What Price Censorship?

The newspaper reading public, which the news from the Solomons has kept in a mood of sustained optimism for the past several weeks, received a distinct shock about halfway through breakfast yesterday morning to see that "we are still losing the war in the Pacific." This startling announcement came from Republican Representative Melvin Maas of Minnesota, who gave a radio address on Thursday night with this as his punch point. To add to the confusion, Maas threw in the old story of no unified command and lack of cooperation between Army and Navy--all of this on top of recent assurances that Vice Admiral Halsey is completely and competently in charge of the task force in the Solomons.

Maas' speech was in part at least authoritative, because he himself, a colonel in the Marine Reserves, has just returned from several months active duty in the Pacific area, and was hence in a position to observe the facts of many of the engagements. It was on this "inside dope" that he based one of the two points of his speech. The essence of this complaint was that accounts of U. S. disasters in the Pacific have been "twisted and played down" until they appear to the casual reader to have been actual victories. It has been previously observed by several sources, however, that the delay in making known some of the sinkins of American ships was unnecessarily drawn out. In this respect Maas was merely intensifying a point that has become increasingly obvious to careful news followers. His other point, that unity of command is still a vision on the horizon and a glib phrase in the mouths of military authorities and the OWI, is much more directly questionable, and has already been challenged by members of the army and navy general staffs.

There is no doubt much truth in Representative Maas' accusations. But there is also much that is confusing, vague, and smacking of political overemphasis. Whatever the facts and fallacies of the speech, however, the general situation which it presents makes plainer than ever the need of considerable streamlining in the Office of Censorship. When newspaper accounts for several weeks convey the impression of victory, and are suddenly followed by such a speech as Maas', indicating complete failure, it takes no great amount of thought to see that things are not as they should be. The resulting ignorance among the public from this confusion is as complete as it would be under total censorship. The Office of Censorship is desperately in need of one power that it is specifically denied, and of one that it possesses in too hazy a manner to be effective. Firstly, miscellaneous public speeches by Representatives and Senators, when they deal with matters of war information such as this one did, should be correlated into the general pattern of information that is being presented to the public. And secondly, Price's office should be effectively and whole heartedly backed by the Administration at the same time based on a policy of open sincerity, unhampered by what Elmer Davis has called the "ingrained natural reticence of the services."