The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1910-02-15
E TO RIAL
.sThe New Standard of Newspaper Ethics"

ssIhe New Standard of Newspaper Ethics"
n The Times Dispatch again violates all the stand
tds of newspaper ethics by bringing personalities
no a discussion of principles. Ii endeavors TO
0adc its responsibility for the position that Every
IN has right TO drink liquor to his comfort,
Eirst it finds fault with The Nrgnian because 1t
1oes not give date and page of its utterance.
secondly, it takes refuge in the statute OF limlta-
Non. and pleads that the utterance is out OF date
Thirdly, IF its slogan ever enunciated and
s5ntpoduced into the Times-Dispatoh in the days
shs4ore the passage of the Mann Bill which the
Mondays version OF the Friday totally different
Statement il appears regrettably necessary to re-
cord impression that the enunciaung was done
by Mr.. W. S. Copeland at the present chief editorial
contributor to The Richmond Virginian
Is not this pitable exhibition the part of the
Supreme" in Virginia? 1t cannot deny that The
Virginian correctly quotes IT, II cannot point to
any statement at any time, in which it repudiated
this utterance, which has been quoted hundreds OF
times in the past years on the platform and
lin Int as the position taken by the TimesDspatch.
lit finally admits that the utterance was made IN
It's columns but tries to evade its responsibility for
ii by the starement that the enunciating was done
by Mr.. W. S Copeland. at present chief editorial
4 contributor on The Richmond Nrgnian."
\ This is childish lodging. There is only one
question invoked. Do The editorial utterances Of
the Times-Dispateh represent the policy OF the
Times Dispatch or do they represent simply the
views of the men who write them If they represent
nobody but the writers, let them be printed as any
other personal communications printed and let
the writers sign their names and let their utterance
stand only as their individual views. But it they
represent the views and policy of the paper let the
paper stand for them and quit lodging and trying
to saddle upon individual the responsibility OF an
editorial utterance. What would the founder and,
I for twenty years the publisher of the Times-Dis
patch have said If any man had asked him who was
responsible for the editorial utterances Of that
Nvsar Wau1 he have &aid that the TineS-I lis
patch not responsible but the man who wrote
the editorial personally responsible One can
picture the fine soorn with which he would have
\ made reply that the Times Dispatch was response
bic for all the statements in its editorial columns.
! How have the mighty falIenl
This second break the part OF the Times
4 Dispatch is utterly nexcusable That paper at
4 4empted- on Sunday and Monday to hold the Nif
Z ginian responsible for a private personal letter,
written by one of the stockholders in reference to
matter connected in no way with the policy of the
paper The Nirginian showed that by such a stand
ard the Times Dispatch must be judged by the
personal acts of the present managing editor OF
the Times Dispatch who is responsible for this new
standard OF newspaper ethics.
But here on Tuesday, We have virtually the same
position announced in another form. namely, a
newspaper is not to be held responsible for its
editorial utteranCes, but when they attacked can
dodge its responsibility and place it upon the in
di,dual who wrote the editorial which declared the
POSITION anu ponCy vi II Is ofHy proper
to say at this point that while it is that w S.
copeland is one of the editorial writers The Vir
ginian staff Yet Mr. Copeland in taking up this
work distinctly stated that he would not be in any
sense responsible for the editorial policy of the
paper. but would do such work upon it, as should
he arranged with the management OF the paper. 1t
not right to hold newspaper responsible for the
{ views OF workmen upon it, nor on the other hand
+ Is it right to hold every who works upon a
paper personally responsible Tor the policy OF the
paper. As matter of fact Nh Codeland has not
written any OF the editorials the liquor question
81 which have appeared in the columns of the Nr-
ginian.
n The Nirg MAN believes that the newspaper world
will look with amazement and disgust upon this
effort of the Times-Dispatch to drag into the col
nmns of the newspapers the personal conduct and
opinion of those who may stockholders, editorial
contributors reporters, etc, be connected with the
papers.
. This is indeed "A New Standard OF Newspaper
Ethics