THE OWNERS OF THE PRESS [To the Editor of THE
SPECTATOR]
SIR,—Mr. Mander makes an important point which was for want of space, insufficiently covered in my article ; but I think his statement of it is open to criticism. He suggests that Sir Samuel Hoare made a new and objectionable departure in going to proprietors rather than to editors. I do not know what Sir Samuel Hoare actually did, but if he telephoned proprietors the only difference is his means of communication.
Far from being new, communication with proprietors is almost the oldest method of " Press management." Henry Sampson Woodfall (printer and part-owner of the Public Advertiser) was prosecuted for the " Letters of Junius " ; John Walter I was imprisoned for libel, and I could give evidence of the ,bribery of eighteenth-century proprietors. Later on, Palmerston used to see Sir John Easthope, proprietor, not Black, editor, of the Morning Chronicle. In the 'seventies and 'eighties, statesmen communicated with J. M. Levy and Levy-Lawson (later Lord Burnham), owners of the Daily Telegraph, and with Lord Glenesk, after he had ceased to edit but remained owner of the Morning Post. Even with The Times, when after the Tetirement of Delane people thought that the power of the proprietor had increased, statesmen wrote to John Walter as well as or instead of the editor (for an example, see Fitzmaurice, Life of Granville, II, 444).
The moral of this dull list of facts is that anyone who wishes to influence anything goes to the person in control. It happens sometimes that the owner controls his newspaper. Where the situation today differs from that of 50 years ago is in the fact that editorial control is now the exception rather than the rule. From a journalistic point of view, the decline of the editor is both lamentable and relatively modern. But a statesman has to accept the situation as he finds it ; I do not believe that anyone accuses Sir Samuel Hoare of creating this situation —nor is it his duty to assist in its destruction. When editors,
generally instead of exceptionally, regain their old power, the statesman will no doubt return to older methods. I thoroughly agree that such a return would be desirable. But who is to bring it about? What will the public think if the Home Office seeks to reform the Press ?—Yours faithfully, FELIX FRIES.
91 Prebend Gardens, London, W.6.
Previous page
