Evening star., 1938-11-09
Regimenting the Advertiser

A~N sAAS 1A"NSAAoSA
The latest antitrust dissertation
by Trust Buster" Thurman Arnold
has absurd, if not alarming, implica-
tionS. In prepared statement out
lining advertising restrictions to be
imposed on the Ford and Chrysler
Motor Companies by consent DEGREES,
Mr.. Arnold envisions a Utopia in
which manufacturers modestly re-
frain from Growing over the super
lative virtues of their own products,
decline to spend more money for
advertising than the least prosperous
of their rivals and dispel the long
nourished idea that a good name in
merchandising is of any special value
to the buyer.
The automobile DEGREES, drawn up
voluntarily, Mr. Arnold AYERS, after
indictment of the motor firms for
alleged monopoly in the automobile
finance field will prohibit the COM
panles from spending money to ad-
vertlse the particular interests" of
their finance affiIiates, but will per-
nit them to sell the public on the
general plan of instalment buying.
While these restrictions on adver-
tiSlng do not apply to the products
manufactured by the corporations, it
is significant that Mr.. Arnold re-
CARDS the DEGREES as precedents. To
use his own words, "a step is made
toward restricting advertising to its
proper field-Which is the promotion
of sales-and toward preventing its
use for the fostering of monopoly"
The DEGREES, he adds, may become
most important precedents in pre-
venting the misuse of advertising
power in other fields"
Mr.. Arnold vouchsafes the written
opinion, approved by Attorney Gen
eral Cummings for the administra-
ton, that manufacturers who have
large sums to spend for advertising
are taking unfair advantage of the
little fellow with less money to spend,
and that therefore the big advertiser
is guilty of monopolistic practices.
The expenditure of large sums to
build up trade names, he contends, is
not only "Wasteful," but calculated
to hurt the business of the competitor
with a name not so we'll known.
All of this seems rather amazing.
Has it become reprehensible to estab-
lish a good reputation in industry
and to boast-yea, shout-about it,
through advertising or otherwise?
Certainly Congress never intended
the antitrust laws to be used as a
curb on advertising, and Mr.. Arnold
comedies this. But when he speaks
of "precedents" and steps" toward
restriction of advertising to a field
of his own definition, he must have
something specific in mind-either
the use of grand jury inquisitions
and consent DEGREES as a threat to
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, VI clldCGUle1lU OF leg
islation to "socialize" and regiment
advertising.
Incidentally the New Deal has dis
claimed any intention of shackling
the free press, but it should not be
overlooked that Mr.. Arnold's dream
of reducing the advertising budgets
of big business" to the level of the
poorest competitor in particular in
dustry would constitute an indirect
blow at free press in this country.
The press can remain independent
just SO long as it continues on a self
supporting basis, free of subsidies
from special interests or from the
Government. Such a restriction on
advertising volume as that proposed
by Mr.. Arnold would be a menace to
the Self-sufficiency and the indie
pendence of American Journalism.