Semi=weekly graphic., 1898-02-23
Deeadenee Of the Press.

some remarks about the status of the press of the present day. What are its ends and what is it's lnfuence2 A true answer to these questions will not rebound to the credit of the modern press.
 Itis constantly held, with dam nabIe iteration, that "that this newspaper is strictly business in stitution; that it's raison d'etre is to make money for it's owners; and that it's object is to print all the news. But these declarations place the press of today upon very low plane, and have sunk it far below the level of the press of the past two or three generations.
 As matter of fact the press has never been the great and banefcent agency which it has been held to be, both by demagogues, who are bid ding for its favor and applause, and by the individual egotism of it's con ductors.
 In it's best days the press was characterized by great vigor of thought; superior intellect, earnest ness and poweri but it was equally
  characterized by yirulenee, abuse, if not blaekguardism, belligerency and partisanism. This is not high praise; but it is true, and in that era ofits existence it really possessed great power and influence, and was an agency to be courted or feared.
 Out of such an agency one might have reasonably predicted an eYolu- tion really great and benefcent; a dynamic power in civilization and especially in politics. But quite the contrary has happened. The evolu- tion is not yet complete; but so far as it has gone, the result has been quite disheartening to those high hearted and honorable men who love the profession of journalism. Let those who are old enough to re- member Prentice, Greedy, Jones, Forsy the, Daniels and a number of other of journalists of the elder era and compare them with Pulitzer, Hearst and their kind. Let them compare the blackguard journalism of the era of the first men ntioned, with it's feroeity, it's courage and it's duels and It's street fights, with the yellow journalism of the present era, with it's indecency, it's fake news, it's preposterous assumptions, and dirt in general, and he will realize the awful drop that has occurred in the standard of journalism within even the last thirty years.
 In the old time there was not so much "news" printed in the papers because indecency and scandal were not relished by the public so much as they are today, and because the feverish thirst for sensation was not so intense. It was not then necessary for a reputable rewspa- per to print at the head of it's col umns, All the news that is fit to be printed, as tfe New York Times does. And again, editors were held to strict accountability for what they printed, and publishers were not estimated by the number Of startling lies they might print one day and be forced to contradict the next.
 Indeed, fake news has become a common thing with newspapers, and an important speciality with some newspapers, and the New York Journal and the New York World, for instance, have created fortunes by publishing fake news. They are denominated great newspapers, and yet there is no reading man in the country who attaches the slightest importance to these sensational publications. But they amuse, ere ating little or no impression upon the thought of the country.
 But it is a singular fact that men and even women-like to read this description of papers; so much so is this the case that the evil will con- tinue to grow, and though there are some clean and conscientious news papers remaining in the country and making money, yet the profits of. yellow journalism are so great, and hence so tempting, that we do not hesitate to predict that, if some successful movement is not made to check this descent of journalism in-