Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1936-04-21
EFFORT TO SMEAR
NEWS CRITICS.
Roosevelt Said to Have In.
tensified Demand for
Favorable Stories.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

President Roosevelt personally mas
set in motion a campaign to dis
credit, If possible, the effectiveness of
those Washington correspondents who
write articles critical of his admins
tration.
For a log time there was not the
slightest evidence that Mr.. Roosevelt
resented criticism or that he would
undertake any punitive measures
against his critics. His position as a
tolerant President was defended by
this correspondent and others as be-
ing in keeping with the American ira
dition of free press.
Within the last fortnight the situa-
ton has changed. Mr.. Roosevelt on
two separate occasions discussed with
visiting publishers and newspaper
owners the question Of permitting
Washington correspondents to in
terpret the news. The versions as to
what Mr.. Roosevelt said vary, but it
is declared that he plainly showed a
tinue printing material of the in
terpretive character and urging that
the news be published without color"
One Sided Story.
1t so happens, of course, that on
the Government pay roll are many
newspaper writer's who really are the
authors of official announcements of
various kinds, and in many instances
such announcements are duly colored
to put the administration in favor
able light politically. If only off
cial" announcements or what Mr..
Roosevelt terms the news" were
printed, the American people would
get only one side of the story.
In the last few years a group of
Washington correspondents has been
permitted by their publishers to in
terpret the news and give their frank
appraisal or evaluation of passing
events. In this way the news behind
the news can be told and the true
story of the New Deal can be unfolded.
1t would be big advantage to Mr.,
Roosevelt politically if he could bring
about the suppression of those writ
ings which are unfavorable to his
cause.
Mr.. Roosevelt is in frequent con-
ference with the publicity agents of
the Democratic National Committee,
who are paid to do everything they
can to discredit opponents. Recently
the Democratic National Committee
sent out to the newspapers of the
country libelous statement charging
that several writer's who have been
opposing New Deal policies had been
formally taken over by the Republic
can National Committee" There was
no truth in the statement and the
Democratic publicity men knew it,
but it seemed such good way to start
the smear campaign against CORES
spondents whose writings are dlsliked
by the Roosevelt regime.
Ethics Involved.
Now for any newspaper writer in
Washington to be formally taken
over" or in any way connected with
either Democratic or Republican
National Committee means plainly
that he is hired for money to write
the views of those political commit
tees. No newspaper man who cares
anything about his standing in his
profession would do a thing like that,
and continue to write for newspapers.
In other words. a correspondent may
or may not express views that are con-
CURED in by political speakers of
either artv, ~ k>a
expressing his own convictions without
any financial or other connection with
q political committee
The Democratic publicity bureau,
however. believing that perhaps the
public is not familiar with the high
standing of ethics of the Washington
correspondents and will be ready to
accept any charges that are made as
being true, has seized on the device
to discredit the Washington CORE
spondents. Mr.. Roosevelt himself is
now carrying out the Democratic Pub
licity Bureau policy by his direct at
tacks on Washington correspondents.
The first step toward undermining
a free press is to discredit the oppo-
sition. Gradually in foreign countries
opposition editors and writers have
been made the victims of the wrath
of the powers that be- Some have sub
mitted to such tactics and others
have resisted. But in the long run, as
relationships are imposed. the press
fights a losing battle.
Mr.. Roosevelt's words cannot be
quoted as they were given in private
conversation with editors and pub
fishers, who, according to custom, have
declined to quote what the President
said. But the direct connection be-
tween the public attack made by the
Democratic National Committee on
various Washington correspondents
and the Presidents conversations in
private is no longer a secret, and in
the public interest ought not to be. If
the news out of Washington is to be
controlled directly or indirectly by
the administration in power, the
American people ought to know the
situation as quickly as possible. And
If writer's who are conscientiously
trying to write their impressions of
what is happening in Washington are
to be made the objects of a punitive
campaign because they happen to dis
agree, this, too, ought to be fully dis
closed so that the first signs of a real
dictatorship may be recorded and so
that the restraints being put on the
freedom of the press may be known
to the reading public
Copyright. 1850