McCormick's McCarthy

Last Saturday, readers of the Chicago Daily Tribune learned the truth, McCormick style, about the army versus McCarthy. Under an eight column headline, STEVENS TRIED TO KILL PROBE: McCARTHY, they read a lot about McCarthy's so-called "disclosure" and a very little about what the Tribune termed the "alleged actions" of Roy Cohn. The self-acknowledged "World's Greatest Newspaper," in pursuing its pro-McCarthy bent, made striking use of its prerogative to interpret the news.

Ever since his Wheeling speech, the Tribune has endorsed McCarthy editorially, spotlighted his probes in blaring headlines, and defended him with colored caricatures of his opponents. Only once did Colonel McCormick falter. When General Zwicker faced the Senator's invective, army veteran McCormick reflected and said: "It seems to us that Senator McCarthy will better serve his cause if he learns to distinguish the role of investigator from the role of avenging angel." But after two weeks of retrospect, the Tribune eased back into the Senator's fold: "Senator McCarthy has been trying to clean out some of the subversive characters that the New Deal planted in the Government services. If he has made a few mistakes, that is only human. There is no doubt that he wishes to save the country."

The Tribune has since turned McCarthy's human flaws into padded infallibility. Playing down or ignoring all recent attacks, it brought McCarthy into the Schine affair unchallenged, Under Saturday's banner headline, columnist Willard Edwards again forgot the Senator's critics. He began, "Army Secretary Stevens was accused by Senator McCarthy (R-Wis.) today of attempting to kill an investigation of communism in the army by suggesting that McCarthy 'go after the navy, the airforce, and the defense department'." Referring to this as a "disclosure," Edwards punched on down a column sprinkled with pressure words like "revealed" or documentary exhibit." He paused briefly to mention the army report on Roy Cohn. Tossing off these "alleged actions" in two sentences, Edwards later assured his readers, "The army report was unsigned, although Adams was known as its author. . . McCarthy said Adams had an 'interest' in making the report." Edwards neglected to say that the report also concerned McCarthy, and the Tribune chose not to publish the transcript. The record for Saturday was two sentences for the army, seven columns for McCarthy.

Sunday's ratio was about the same, and the reporting no more accurate. In summing up the files McCarthy released, the Tribune said, ". . . some members of McCarthy's staff believed Schine would never have been drafted into the army except that 'extreme left wing writers' started 'screaming about his case'." The file cited said nothing of the draft, but deplored Schine's status quo as a private.

In its reporting to date, the Tribune has neither expanded its two-sentence coverage of the army report, nor alluded to Congressional attacks on McCarthy and Cohn. Saturday's column ended with authoritative optimism: "The conflicting versions of the Cohn-Schine affair and the revelations of the army 'cover-up' attempt stirred Capitol Hill and the Pentagon as no incident in recent years. A campaign to oust Cohn had boomeranged, it was agreed, and heads would fall in the defense department." And so, with crossed fingers or back page coverage, the Tribune will bury the Schine affair.