Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-08-09
THURSDAY. ......AUGUST 9, 1888,


Advertising Under k0lse Prctences'
We conld not but smile when we read
yesterday in tho C3'tcat Presbyterian
its comment on long selected article,
which, seeing il whore we did, we at first
took TO be one that had been penncd in
the interest Of the public and repro
duced in our neighbours columns that all
its readers might profit 10y it, but which
we soon discovered 10 be what the Pres
byfeyfan guessed it 10 be. We quote:
"Since the foregoing WAS put in typo
we have been ied TO beiievc that II ia
nothing but an advertisement Of we
omit the name. All that's said by Wids
Atrakc may Zoe true, hut for ourselves
We know nothing about It. II the arii-
Gle * ms We suspect an advertisement
our publication of it viii serve to show
the tricks OF the advertising trade and
bow our most respectable magazines and
uewspapers. in order to make money,
eel their columns sn1 deceive their read
erN We clipped the article from the
reading columns OF the New York Chris-
h1n iiroc0tc
"Nhether the I4r9cnic had 1t as IN
advertisement or not We DO not know,
but our suspicion Is that it Was ana adj
vertiscment in both Uido AT0Lc and
the 1frDc0fc.
a great many newspapers now IN
tro1ucc. without any mark at Oh, paid
o3yerbscacnts among their telected
ARTICLES and We regard it a. shameful
practice.
Does the Cu'rol Presbyterian ever
sec any advertisements Of that kind in
the Rchmoud religious papers? Or
even in our secular journals ?
1t is not 50 easy ioreditors to draw the
Huebetwoon admisableaad inalmissiblo
advertisements. II would he 10 assume
o sort Of censorship over the press for
the mana -cr Of q journal 10 decide for
example that no pateut-mediciac ady,r-
tisemeut should ever appear in rs col
umns and yet TINS is exactly what strict
morality would seem 10 demand OF all
editors. All OF rs are rather in
chned to allow secular journals to
advertise quack-medicines bat, rs
we expect more OF q clergyman
than OF laymaD we expect religious
pspers to le more choice than secular
ones in admitting advertisements. 1t
rather touches ones moral seusipilitie3
to fnd conspicuously placed in a rei-
Fious weekly to which SO many persons
look for advice an advertisement assuring
their readers that consumption may be
cured by the use of Dr. Somebody's
remedy; or an advertisement intended
for 10 other purpose than to in
duce uususrcct'ng persons TO Gil the
advertisers pockets with postage
stamps; or au advertisement coming
from city where there are
thousands Of women working day in and
day out for a mere pitiance and other
thousands seeking employment at siarya-
ton prices stating that the advertiser
desires to employ large number of
women at ten, twelve, fifteen, or twenty
dollars per week; or an advertisement
Offering to find employment for ali
school teachers who viii enclose Il dollar
or two to the advertiser; OF q lottery adj
vertisomcnt.
But these attempts to impose upon
the public assume Irotean shapes. We
cannot undertake 10 catalogue them.
Bogus OF deceiving advertisements ought
not to appear III any paper secular or
religions. The cat ought to be boiled.
But who is to bell her What editor
would undertake 10 give list of the ad-
vertisements which he knew, or thought
he knew, were written with intent to
defraud the public No doubt even re-
hCious papers occasionally publish ad
vertisements which lead patrons of the
paper TO take medicines that Lill them
This is not a comforting reflection for
any Of u.s.
viii the Ccatral Presbyterian suggest
remedy for the condition of things to
which We have in this article alluded and |
which all OF US SO much deplore?