New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-05-19
SECOND ARTICLE

ANY censorship depends largely upon the
Judgment and the personality Of the censor
His government lays down some rules for
his guidance md then tells him TO go aheau'
He may be instructed to censor only iac,s
or he may have TO censor OPINION as "en'
The British organization, built up by the Di-
rector of Special Intelligence from pracu-
cally a handful of men to body OF more
than 5000 trained experts has, rightly or
r,ro,gIv boon directed to censor opinion ms
we'll as facts.
The censor is between two fires-he IS SUD-
iect TO attack from the press and from gov
eminent departments. In the last resort the
press will win in n democracy. Public officials
often fail to appreciate the power OF the
press; they do not recognize that without
tho press on their side they would not go far.
Suppose. for example, the British and Ameri-
can press should boycott Mr.. Lloyd George;
supposc he made a speech addressed to the
American people and suppose no British or
American newspaper published it. Could
President Wilson inform his countrymen
what the British Premier had to say or couio
he hope to do anything with the whole
American press, not hostile, but silent re-
earding the Prime Minister'S utterances
The press of country lives long after its
leaders have stepped down; the press maxe'
leaders, not leaders the press. And when
the press fights for freedom of opinion II y
on firm ground The press in democracy
is strenuousy opposed to DICTATORSHIP even
in war time.
Facts Held Up, Then Passed
When I failed twice to get the British
censor to pass articles telling Of the misruie
Of Stuermer and Protopopof in Russia the
censor was acting within his power. A THIRD
article, giving all the facts contained In
the two preceding, was passed. That was
Good illustration of the question OF person
atty in censorship. Ii there were reasons
why America should not read the hrst TWO
articles, why was the third passed? The
answer: conditions had changed in Russia
and the censor did not fear offending an
ely: or, better, the censor believed the al
vantages of the publication more than coun-
terbaanced the disadvantage.
The business of censoring opinion cannon
be easy. If, for example, 1.-The Times oil
London should bitterly attack the French
government a serious situation would arise
but if "The Labor Leader should publish
a similar attack no one would greatly worry
On the other hand the propaganda value oil
"The Times" to the Allies greatly exceeds
that of 1.-THE Labor Leader" Again, Tine
Nation" has been uniformly friendly to Pres
ident Wilson and the United States, while
"John Bull" with circulation well over
Million has frequently hurled invective al
both. There is a ban on the foreign crcuia'
ton of "The Nation" because it furnished
"propaganda material" - encouragement 10
the enemy-but none on John Bull when
might have furnished plenty Of discourage
ment to prospective ally as well as cheer
to the enemy propaganda bureau. In every
case the censor had to use his Judgment on
whether the periodical should be exported
6ut emphasis must be laid on the point thar
it was not fact but opinion he had to judge
II think this war will end in a stalemate
and that we should Immediately begin 70
seek peace by negotiation, that is an opinion
which the censor is empowered to delete
from anything | write. But suppose the