Publication information |
Source: Archbald Citizen Source type: newspaper Document type: editorial Document title: none Author(s): anonymous City of publication: Archbald, Pennsylvania Date of publication: 14 September 1901 Volume number: 8 Issue number: 393 Pagination: [2] |
Citation |
[untitled]. Archbald Citizen 14 Sept. 1901 v8n393: p. [2]. |
Transcription |
full text |
Keywords |
McKinley assassination (public response); yellow journalism; yellow journalism (impact on Czolgosz); New York Journal; The Sun [New York, NY]; society (criticism). |
Named persons |
William Jennings Bryan; Grover Cleveland; Ulysses S. Grant; Rutherford B. Hayes; William McKinley. |
Document |
[untitled]
The assault on the President has
been used as a pretext for a violent attack on the so-called “yellow” journals
and there is a disposition in some quarters to hold them responsible for the
senseless deed of the President’s assailant. We must confess that we cannot
see any connection between the “yellow” sheet and the black deed of the murderer.
It has not developed that the miscreant who shot President McKinley was a reader
of these journals nor is there any evidence that his mind was perverted by reading
of any kind. His assault cannot be justified on any rational ground and it may
be accounted for only by the natural perversity that mars every one of the enemies
of social order of which this fellow is a type. At the same time there is no
denying the fact that some of the newspapers have gone entirely too far in their
abuse of public characters. A very conspicious [sic] offender in this respect
is the New York Journal which has mercilessly lampooned the President
and his administration. Its treatment of him and his advisers has been utterly
reprehensible. The New York Sun has gone almost to the opposite extreme
with those who differ with its peculiar policy as was evident in its treatment
of Grant, Hayes, Cleveland and Bryan. In view of these facts it is amusing enough
to make a horse laugh to hear each of these newspapers calling the other “yellow.”
Both have been needlessly brutal and vulgar.
But it is hardly fair to these newspapers to hold
them entirely responsible for the coarseness that so frequently disfigures their
columns. Back of them are the people who crave the sort of literature that the
“yellow” journals supply. This type of modern newspaper is published chiefly
to make money by satisfying a popular demand. It panders to a vitiated public
taste. Let the people insist on having something better, or let them show their
disapproval of gutter journalism by refusing to buy any of it and we venture
to say that there will soon be an end to the “yellow terror.”
The blame for “yellow” journalism should be placed
where it properly belongs—with the people who encourage it.