The Washington times., 1901-11-03

should be recorded to his credit. He was
an innocent and retiring young man; by
card he extended the courtesies of the
New York -. and begged the honor of
an Interview" / explained firmly but
courteously that l had nothing to say and
could answer no questions.
He said he was sorry, as that prevented
Kim from asking the single question he
had intended to ask. l reflected that one
question which | was not bound to an
swer could no harm, and my curiosity
prompted me to ask him what II was. l
had intended" he said, Ito ask you
whether YOU considered that the assassi-
nation of President Mckinley was due to
the liberation afforded anarchists by Eng
land" The supposition was preposter-
Gus that | blurted out an indignant DIS
cIaimcr before realized that l had been
caught out. | have no doubt that start
ling account of the interview appeared
the next day. and that my only consola-
ton is my firm conviction that that in
genuous youth would have produced ii
even If had said nothing, for the inter
viewer has often no hesitation in telling
you with frankness that has an almost
irresistible charm that the interview has
to be printed whether you contribute to
1t or not.
When it became known that at Buffalo
/ had been received by Mr.. Roosevelt and
the members of the Cabinet, the chase
became fast and furious. / was assured
more than once that l could secure
nice little sum, either by reporting
what they had said to me. or, if L felt
any delicacy in the matter, by saying
anything interesting that would occur
to you as probable" / venture to think
that those last words, anything inter-
esting that would occur to you as prob
able furnish key to right under
standing of the American press.
The English journalist, whatever he
NAV do. processes to be seeking after
facts-the drier and duller those facts the
more likely he is to get reputation for
depth and accuracy. He knows that II
his statements prove incorrect he Will be
contradicted. and he knows that his edi-
tor does not like a contradiction of what
appears in his columns. He has, more
over. a healthy fear of the law of libel,
which tends to curb even exaggeration.
AS a result his imaginative powers are
allowed no play; they get blunted for
want of use, and perhaps this is why the
English journalist is regarded as some
thing of a bore who requires facts, and
generalities
His American brother lives in an en-
tirely different atmosphere, and is there
fore an entirely different product. He is
not required to concern himself overmuch
with facts-at most they are pegs on
which to hang a general conversation. He
just sustains and directs the conversation,
but INDUCES in no Socratic cross-exami-
nation. He will accept any reason you
give him, or can invent II for you if you
have not got one. If you have no ideas
he has plenty, and he puts them into your
mouth with no foolish reservation of
copyright If he makes you talk non
sense 1t is generally interesting nonsense,
for with much practice he gets to know
what he thinks you ought to say, even II
you do not say IT.. His object and his
editors object is to make his paper inter
esting I'VE publish a daily paper and
not a daily encyclopedia, sir" said one OF
them. The American journalist has to
supply copy, and the three requisites, as
qouted to me by very Intelligent re-
porter. are: G) That It shall be good read
ing; (2) that it shall be connected with
some individual OF event of note; 80 that
il shall be probable. Within these limits
the field Is all his own. In some way or
be made 10 speak. He is dull and senten-
tious; he must be made interesting. He
knows or will say nothing on the subject
upon which he is questioned; ne must be
made to express strongly what would
probably be his view. If he had any. The
next day the man interviewed may wish
to deny all he has been made to say.
Nothing is easier: the same or another
reporter of the same or another paper is
at his disposal. He wants perhaps mere
ly to deny the previous interview; he
would be poor journalist who confined
himself to that. He is made to express
opinions diametricalIy opposed to those he
expressed yesterday; the same paper will
publish the two, will make no attempt TO
reconcile them, no apology, and the public
may choose between the two versions,
whichever it thinks the more probable.
AS matter Of fact the public reads both,
is amused by both, and attaches no value
to either.
In America the press is distinctly a
commercial enterprise. 1t is printed to
sell, and success is measured by it's sales.
and its sales alone. very much larger
number buy newspapers than in England.
The interest of the masses in politics
(State, Federal, and ImperiaD is much
larger. The intelligence of the masses is
much higher, and they are much more
apt to form their own opinions from facts
given to them than, as In England, TO
take them ready made from their papers.
AS a result the news portion of the paper
is far more important feature than the
editorial The news editor" as he is
called. is really far more important than
the political editor or leader writer. 1t is
the news editor who has TO make the pa
per readable to the masses who buy,
while the Editor is merely sort Of Greek
chorus. Formerly the news editor was
expected to collect and publish such items
OF so-called news as told on the side
which the political editor supported. Any
thing inconvenient to those views was
suppressed (as it is today in most of the
French press, but the importance Of the
news editor has grown, the necessity OF
giving both sides of a question has been
recognized as an act Of policy If not of
justice, and the news editor has come TO
be independent Of the political views Of
his editor.
That is distinct advance, but the re-
suit has been that the editor, who in
England is responsible for the whole pa
per, who gives TO 1t its tone and charac-
ter. who is the guardian of its consistency
and reputation, exercises in America no
such control over the news portion of the
paper. II his own reporter is declared a
liar he prints the declaration without
comment, and considers that he has prov
ed the impartiality OF his journal. The
individual character of a paper, as we
understand 1t in England, is hardly known
in America; for, though many papers
have their very strongly marked charac-
teristics they apply to the editorial por-
gO-