Year: 1868

The Anonymous In Newspapers.


The anonymous character Of British journal
ism has Ion been one of its most essential and
striking peculiarities. There are not one hun
Dire men in England, outside of the little cote
rie of the newspaper world itself, who can give
you the name of the conductor of any one Of
the leading London journals, while veil of
even more impenetrable obscurity hangs over
the individuality of the writer's for these papers.
The Englishman who accepts the deliverances
of the London Times, the Adcertiser, the STAN
dard, the Telegraph or the Star as the utter
ances of an oracle gifted with infallible wisdom,
has no means furnished him for ascertaining
the paternity of the arguments, appeals or
demonstrations which are addressed to his pas
sions, his prejudices or his reason. What he
reads may have been written by Prime Minis
ter, member of Parliament, professional
hack writer, an obscure barrister or a disap-
pointed man of letters. The reader knows
nothing about it, and cares nothing. 1t is the
newspaper that speaks to him with its voice Of
impersonal authority, and if he be q reader Of





ton be his accustomed one he accepts its deci-
sions as final.


An effort has recently been made in Eng
land to change all this-to lift the veil that
covers the face of the prophet and to permit
his worshippers to behold him, as well as to
stitution of signed for anonymous leading
articles in the newspapers would improve the
education of the public mind as effected by the
press This "reform, if it may be called one,
has already been attempted in the magazines
of England, as well as in those of the United
States, with results beneficial at least to the
magazines. This can be no precedent, how
ever, for the newspapers. Magazines are read
chiefly for amusement, and people are attracted
to them by an array of distinguished names.
But men read newspaper leaders for help in
shaping their course IN the everyday events
of actual life. They have convictions on most
practical subjects, but these convictions are
often crude and undeveloped, and they look to
their newspaper with the expectation of find
ing them there elaborated and worked out for
them. The majority Of men seek newspaper
whose sympathies seem most to accord with
their own, and its influence over them consists
not so much in teaching them any new truths
as in developing for them their own previous
convictions. There are men to whom their
newspaper has become an everyday Bible; and
this relation is sustained, in most instances,
in exact proportion to the extent to which it
has been enabled to present to them a certain
unity and neutrality-suspicious. which are
not easily preserved save by the covering Of
anonymity and impersonality. When it is
affirmed that all this would be changed for the
better by the adoption of the French system of
affxing to each newspaper leader the name Of
its real or pretended author, an assertion is
made that should not be too hastily believed.


In London, something more than q dozen
years ago, number of the most eminent and
skilful writer's of that capital resolved to estab
lsh daily newspaper that should rival, if it
did not excel, any of the London journals then
in existence. Charles Dickens was one of the
projectors of this scheme; with him were asso-
cated men only second to him in genius. The
moment appeared auspicious for the enterprise;
the public was prepared to welcome the new
journal with cordiality; the unwonted publicity
given to the names of the writer's upon it and
their very high reputation as writer's seemed
to give assurance of it's success. But seldom in
the history of newspaper failures that dismal
record of blasted hopes and squandered for
tunes-s there to be found the record of q
ocI 1a<a do
Of this enterprise that promised SO fairly. It
languished for while, daily losing
money for its proprietors and unable to win
for itself any place Of honor among its competi-
tors. The paper was finally sold to practical
man; all its famous. literary contributors re-
tired from it it began new career upon the
anonymous system, and people read it without
knowing who wrote 1t. 1t now stands among
the leading journals of London, having won it's
place by its own merits, and not by the adven-
titious aid Of distinguished names. It was
common sense, and not genius, that finally
made it success.


In our own country the impersonal and
anonymous in journalism has of late years
grown into favor with the providers and the
consumers of newspapers. Our confrirss Of
the rural districts still parade at the head Of
| their columns the name of an "editor," to
whom is awarded the credit or upon whom
rests the blame for all the leading articles he
prints. But even with them this parade Of in
dividuality is more often pretence than q
reality Their leaders are more often the pro-
duction Of some lawyer who has . plentiful
lack Of clients, or of the village politician OF
preacher, than Of the hard worked and
poorly paid gentleman whose most eloquent
appeals are generally addressed to delin
quent subscribers and whose controversial
powers are absorbed by his quarrel
with his rival Of the Eatans,oa Gazette. How.
ever, the conditions Of publishing newspaper
i a x6.t obc,,1