Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 15.djvu/342

 328 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

newspapers no honest discussion or honest treatment of news can be hoped for. This is incidentally and significantly admitted by so conservative a statesman as Lord Hugh Cecil, the son of the late Marquis of Salisbury, the British Tory leader, in a recent article on the decline of parliamentary debating. Lord Hugh Cecil argues for free and full discussion in the House of Com- mons, and here is one of his reasons :

I am quite clear that, if deliberation, in the true sense of the word, does not take place in the House of Commons, it will take place nowhere. Delibera- tion in the country is not a reality in the sense that it is a reality in an assembly. In the country it is chiefly conducted by the press, who are largely the exponents of wealthy interests. We are but at the beginning of a development in that direction, which is sure to go farther. The press will speak the mind of a certain number of wealthy people who can start or buy newspapers with a political object in view.

The situation in the United States with reference to the con- trol of the press by wealthy interests is not so serious as it is in England,^ but the various tendencies in the direction of such con- trol are not to be overlooked. At any rate, the influence of the powerful advertisers is thoroughly pernicious. There are ad- vertisers who do not hesitate to demand either silence or positive championship of their "side" of a question. There are theatrical managers who will not tolerate adverse criticisms of their "productions" in a certain style or manner, and who actually dictate dismissals of writers. There are brewers who "drop" newspapers for what they consider excessive devotion to prohibi- tion or law and decency. There are corporations that will not give any "business" to papers that are fair and impartial in their treatment of labor unions, of strikes, of injunctions. There are dairy interests that will promptly visit their displeasure on editors who can see no justice in a high tax on oleomargarine that is honestly labeled and sold for what it is. There are public-utility companies that will not suffer advocacy of municipal or state ownership. Boycotts of newspapers by department stores, by theaters, by the liquor trade are not unknown, but the instances that reach the public form a very small proportion of the instances of quiet pressure, hints and words to the wise, "object lessons," etc.