374 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
content with preventing their readers from seeing things exactly as they are. Some lie for revenue, others for party advantage and the success of the cause in which they believe. The paper that desires and secures accurate reports, that sets down nothing in malice, that suppresses nothing which is unfavorable to its side, and honestly publishes everything which is creditable to the other side, is notoriously the rare exception. Yet the business of a newspaper is to tell the news — fairly, impartially, intelli- gently, and accurately — not to "make" news, nor to color and falsify it.
It is evident that when mendacity, sensationalism, and reck- lessness reach a certain degree, the advantages of publicity and the dissemination of facts and information are overbalanced by the mischiefs and demoralizing effects produced. When we speak of the broadening and liberalizing influences of the press, we imply that truth is its watchword and inspiration. A venomous and hate-inspired press breeds internecine and international ani- mosities, friction, fanatical hostility, and even war. In France a powerful section of the press is so vile, brutal, shameless, and inhuman that Mr. Bodley, in his admirable study of that coun- try, congratulates Frenchmen upon the fact that multitudes of peasants and laborers never read the newspapers. Mr. Bodley is right, and we know what a blessing it would be if certain American newspapers, having hundreds of thousands of readers, found themselves deprived of their constituents. It would be rash to say of any country that it would be better off morally and intellectually without newspapers, but one can certainly conceive such a situation.
The evil is greatly aggravated by the established and fixed habit of commenting upon the news. The average paper has an editorial policy and this policy, indirectly applied and manifested in "editing" the news, is directly expressed in the interpretation and criticism of the recorded facts and incidents. To what extent the editorial habit has grown is a matter of general knowledge. The editorial "we" covers sins, absurdities, and follies without number. Nothing is more ludicrous and preposterous than the omniscience and dogmatism of the editor of a familiar type.
