a single Denver paper publishes a line aboutthree nefarious telephone bills before the Colorado Legislature? Andwhat shall we think of a certain daily whose editor recently told methat there was on his desk a list three feet long of names of prominentpeople who were not to be mentioned in his paper either favorably orunfavorably?

But direct bribe-giving and bribe-taking are, as I have said, veryrare. Such a procedure is too crude. If you should get up some palpableadvertisement disguised as news, and send it around to the leadingpapers asking them to put it in as reading matter, and send you thebill, expecting them to swallow the bait, you would be disappointed. Itis more likely to be done in another way. A financier invites an editorto go with him on a cruise in his private yacht to the West Indies, oroffers to let him in on the ground floor in some commercialundertaking. Then, after the editor is under obligations, favors areasked and the editor is enmeshed. 

Although I have said much about the sordid side of journalism, and thetemptations that we editors have to meet in one form or another, I donot want you to think that the profession or trade of journalism offersno scope for the highest moral and intellectual attainments. I havedwelt thus long on the seamy side of our profession because there is aseamy side, and I believe it does good occasionally to discuss it withfrankness. The first step in correcting an evil is to acknowledge itsexistence. Were the title of this lecture "Journalism and Progress, " or"The Leadership of the Press, " I could have told a far different androsier, though a no less true story. 

But, as I approach my conclusion, let me give you some more pleasingexamples of the better side of "Commercialism and Journalism. "

George Jones, the late owner of the New York "Times, " when that papermade its historic fight against the Tweed Ring, was offered five milliondollars by "Slippery Dick" Connolly, one of the gang, and an officer ofthe city government, if he would sell the "Times, " which was then notworth over a million. Mr. Jones said afterwards, "The devil will nevermake a higher bid for me than that. " Yet he declined the bribe without atremor. A certain religious weekly lost a hundred thousand dollars forrefusing to take patent-medicine advertisements--probably ten times whatthe paper was worth. "Everybody's Magazine, " and many others of itsclass, refuse every kind of questionable advertising. 

Many editors and publishers scrupulously eschew politics, lestobligations be incurred that might limit their opportunities for publicservice. Some will not even accept dinner invitations when the motiveis known to be the expectation of a _quid pro quo_. 

Perhaps one of the few disagreeable things a conscientious editorcannot hope to avoid is the necessity of denouncing his personalfriends. Yet this must be done again and again. Indeed, there arethousands of editors to-day who will not hesitate a moment to espousethe unpopular cause, though they know it will endanger theiradvertising receipts and subscription list. 

"The Independent, " for instance, could undoubtedly build up a greatcirculation in the South among white people if we could only ceaseexpressing our disapproval of the way they mistreat their coloredbrothers. But we consider it a duty to champion a race, who, through nofault of their own, have been placed among us, and whom few papers, statesmen, or philanthropists feel called upon to treat as friends. 

There is a limit, of course, to the length to which a paper can go indefying its constituency, whether advertisers or subscribers. Manifestly a paper cannot be published without their support. But thereare times when an editor must defy them, even if it spells ruin tohimself and bankruptcy to the paper. It is rarely necessary, however, to go to such an extremity as suicide. The rule would seem to be--and Ithink it can be defended on all ethical grounds--that under nocircumstances should an editor tell what he knows to be false, or urgemeasures he believes to be harmful. This is a far different thing fromtelling all the truth all of the time, or urging all the measures heregards as good for mankind in season and out. That is the attitude ofthe irreconcilable, and the irreconcilable is as ineffectual injournalism as he is in church or state. Thus "The Ladies' Home Journal"has not as yet taken any part in furthering the great woman's suffragemovement which is sweeping over the world, and which ought to, butnevertheless does not, interest most American women. From Mr. Bok'spoint of view this policy of silence is quite right, and the only onedoubtless consistent with the great circulation of his magazine. Aperiodical which wants a million readers must adhere strictly to theconventions if it would keep up its reputation as a safe guide for themultitude. This may not be the ideal form of leadership, but it iscommon sense, which is, perhaps, more to be desired. "Ed" Howe, theeditor of "The Atchison Globe, " the paper which gets closer to thepeople than any other in America, evidently admires this theory ofediting, for he confesses, "When perplexities beset me and troublesthicken, I stop and ask myself what would Edward Bok have me do, andthen all my difficulties dissolve. "

Despite the sinister influences that tend to limit the freedom ofeditors and taint the news, the efficiency, accuracy, and ability ofthe American press were never on such a high plane of excellence asthey are to-day. The celerity with which news is gathered, written, transmitted, edited, published, and served on millions ofbreakfast-tables every morning in the year is one of the wonders of theage. When great events happen, especially of a dramatic nature, we seenewspapers at their best. Witness the recent wreck of the steamshipRepublic. Only a few wireless dispatches were sent out by the heroicBinns during the first few hours, and yet every paper the next morninghad columns about the disaster, all written without padding, inaccuracy, or disproportion. Also recall the way the press handled therecent Witla kidnaping case. Within twenty-four hours every newspaperreader in the United States was apprised of the crime in all itsdetails, and in most cases the photograph of the little boy wasreproduced. 

It is the gathering of the less important news of the day, however, where reporting has deteriorated, and yellow journalism is largelyresponsible for this. Yellow journalism is a matter of typography andtheatrics. The most sensational, and often the most unimportant, newsis featured with big type, colored inks, diagrams, and illustrations. "A laugh or tear in every line" is the motto above the desk of the copyeditor. The dotted line showing the route taken by the beautifulhousemaid as she falls out of the tenth-story window to the streetbelow adds a thrill of the yellow "write up. " The two prime requisitesfor an ideal yellow newspaper, as that prince of yellow editors, ArthurBrisbane, once told me, are sport for the men and love for the women;and as the Hearst papers have secured their great circulation byputting in practice this discovery, we find the other papers areconsciously or unconsciously copying them. A typographical revolutionhas thus been brought about, as well as a general deterioration ofreporting. Even in papers of the highest character an over-indulgencein headlines is coming into vogue, while the reporter is allowed toooften to treat the unimportant and most personal events in apicturesque or facetious way without regard to truthfulness. On alecture trip West last winter, a reporter of one of the mostrespectable and influential papers in the country asked if I was goingto attack anybody in my speech, or say anything that would "stir up themud. " When I said I hoped not, he replied that it would not benecessary for him to attend the lecture. "Just give me the title, andthe first and last sentences, " said he, "and I'll write up an accountof it at my desk in the office. "

Sometimes, by this method of reporting, a serious injury is done to theindividual. A reporter on the New York "Times" wrote up last winter asensational account of the marriage of the head worker of theUniversity Settlement on the East Side to a young leader of one of thegirls' classes. The marriage was performed by one of the officers ofthe Society of Ethical Culture, who are expressly authorized by the NewYork legislature to officiate on such occasions. And yet the reportercalled the marriage an "ethical" one, putting the word "ethical" inquotation marks and also the word "Mrs. , " to which the bride wasmorally and legally entitled, implying that the marriage was irregular, and indicated a tendency towards free love. Though many letters ofprotest were written to the "Times" about this, the "Times" made noeditorial apology for a breach of journalistic ethics, which shouldhave cost the reporter who wrote the article and probably the managingeditor who passed it their positions. 

It is this lack of sense of the fitness of things that would make theaverage reporter scribble away for dear life, if, when the President'smessage on the tariff was being read in Congress, a large black cat hadhappened to walk up the aisle of the House and jumped on the back ofSpeaker Cannon. Such an occurrence, I venture to say, would havecommanded more space in the next morning's papers than any pearls castbefore Congress by the President in his message. 

The yellows, however, despite their "night special" editions issuedbefore nine o'clock in the morning, their fake pictures and fakesensations, have come to stay. They serve yellow people. Formerly themasses had to choose between such papers as "The Atlantic Monthly, ""The Nation, " the New York "Tribune, " and nothing. No wonder they chosenothing. In the yellow press they now have their own champion, --a pressthat serves them, represents them, leads them, and exploits them, asTammany Hall does its constituency. Of course they give it theirsuffrage. The hopeful thing is that yellow readers don't stay yellowalways. When a man begins to read he is apt to think. When he begins tothink there is no telling where he will end, --maybe by reading theLondon "Times" or the "Edinburgh Review. " In New York the yellowpapers, while they still have an enormous circulation, are losing theirinfluence as a political and moral force. Evidently as soon as yellowpeople begin to use their wits they first apply them to the yellowjournals. 

The daily newspapers, however, both yellow and white, like naturalmonopolies, are public necessities. The people must have the news, andtherefore, the predatory interests, whether political or financial, have been quick to get control of the people's necessity. "Read thecomments on the Payne Tariff Bill, " says the "Philadelphia NorthAmerican" in its issue of March 20, "and every sane, well-informedAmerican discounts the comment of the Boston papers regarding raw andunfinished materials that affect the factories of New England. Most ofthe Philadelphia criticism counts for no more than what New Orleanssays of sugar, or Pittsburg of steel, or San Francisco of fruits, orChicago of packing-house products. And it is common knowledge that whatalmost every big New York paper says is an echo of Wall Street. "

The weeklies and monthlies, however, are not, like the dailies, necessities. They have to attract by their merits alone. They must atall hazards therefore retain the people's confidence in theirintegrity, enterprise, and leadership. Whether this be the trueexplanation or not, there is at least no doubt that the moral power ofthe American periodical press has been transferred from the dailies tothe monthlies and weeklies. The monthlies and weeklies have also theadvantage of being national in circulation instead of local, andtherefore less subject to local and personal influence. They are alsopreserved, bound or unbound, and not thrown away on the day ofpublication like the daily paper. At all events, the weeklies andmonthlies have been the pioneers and prime movers in the great moralrenaissance now dawning in America. Moral strife always brings outmoral leaders. Where will you find in the daily press to-day twentyeditors to compare with Richard Watson Gilder and Robert UnderwoodJohnson, of "The Century, " Henry M. Alden and George Harvey, of"Harper's, " Ray Stannard Baker and Ida M. Tarbell, of "The American, "Lyman Abbott and Theodore Roosevelt, of "The Outlook, " Walter Page, of"The World's Work, " Albert Shaw, of the "Review of Reviews, " Paul E. More, of "The Nation, " S. S. McClure, of "McClure's, " Erman Ridgway, of"Everybody's, " Bliss Perry, of "The Atlantic Monthly, " Norman Hapgood, of "Collier's, " Edward Bok, of "The Ladies' Home Journal, " George H. Lorimer, of the "Saturday Evening Post, " Robert M. La Follette, of "LaFollette's, " William J. Bryan, of "The Commoner, " or Shailer Matthews, of "The World To-day"? These are the men--and there are more, too, Imight name--who came forward with their touch upon the pulse of thenation when the day of the daily newspaper as a leader of enlightenedpublic opinion had waned. As a Philadelphia daily has admitted, "Avacuum had been created. They filled it. "

Let me quote from a recent editorial, [3] which seems to sum up thistransformation most clearly:--

 "The modern American magazines have now fallen heir to the power exerted formerly by pulpit, lyceum, parliamentary debates, and daily newspapers in the moulding of public opinion, the development of new issues, and dissemination of information bearing on current questions. The newspapers, while they have become more efficient as newspapers, that is, more timely, more comprehensive, more even-handed, more detailed, and, on the whole, more accurate, have relinquished, or at least subordinated, the purpose of their founders, which was generally to make people think with the editor and do what he wanted them to do. The editorials, once the most important feature of a daily paper, are rarely so now. They have become in many cases mere casual comment, in some have been altogether eliminated, in others so neutralized and inoffensive that a man who had bought a certain daily for a year might be puzzled if you asked him its political, religious, and sociological views. He would not be in doubt if asked what his favorite magazine was trying to accomplish in the world. Unless it is a mere periodical of amusement it is likely to have a definite purpose, even though it be nothing more than opposition to some other magazine. If a magazine attacks Mrs. Eddy, another gallantly rushes to her defense. If one gets to seeing things at night, the other becomes anti-spirituous. If the first acquires the muck-raking habit, the complementary organ publishes an 'Uplift Number' that oozes optimism from every paragraph. The modern editor does not sit in his easy-chair, writing essays and sorting over the manuscripts that are sent in by his contributors. He goes hunting for things. The magazine staff is coming to be a group of specialists of similar views, but diverse talents, who are assigned to work up a particular subject, perhaps a year or two before anything is published, and who spend that time in travel and research among the printed and living sources of information. "

 [3] _The Independent_, Oct. 1, 1908. 

Now my conclusion of the whole question under discussion is this: Whilecommercialism is at present the greatest menace to the freedom of thepress, just as it is to the freedom of the Church and the University, yet commercialism as it develops carries within itself the germ of itsown destruction. For no sooner is its blighting influence felt andrecognized than all the moral forces in the community are put in motionto accomplish its overthrow, and as the monthlies and weeklies havethrived by fighting commercialism, so it is reasonable to suppose thatthe dailies will regain their editorial influence when they adopt thesame attitude. 

I know of only four ways to hasten the time when commercialism willcease to be a reproach to our papers. 

First. The papers can devote themselves to getting so extensive acirculation that they can ignore the clamor of the advertisers. Butthis implies a certain truckling to popularity, and the best editorswill chafe under such restrictions. 

Second. The papers can become endowed. That others have thought of thisbefore, Mr. Andrew Carnegie can doubtless testify. There would be manyadvantages, however, of having several great endowed papers in thecountry. The same arguments that favor endowed theatres or universitiesapply equally to papers. We need some papers that can say what ought tobe said irrespective of anybody and everybody, and which can serve asexamples to other papers not so fortunately circumstanced. Butmanifestly the periodical industry as a whole is much too large to beendowed, and the few papers that may be endowed by private capital, orby the Government, would have only a limited influence on the industryas a whole. Our government now publishes a weekly paper in Panama, which takes no advertisements, and is furnished free to everygovernment employee on the Isthmus. It is a model paper in manyrespects, but manifestly its example is not apt to be followedextensively before the dawn of the Coöperative Commonwealth. It may bethat the practice newspapers conducted by the schools of journalismconnected with our great universities will raise the standard by makingtheir chief object the publication of accurate and reliable news. 

Third. The papers can combine in a sort of trust. Take the TheatricalSyndicate, for instance, whose theatres could not be kept open a weekwithout newspaper publicity. The Theatrical Syndicate's policy seems tobe to single out any paper that becomes too critical and give it anabsent-advertisement treatment. At the present moment this medicine isbeing prescribed in several of our large cities. But let all thepublishers form a publishers' trade union as it were, and whenever anadvertisement is withdrawn, appoint a committee of investigation, andif the committee reports that the withdrawal of the advertisement wasdone for any improper reason, then let all the papers refuse to printan advertisement of the play, or allow their critics to mention ituntil the matter is satisfactorily adjusted. This would bring theadvertisers to their knees in a moment. 

The papers have the whip hand if they will only combine, but they areall so jealous of one another that probably any real combination is along way off. Still there are indications of a gentleman's agreement inthe air, for all other interests are combining and they will be forcedto follow suit. 

And what will the public do then, poor thing? A newspaper trust willcertainly be as inimical to the public welfare as any other combinationdoing business in the fear of the Sherman law. Indeed it would be moredangerous, for a periodical trust would practically control thediffusion of intelligence, and that no self-respecting democracy wouldor should allow. But this is borrowing trouble from the future. 

Fourth and last. We come back to the old, old remedy, which ifsincerely applied would solve most all the ills of society. I refer topersonal integrity, to character. Despite what may be said to thecontrary, integrity is the only thing in the newspaper profession, asin life itself, that really counts. 

The great journalists of the past, whatever their personalidiosyncrasies, have all been men of integrity; the great journalistsof to-day are of the same sterling mould; and the journalistic giantsof to-morrow--and the journalists of the future will be giants--mustalso be men of inflexible character. 

There has never been a time in all history when so many and soimportant things were waiting to be done as to-day. The newest schoolof sociology tells us that the human race in its spiral progress onwardand upward through sweat and blood, misery and strife, has at lastreached the point where, emerging from the control of the blind forcesof an inexorable environment, it is about to take its destiny into itsown control and actually shape its future. From now on, evolution is tobe a psychical rather than a physical process. The world is on thethreshold of a new era. We see the first faint dawn of universal peaceand of the brotherhood of man. 

Fortunate that editor whose privilege it is to share in pointing outthe way. 

_The Riverside Press_CAMBRIDGE · MASSACHUSETTSU · S · A