The Osceola times., 1882-03-18
AMERICAN vs.. ENGLISH JOURNALISM.
synopsis Of Mr.. Frank II. Wiiisio's Address
Upon this subject Before the Illinois Press
Association.

may be properly used In this connection
for the American press may baye an ac-
ton against the English, for completely
ignoring its existence, or for holding IL
up to public contempt. However, my
purpose being contrast and not antagon-
ism, will take the liberty to change my
subject TO american and English jour
nalism."
The two forms of journalism have
sprung from the same original stock; so
have the two peoples; but both have
widely diverged. The English press is
provincial, the American is cosmopoli-
tan. 1t is largely in this provincialism
that the difference exists. The English
press rarely gives any news except what
pertains 10 its own people. Lately, un-
der momentsry inspiration, the papers
rivaled each other in giving the highest
thermometer or the greatest number OF
suustrokes in America, in recording our
outlawry or appalling accidents; and
later, it has excluded all except the Kill
ING of our president. In commenting
upon this 10 an Englishman of middle
rank, his reply was characteristic: "Aw,
YOU ave TO ave what we are doing, but
we don't ave TO ave what you are doing
The average Englishman has an astound'
ing idea OF his own country, and an
equally astounding idea of all others.
The impersonality of the English
press is very marked; in this respect
widely unlike the French press, and un-
like our own. In France, contributions
appear with the authors name, and he Is
responsible. Thus, all editors are trained
in fencing, not knowing at what moment
they may be called out on account OF
some offensive article. While in Amer
lea personal responsibility largely prevails
the editors defensive weapons are much
more varied, embracing shotguns, slung-.
shots. billies fists, brass.knuckles, and
other articles "too Numerous to men
ton"
The precise reverse of personal re-
sponsibility prevails in Eng and. Only
one person is known, and all subordi
mates are in obscurity. You can't gee
the editor and ask him around the cor
ner to take a drink. Often you cant
find out his name, and you can't get into
| his Office without the greatest formality
After considerable correspondence | re
ceived printed card stating that the
printer of the London Times Office would
show me through the establishment.
was taken in charge and was permitted
to look upon the dignified compositor'
, setting type, to gaze with awe upon
the presses, and then--was shown to the
same door at which | entered. My re
quest TO see the editor was treated mucl
as If common tramp should ask 10 bt
shown through the harem of the Sultan
of Turkey. Whatever may be the rea
| ~ IL. lal
ality, | suppose IL mad beginning, and
perhaps some fellow without brains
wants to absorb the credit of great
newspaper all himself My conviction
is that the system is not a good one
Writers only care to earn their salary
and can have no interest in their work
Only when an attachc goes outside as
did Archibald Forbes and others, does
he get any recognition, and then the pa
per that employs him never mentions
his name. Neither do the English pa
pers mention each other, thinking, per-
haps that the reader is thus prevented
from knowing of the existence of their
rivals.
much prefer the generous, mutual
reception Of the American press. Here
we recognize that the growth of an in.
dividual does not interfere with the
growth Of a paper. The love of appro-
baton is a potent stimulant and be-
lieve writers do better work with this to
urge them on. The English employe
has TO do his work well, or he will lose
his place, but he works only for pay,
while American writers work for both
pay and glory.
ENGLISH impersonality is connected
with a species of caste which isunknown
in America. Here every subordinate is
a possible chief In England reporter
is ex-otlicio a nobody. He may have
been gentleman before he was report
err but he forfeits all this. An English
reporter enters upon his work as life
time calling, and frequently grows old
in the business; while American report
ers, before they are old, are proprietors
or conclude that they have mistaken
their calling and go at something else.
The English proprietor is as exalted az
his subordnates are debased, and many
of his employees do not even know his
name and ifyou should be permitted to
see one Of the editors who have been
lionized in this country, and had enter.
tanned him here, the most you could ex-
pect Of him would be an invitation to
dine once at his cheapest club. BY this
do not mean to reflect upon the hospit.
slity of the English people as whole,
for they have few equals and no superiors
in generosity.
The English press is solid and conserva
tive, and In some respects superior to
our own. Take for instance case like
that Of Guiteau. An English editor
wonld not have presumed TO know NJ
to his guilt or innocence, and he would
not even have been spoken OF as the as
sassn, but as the alleged assassin. The
greatest care is taken not to forcstal in
any way the functions of judicial tribu
nal English editors are better educated
as rule. This education is good, but
frequently operates to the disadvantage
handicapped by classical illusions as tC
destroy their force and aften their etec
!, tiyeness. There an editor is not called
upon 10 discuss an infinite variety o.
subjects; he is employed TO write upor
one topic, and naturally treats it NOR,
exhaustively and thoroughly than al
! American editor can do.
} With all its faults | prefer the journal
ism Of our own country. The faults ar,
not ineradicable, and our newspapers ar,
earnest aud intense. The English il
calm and dispassionate. In Amerlc.
, men say what they mean, and write 70
their personal reputation, and for tn,
appreciation of the people. II is this in
tensity which makes our press NOR,
potent factor, more intimately connected
I with the future interests of the great re
/ public.