The Newspaper.

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 17408, 20 March 1922, Page 6

The Newspaper.

'Everyone has his or her opinion of the newspaper—not this or that one, but the newspaper in general. And except the weather, there is probably nothing mundane which is the subject of so much gratuitous critioism. This is the more remarkable because, if one were to believe all he hears be would realise that the conduct of a newspaper, the expression of its views, the collection of the day's news, and the proper arrangement thereof, constitute collectively one of the easiest jobs in the world, and one which would be performed much better than is the case were it not that, as every experienced newspaper man knows, all the heavensont journalists are engaged in other occupations. "What the world mis&es, owing to this unfortunate circumstance, can only be imagined. But until all th* round pegs are fitted into round holes, wfiicli will not happen this, side of the millennium, the' present arrangement will persist, and the public must put up with newspapers as they aro. One is tempted sometimes to think that some people share Charles Lamb's opinion. "Newspapers,"- remarks Elia, "always excite curiosity," a gratifying tribute which was spoiled by the next sentence, "No one ever "lays one down without a feeling of "disappointment." But is that so? Is it possible for hope to spring so eternally in the human breast as to survive the disillusioning shocks caused by reading \ the daily paper more than thre© hundred times a year for year after year. Would a production which invariably provoked disappointment be welcomed on each successive daily appearance year after year with any feeling even faintly resembling ourio3ity? The idea is absurd. Newspapers, as such, would have ceased to exist long ago it Lamb's statement were true. Yet there are those who would subscribe to it wholeheartedly to-day. On© of these, and perhaps the most notable,> is Professor Gilbert Murray, who in a recent addresa on international education at the Education Conference ' in London in January, roundly, and without discriminating, condemned all newspapers, after admitting that they formed one of the most important educational influences. 'What he complained of, however, was that "the newa- " paper's information, upoft which a

" country depended for 'its most vital " social and political action, bad to be " provided in & form having those " twistings, exaggerations, inaccuracies, " and violences which made it attractive to the vast, uneducated public. " If he apoko to a journalist ha had the "feeling that ho was talking to an "educated, usually well-informed man. " But when he read the newspaper he " felt he was reading something written altogether below hta standard of " intelligence." All our respect for Professor Murray's high standard of intelligence, and our natural gratification at his recognition that journalists as a class arc not wholly unlettered persons, entering, by "exaggerations, inaccuracies, and vio'onccs," to the delectation of the lowest intelligences, dees not blind us to tho fact that this criticism, as applied to all newspapers, Is inaccurate, and that it breathes a spirit of that "superiority" which is typical of some professors. A newspaper after Professor Murray's own heart would be a very learned and able production, but it would appeal to an extremely small circle of readers, and would have little claim to b« regarded as a "ne\Vß"-piper. And as we cannot all bo Gilbert Murrnys, nor even ordinary professors, tlhe average newspaper must meet tho requirements of somewhat less exalted intellects, though not neoessarily by pandering to sensationalism. That it does this, marc or less successfully, was, in effect, conceded by another leader in literature, one who had been a professor,. politician, statesman, dor, a man possessed of encyclopaedic learning, and withal of a broad and essentially human outlook on life. This was Viscount Bryce, whose intellectual standard was at least as high as that of Professor Murray. Addressing tho Historical Association, only a few days before ihis death, on the value and use of original authorities in history, he declared that "the greatest of all " sources for the present hif+.-rian were "tho newspapers." He admitted ttat the historian would have r.<> chou-c- v:e> papers to whidh. ho wont for information, for some newspapers were inclined to write for people who passed over anything that looked "heavy." The newspaper was a better index of poptxlar taste than anything else. Yet Lord Bryce did not regard it as beneath his standard of intelligence; on the contrary, he found pagers that were thorougjhly conscientious, and thereforo most valuable. It is eome consolation to those whose work was' spoken of slightingly by Professor Murray to find one like Lord Bryoe saying a word in approval of it. After all, it is the function of a newspaper to publish new 9, and ir in doing so it provides reliable sources of information to the historian, ity value cannot be so trivial or so ephemeral as some of its critics would assert.