The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1893-09-24
lola on ANONYMOUS journalism.

lola on Anonymous journalism.
1t was natural enough that NJ. EMILE
lola. addressing the London Institute OF
Journalists. should have chosen to discuss
anonymity in journalism. but 1t must have
surprised his auditors TO hear him express
| disapproval OF signed articles. The identi-
ncation OF n writer with his work has long
been as distinguishing feature OF Paris
journals as the opposite usage has been Of
London newspapers. it was all the moro
creditable to NJ lola that he went to tho
core Of tho matter and recognized that tho
immense superiority OF the London press
In respect Of weight and influence is largely
traceable to the system which the Paris
press rejects.
1t is obvious that tho influence of signed
articles is due. in the long run. to their in
trinsic merits. and not to their authors
personality. Tho latter factor may dctract
from tho former. but cannot greatly add to
it. a distinguished name may attract read
ers to one poor composition. but it cannot
hold their attention to a series of such per-
formanccs. Under the anonymous system
OF Journalism. an article is admitted into
newspaper OF its deserts. and, therefore. q
high standard OF excellence can be more
easily maintained than where the reputa-
ton or rotoriety OF an author enters into
an EDITORS calculations. Proofs of this
fact may be furnished not only by COM
pairing tho London with tho Paris news
papers. but by contrasting certain English
periodicals with each other. Thus, in the
London Academy the contributions are
signed; in the AthenGum they are not new
erthcless. the superiority Of the latter
weekly, considered as All organ of criticism,
Is, upon the whole, sustained. So, too. the
Nineteenth CeRtu,y and the other monthly
reviews which print the names Of tho con-
tributors have seldom succeeded in sur
passing. and usually fail to reach, tho
uniformly high quality Of literary work in
tho anonymous Quarterly. No article in
any English review has. for some years,
produced 50 great a sensation as the Quar-
terly's attack upon tho hitherto unques-
toned accuracy of Prof. FREEMAN.
AS for tho leading articles of tho London
political newspapers. which NJ lola chiefly
had in view, it is true enough that these
lack the flashes which occasionally light up
the corresponding columns Of Paris jour
nails. but they are almost always character
lied by sobriety and dignity; they are free
from personalities. vulgarity. and indie
cency; and even in respect of style they
are perspicuous and correct. The fun
damental difference is this signed ar
ticle in the Paris Figaro carries only the
weight belonging to its individual merit
and even this may be impaired by tho
disreputabie character OF the author
whereas leader in the London Times
not only eXerts the influence which it
lntrinsically deserves. but produces an ef-
feet equivalent to the sum of all the intIu-
enccs exerted by all the other articles in
that issue OF the paper. Moreover. its inn
pact on the public mind is deepouod by the
whole momentum OF the intellectual and
moral force accumulated by the paper in
the past. In other words. when Paris
journal strikes. it can only be with the
power Inherent in one man; when London
newspaper strikes it is with the power of
q steam engine. In the one case the tar !
get is hit with pebble from sling; in tho
other with bolt from catapult.
All this Is familiar enough to experienced |
newspaper writer's who have seriously con- |
sidered tho workings Of the system OF |
which prevails in England and |
the United States. The first time young
man gets something printed in an editorial
column he Is an enthusiastic advocate of
signed articles twenty years later his
views will DO found to have undergone a
change. He perceives that. even from a
selfish point OF view. 1t Is better that a news
paper. considered as great corporate en-
tity. should flourish. even though this NAV
involve the placement Of his personality.
That such placement conduces to the pub
lie good Is unQuestlonable. and it is salts
factory to find this recognized by M. lola.
He sees that. during and since the French
Revolution. individualism has run mad in
France. and that. OF its perversities. signed
journalism Is one o! tho most mischievous.
NJ. lola Is keenly alive. 1t seems, to the
,vils Of a system that has destroyed In
Paris the authority OF the press. completed
The destruction of political parties, and too
often engendered disgusting personal
orawls. He is inclined to think that ano-
lymity would restore honesty and disiuter-
to the Paris newspapers. The
oracticability Of such change is question
lble. But. at all events. what he describes
rs the heartrending spectacle at present
by the press of the French capital
should suffice TO deter other countries from
adopting the system Of signed articles.