LO, THE POOR NEWSPAPER!

Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard employs the current issue of The Forum to paint a dark picture of the future of daily journalism in the United States. The daily newspaper, he says, is disappearing, and he adduces figures to support his contention that the chain system that has standardized American groceries is threatening to absorb and standardize American newspaperdom.

Big Business has invaded the field of daily journalism, and with the making of money their sole aim, the owners and editors are forsaking any pretence of responsibility toward the reading public. Syndication of features and even of editorials on questions of national importance is tending to stamp the daily press of the country with the seal of a few powerful corporations or individuals, with a natural paralysis of broad and constructive thought.

Mr. Villard points out that the political dangers of this trend are the greatest. Of the papers that have vanished lately, the majority have been Democratic, with a corresponding stifling of expression by one of the two national parties in a number of states. It is possible, thinks the writer, that with a certain initial layout, one party may get control of the larger portion of the American printing presses.

The political power of much of the daily American press may be overexaggerated. Admitting the influence of a few crusading editors in the large cities and of a few local demagogues, it is doubtful if the average voter is swayed by his breakfasttable reading more than by red fire and hard cider. Constructive editorial opinion and advice on polities, at least those of national import, is offered by a minority of printed sheets. Dissection of a candidate or of an issue is left largely to the weekly magazines.

If the magnitude of the political catastrophe resulting from the standardization of the press may be overdrawn, there is another more optimistic view of the situation. The general level of a universal standard for the national press would be kept higher by pressure of public opinion than the plane where much local journalism stands today. It is inconceivable that the tabloid sensationalism that washes down so many breakfasts now, or the pink and purple extravaganzas of Mr. Hearst should ever set the style for a nationwide press such as Mr. Villard imagines. If amalgamation will gloss over with a coat of standardized paint the more glaring sins of modern journalism, there is small reason to lament the passing of the multitude.