The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1934-12-25
CRIME NEWS

THOAIAS JEFFERSON and other constitu-
L tional fathers to the contrary notwith-
standing, every so often somebody hobs up to
cry down freedom of speech and to demand
censorship Of newspapers. Recently there has
been periodical recrudescence Of this sort of
thing As usual it is based largely on quite
prevalent impression that the newspapers give
! too great prominence to crime news.
/ Last August a committee of the New York
Bar advocated censorship But that is not with
out precedent In 1926 the New York Crime
/ Commission urged censorship Of crime and court
news.
! In the last issue Of The State Bar Journal of
/ California, Judge Leon r. Yankwich of the
/ Superior Court of Los Angeles presents results
/ of his own study of the subject. He believes that
| the two pleas for censorship mentioned above
approach the problem from too narrow stand
point because they overlook entirely the function
! of the newspaper.
They also overlook he says, "the fact that
every right the newspapers possess - even the
very right to exists the result of centuries of
struggle" He further points out that the his
tory Of free government may be written in the
history of the struggle for free expression"
FUDGE YANKWICH quotes Pennsylvania well
fare authorities and University of Oregon
investigators to the effect that newspapers de-
vote not to exceed per cent of their total news
paper space to crime news and that the news
papers carry far less such news than they did
so years ago.
He believes that modern newspaper technique
and the way in which some newspapers handle
crime news is partly responsible for the common
belief that crime is increasing although the Fed
eral Council of Churches reports it is decreasing.
He holds that newspapers are not the creators
or censors of news which he defines as any,
thing new or interesting He emphatlcally con-
tends it is not only the right, but the duty OF
newspapers to report crime news and record
court activities as their proper function. His
chief concern is how they should perform that
function
Judge Yankwich's most stringent criticism
is directed Cd at those newspapers which en-
bellish crime, glorify criminals and perhaps IN
duce persons of subnormal intelligence to initiate
their crimes: CD at those newspapers which,
before trial and sometimes before capture of the
person accused of crime, publish all details of the
crime testimony of witnesses, clews, SurmlSes
and theories Of the prosecuting officers, often
thereby enabling the guilty to escape arrest and
making it more difficult to secure jurors to fairly
try a case.
CENSORSHIP, says Judge Yankwich in con-
~ clusion, will not solve the problem. Nor
will the exercise of the power of courts to
punish as contempt What will solve it is CO.
operation between those charged with the adj
ministration of justice, the public and the news
papers"
Such a program of cooperation, in the opin-
ion of Judge YankWich, would call upon the
newspapers, on their part, to be guided not by
the lowest but by the highest standards of the
professional judicious use of their great
powers in recording facts relating to the admin
istration of justice.
"On the part of the public, consideration
of this problem should lead us to realize that,
despite temporary annoyances and inconven-
fences, which may be occasioned by modern
newspaper technique, the freedom of the press
is the greatest safeguard of free institutions. We
should therefore, lend deaf ear to those who
would encroach upon that great American fun
damental."