Hearst’s Peculiar Papers
In the arraignment of
Editor Hearst there has been some unfairness. He is entitled to
credit for some things. He has had the enterprise to build up great
journals. He has called about him men of brains and experience.
If he has desired the services of any writer or artist he has not
hesitated to offer the requisite salary and more. Thus he has done
much for the working newspaper man. Personally he is generous, and,
strange as it may seem to those who judge him by his sheets, modest.
In a quiet way he does more for charity than he does through his
several publications, heralding the latter feat by blare of horn.
There is nothing more to be said in favor of his type of journalism.
His papers are all rotten to the core. No information given in them
can be accepted without corroborative evidence. Their editorial
opinion is absolutely without value. They seem devoid of sense,
honor or decency.
Since the murder of President McKinley,
Hearst has been charged with the creation of the state of mind that
made the murder possible. It is with regret the conclusion is reached
that the arguments supporting this contention are sound. A recent
interview with Goldman set forth her opinion of Mr. McKinley. Of
itself, this opinion would have no weight, but when it is couched
in terms that might have been taken bodily from the columns of the
Journal the time has come to think.
The Brooklyn Eagle is a reliable paper.
It is conservative enough, and not given to hysteria. The Eagle
tells of a dispute between an Irish mechanic and a German grocer.
The grocer had said he was not sorry Mr. McKinley had been shot.
The mechanic, at first inclined to knock him down, decided to argue
the matter. He asked the German to explain. This the grocer did
by showing the files of the Journal and the World, with their uncouth
and villainous cartoons and their bestial editorials. In these the
president who now lies dead, and over whom a nation weeps, was portrayed
as the head of the trusts, the tool of capital, the man whose delight
was to grind the laboring element. Nothing could have been more
vilely false, and yet this is the character of the information that
Hearst has been giving to his subscribers. The ignorant among them
have been misled. The German was honest in his convictions. Had
Mr. McKinley been the sort of executive painted, his removal would
have been a blessing. Then who is to blame for a condition of mind
that tolerates a Goldman and arms her admirers? The Hearsts of the
land must bear a share of the guilt.
Now with fair words such editors try
to make amends. The Hearst papers and the Oregonian sit on the stool
of repentance and slobber their woe. When were they giving out their
real sentiments? Were they all the time hypocrites, doing a harm
they had no intent to do, or are they hypocrites now?