TURF PROPHETS IN THE DAILY PRESS.
[To TIER EDITOR OF TIER "SPECTATOR."] Sin,—In this sorry business of the Cadbury and Rowntree connection with the Star I have found a crumb of comfort which your readers may be glad to share. The admitted facts are, briefly, that members of the Cadbury and Rowntree families, and the proprietors of the Daily News, between them control the Star ; that these gentlemen all publicly declare their belief that betting is immoral ; and that in their organ, the Star, they nevertheless publish incitements or encourage- ments to bet. The defence put forward on their behalf by several of your correspondents is that the Star does valuable service to many good causes, and that on its racing tips depends its circulation, and consequently its power for good. Now, the indirect consolation I have found, in considering this example of hypocrisy, is as follows : It is frequently assumed, in discussions on the reporting of divorce cases, that much evidence that decent newspapers suppress would, if published, be read with avidity—that is, that there exists for it a public demand. But unless the Star reports that I have examined are exceptional, they prove this unpleasing assump- tion to be quite erroneous, for there is in them no trace of a desire to pander to the supposed craving. We know that on Messrs. Cadbury and Rowntree's principles they would, if they thought unsavoury details likely to be attractive, make the publication of them a special feature of the paper, in order to increase its circulation and its influence for good, and it is therefore clear that in the judgment of experienced caterers for the public the alleged demand for such details does not exist. This must be a satisfaction to all your readers.—I am,
Previous page
