Bisbee daily review., 1917-05-23
Wednesday Morning, May g, 1917.
FUTILITY OF ATTRACTIONS.

Newspapers and newspaper have constitutions dislike They believe rightly the reracton usually amounts exaggeraton of the original article and does harm than good. The general public however believes that by printing facts facts placed in different light certain news may be rectifed.
 In the gathering of there is chance for ms take It is truly remarkable that mistakes creep into the papers the country When considered eight page daily changes, approximately thirty five columns thirty five thousand words, every day the mistakes and pale nsignihcance. The reporter who information, which newspapers build their printed matter is liable the majority of however the reporter blamed for mistake due to his informant.
 may be rightly charged that the reporter and the newspaper should carefully scrunize the character of his source done in nearly every case oftmes however the is in
 After news is placed a typewriter and headed" it then goes into the composing room. The head the article direction and the article proper to linotype machine After the type proof is taken and proof reader the sheet This supposed to Sometimes proofreaders read by copy-that follow the original article while reading the printed version-and many mistakes eimInateQ In the smaller eStaDlShmentS thlS IS eN pensive and is. often than not dispensed with
 Knowing the public its attitude toward news the editor reported dislike going infinite detail correcting mistake Some people appear think that many mistakes have been made maliciously Moth ing could farther the truth newspaper brides itself the cleanliness of its product freedom from Then too the reporter that print a retracton the be explained In ly every would allow the original article go unchalenged It brings attention mistakes which sometimes uncomfortable, both to the object of the article and to the paper.
 As in point the Tucson Citizen of Monday. example The original article comparison the retraction Read and whether this retraction of aggravation than correction:
 Doing the best it could tighten the gloom of The Citizen Friday printed the following squib
 "He OLieutenant Quesenberry) shown Menlo park. but advised by MT Hofmeister that it unsuitable owing the proclvities the adobe soil in weather Life in the trenches long pie froc and if training for desired, Meno park would probably be good place.
 "Mr Eomeister is responsible only for the statement that the adobe soil in Meno park all adobe soil has muddy disposition The rest of the squb is bit of editorial humor that exploded prematurey.
 "The explosion caught H. Schwalen who is the chief the Pima Realty Trust company, guardians of Menlo park, dour moment He demands plsnation with which The Citizen blandly oblges.
 "The vain purpose of the writer of this squib to boast soil of Tucson the equal in plastic qualities any France The fine deep soil of Menlo park so excellent for planting the umbrageous shade tree shrub the graceful vine and the verdant lawn had been forcefuy and forcbly impressed on his subconsciousness by which the elysan fields beyond have justly attained residence section and it natural step to prefer this adobe in mention that in other locality although the environs the city richly endowed adobely
 Although the natural proclivtes of the adobe in park stated thoroughly have they been curbed by management by of broad and well boulevards that Cinderella herself would not soied her dainty slippers with the dew did she tread the Meno park thoroughfare after down pour"