St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-03-09
NEWSPAPER ANONYMITY

Senator HoMPE's bill, regulating what
he calls the liberty of the press, has ex-
cited more interest abroad than it has
IN Minnesota. The bill itself is not i'm
p0rtant enough to warrant any extend
ed criticism, but its general purpose, it
may be said, is to require the names of
the authors to be affixed to all articles
published in newspapers in the state
Which comment upon or criticise the
actions Of men in public life.
1t Is not entirely obvious why, if this
IS to be counted an advantage, the favor
should be limited to politicians and not
extended to other classes of citizens,
who are almost as worthy in the eyes
OF the law. Nor, again, is it quite clear
how any particular good is to be ac-
complished by such an act, even
IL 1t were enforceable, unless Mr..
HoMPE proposes also to reinstate
the dueling habit and afford his ag-
grieved fellow statesmen the opportu-
nifty of killing their critics on the field
OF honor, as we'll as suing the offending
newspapers in the courts of justice.
But the fact that such bill has been
introduced is an interesting commentary
on the success with which writer's for
the public press nowadays merge their
own individuality in that of the paper
with which they may happen to be con-
nected. One would think that 1t would
not be necessary that articles should be
signed III order to have their authorship
uncovered. If a newspaper should say
anything offensive of one of our SEN
atorS it would seem to be the easiest
thing in the world for anybody knowing
its staff TO tell him at once who wrote
the wicked paragraph. The editor with
a vigorous and aggressive personality OF
with a timid and shrinking one might
reasonably be expected to betray his
character in his sentences. But in point
Of fact he does not.
All sorts Of men with characters I'M
like and with divergent trainings will,
after little, write in practically the
same style, and with the same trend of
thought if they work together in the
same office. Many and many brilliant
leader, for which the editor-in-chief gets
credit, was written by some obscure and
humble underlIng. And many weak
Squib, for which the public curses some
understrapper, has dropped from the
brilliant pen of papers high-priced
paragrapher. WALTER BAGEHoT, in
his brilliant book, which he calls ply
sizes and Politics." calls attention to this
curious fact, and gives an example from
his own experience. When he first be-
came writer on the London Times
nothing was more foreign to his taste
and his methods tn an its style of edi-
torials. But, after a few weeks, he
found himself, even against his will.
writing as his fellow workers did, and
as all editorial writer's for the Times
! had always done. He does not offer
| complete explanation of how he came
to do this, but implies that he was prac-
! tically driven to it by an irresistible
impulse. the nature of which he could
not anayZe.
This corresponds to the experience of
writer's son other papers, and explains
why it is that every article on the edi-
torial page in every successive issue of a
daily newspaper appears to be the work
of the same man, while. in point of fact,
| they have been written by many differ
ent members of a ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
staff. The readers of paper become
! accustomed to particular tone, and
expect and desire it. The paper itself
endeavors to crafty them, and its
writer's are selected and retained in as
far as they are able to do this. The
| general result is complete newspaper
anonymity. Every sentence is the SEN
tence not of its author, but of the paper
The paper sends it out to the world as
its expression of opinion, and stands
responsible for it, This is the distin-
gushing characteristic of contemporary
American journalism, and it would
probably require quite number OF acts
of the legislature to effect any change
! in it.