Freedom Of The Press

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 204, 26 May 1938, Page 13

Freedom Of The Press

Sir. —A wide discussion is present today concerning the outspoken Press of this Dominion, particularly in reference to political mattes. The average man or woman here in New Zealand should be able to judge as to the truth of arguments for or against. Possibly the following may help them to clarify the subject, and arrive at some definite understanding. The London “Daily Express” in its opinion column, commenting on remarks made by Sir Charles Higham about the freedom of the Press, said : “Suppression and indifference are the twin allies of tlie destroyers of freedom. As long as we have liberty to print and speak, abuses can be remedied.” Under the Roosevelt Administration in America, Mr. Roosevelt affirms he is insistent upon keeping an open path to the heart of the voter.” He further believes the Administration must sell itself tq the public not once, but continuously. Newspapers constitute his day-to-day medium.” • I have recently been reading an article in the American “Review of Reviews,’ from the pen of Mr. Raymond Clapper, and in one article apropos the Press he states: “Tlie readers of British newspapers have no idea of the extent to which the American Government cultivates the goodwill of the newspapers. They know the newspaper man and his psychology. Th§y know how he works and what he wants.’. . . AU Government business is known to newspaper correspondents, who are free to “use it or disregard it. We have confidence in the correspondents who pass upon whether they consider it news or not. That becomes a matter for the paners’ judgment.”—l am, etc., MA_N IN THE STREET. Wellington, May 23.

Sir, —It is a fair assumption that the absurdities printed this morning over the signature of P. M. Butler, appeared because of the criticism the Press has recently been subjected to by certain members of the Labour Government, but that is not a sufficiently good reason why it should be inflicted on your subscribers. 1 f one wants that kind of stuff it is available in large doses in the Labour Party s exclusive paper. There one gets all that is possible in the way of extreme partisan hyperbole. Never by any chance is a good word said for anyone other than members of the Labour Parliament. The sins of the last Government—now by comparison proved to be really virtues —were entirely responsible for the present crowd being in power, certainly not their own tvpe of appeal. 2k mental lapse put them there, so that iteration and reiteration of forgotten sins, by which they profited, does not help their ambitions. . A good Scotsman in his prayer cried aloud. “Lord, Lord, we did na ken” and the Lord in His mercy replied, “No, ye did na ken. but ye ken fine the noo.” Sensible persons never make the same mistake twice. The writing is on the wall, and next November those so sensitive aesthetes will have the time to revisit that political El Dorado—Russia —if they wish to do so. —I am. etc., ANTI-COMMUNIST. Lower Hutt. May 23. PJS. —Am not on your staff.