Page:History of American Journalism.djvu/473



JOURNALISM OF TO-DAY 431

Villard, of The New York Evening Post, has testified that the newspaper upon which he worked in Philadelphia used to send him to its large advertisers with the statement that "they could have as much space in news columns at any time as they wanted." Undoubtedly, such a condition too often existed during the Pe- riod of Financial Readjustment. No such condition, however, obtains to-day. On the other hand, the first charge deserves care- ful consideration. There has been in a few cities a suppression of news because of fear of advertisers, but it has always been fraught with great danger to the local press. Mr. Villard has admitted that the press of Philadelphia "has never recovered from the blow to its prestige when it actually refused to tell the story of a crime of the member of one of the large drygoods houses." Yet this omission proved the impossibility of suppressing news, for the story appeared in New York papers which sold rapidly in the streets of Philadelphia. The story was taken up and told all over the country through the pages of the monthly magazines and the literary weeklies. The suppression of the news did more harm to innocent members of the firm than had the Philadel- phia papers given a whole edition to the story of the crime. The publicity given this incident would indicate that such sup- pressions are rare.

A controversy arose later between this same mercantile estab- lishment and the city of Philadelphia over the question of fire prevention appliances, etc., required by city ordinances: it came from a movement started by the Alumnae Committee of Bryn Mawr College which was studying fire prevention in factories, shops, and stores where women and girls were employed. The Bryn Mawr Committee once complained that it had wrestled in vain with the Philadelphia papers to take the matter up and that the local press had refused to mention the store save in the way of kindness. The press of Philadelphia again received rebuke at the hands of publications of national circulation. In comment- ing on the incident, The Outlook, of New York City, called at- tention to the serious social danger from the muzzling of the newspaper by powerful advertisers.

A letter from the manager of the Philadelphia store to the present writer said: