Connecticut western news., 1890-10-01
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1890.


 WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1890.
 THE RELATIONS OF THE PUBLIC
 TO THE EDITOR.
 Reaa Before the Connecticut Weekly
 Rress Association at Hartford
 September 30, 1890.
 BY s. O. BECKLEY, EDITOR OF THE CoN-
 NECTICUT WESTERN NEWS.
 Afr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen:
 At the July meeting of the Connecti- cut Weekly Press association. held at New Haven, Editor Addis, of the Wind sor Locks Journal, read brief but ex- cellent essay on "The Relations of the Editor to the Public" He expressed the hope that the next essayist would take up the question of "The Relations of the Public to the Editor" He said that whoever would do SO would have 8 large field. I had the honor and good fortune to be appointed essayist for the present meeting, but it has been my misfortune to be so ill. and otherwise handicapped. during several weeks that I could not inspect this large field, as Brother Addis terms it, until the elev- enth hour; therefore, I cannot call your attention to aA the features it contains. The relations of the public to the editor are SO manifold that a volume could be written on the subject, but will only mention a few topics and leave you to follow out the different lines of thought suggested.
 take it for granted that you wish this subject presented more especially with reference to country editors than to city editors, although some of it's features are equally applicable to both. I can best present the question by keeping in in view two leading phases: first, what is due the public from the editor; sec- ond, what is due the editor from the public. In other words, what the pub lie should receive from the editor and what it is their duty to give the editor. Or, state the case negatively, if you pre- fer. in this way: what the public should not submit to; and what the editor should not submit to. These leading phases may be subdivided into various minor phases or topics. It is always 8 delicate and unpleasant task for one to criticise his own occupation and point out the faults or shortcomings of his chosen profession; you can, therefore, comprehend the position in which am placed while attempting to discuss the relations of the public to the editor. Let no brother take -offense or think l wish to be personal because duty com pels me to speak plainly while impar- tially dealing with the question.
 will now consider what is due the public. First, the public should not be misled by the editor. People buy news papers to gain information, to learn what is transpiring at home and abroad, and they have . right to expect and demand that the truth, SO far as obtainable, be published instead of falsehood or sen. sational rumors. In this connection we might state that the public also demand that they be not misled or deceived in regsrd to investments. Multitudes have lost their hard-earned dollars by invest ing in some lottery or real estate scheme which editors were paid to "whoop up;' lost their fortune by purchasing stock in come worthless gold or silver mine which editors were booming in order to sell or unload the stock which some smooth-tongued sharper had either in- duced them to pay cash for or had given them in payment for advertising; lost their fortune by investing in the thou sand and one enterprises or schemes that would instantly collapse, or burst like g bubble. if pierced by the editorial pen tipped with truth instead of deceit, or would fall of their own weight were the newspaper props removed. The public will not long pasronize merchant who deceives them in regard to the quality of his goods; sells them cotton or shoddy for all wool, sand for sugar, clay for flour; neither will it long support an editor who knowingly and wilfully misleads and deceives them. P. T. Barnum, the great snowman, is credited with saying "the American people like to be hum- bugged." Nevertheless such policy is . suicidal one for an editor to adopt.
 The public are not legitimate plunder and they object to many of the schemes by which editors attempt to increase newspaper circulation. Some of the schemes are very unjust and offensive, especially those termed "voting con- tests" in which prize is offered to the prettiest or most popular young lady in the town or the county, the most popu- Ter deputy sheriff in the county, the fa- vorite military officer, the favorite fire man, policeman, railway conductor, etc. Such schemes are an imposition upon the public and generally compel the in- voluntary candidates and their friends to purchase thousands of copies of what ever newspaper offers said prize. And yet such contests do not determine the popularity of said newspaper victims. They merely indicate or reveal the ,6ncInt q vanity that the involuntary