Arizona republican., 1918-05-12
What is Constructive Criticism? !?

Colonel Rooscvelts reiteration Friday of his charge against Postmaster General Bureson of dscrmina- tion in his treatment newspapers which criticize the government is only preliminary the statement he will make at length for incorporation in the Con- gressional Record This matter grew out of the hold ing up of a part of issue of the Metropolitan magazine containing an article 'Is America Honest?" Threats were made by the postmaster general against other publications which, though they had engaged in criticism of the administration in its conduct of the war were of undoubted loyalty In the cases of the Metropolitan Golfers and the New York Tribune, these journals had all long before engaged in the war. urged that should do so and should hasten preparations for that inevitable event.
 We are all agreed that we have no right to in duge in any but constructive criticism. But we are not all agreed to what is meant by constructive criticism. In the opinion of many, it involves the substitution of definite plan for plan with which fault is found It is also supposed by many that this criticism should never be bitter unfrendly. That Is q very definition of constructive criticism
 It frequently happens, often than not, that when some course are pursuing is papaby wrong, unable to suggest the proper course. We see the results and we may understand of the causes, but our understanding is not comprehensive enough to formulate definite plan of reform. The most do is to call upon the authorities to do differently.
 It pretty generally recognized, for instance, that there gross blundering in shipbuildng, airplane construction our ordnance and machine gun manufactures. etc. Some of the were ap- parent but one, perhaps in tH whole country had definite changes plans to offer. That fact. though did not estop citizens from demanding that this laundering should cease; that the government should take action to produce results Such criticism, though it may have been angry and bitter, was in tended to be helpful and it has been effective in securing Improvements it must now be adjudged to have been constructive
 It cannot be said in any where such criticism was offered that it furnished aid and comfort to the enemy, though it may have afforded him some satisfaction, if he wrongly interpreted it as evidence of dissenson among us. But we can recall no case where those who have criticised the administration were out of sympathy with the avowed purpose of the administration, to carry the war to complete victory.
 In the of the Masses and other journals which were suppressed, what may have been regarded as criticism not directed against the administration but against the national policy. Those journals not finding fault with the administrators way of carrying on the war but with the fact that it was being carried on at all That was destructive criti- rism and properly suppressed
 conspicuous example of the postmaster gen. erals discrimination is the favor which the Hearst papers find with the administration. Before we entered the war, they prominently pro- Ger man that their circulation in Canada was prohibited and the British government denied them the privilege of the cables. These restrictions have only recently been withdrawn presumably through the interven- ton of Washington Within @ week of the declara- ton of war; by editorials and cartoons the Hearst papers opposing participation and were bitterly denouneing England. The early war measures were opposed but of late the Hearst papers have become administration papers, thick and thin, railing against an who presume to offer suggestions that here and there in conduct of the war, something seems 70 be amiss