No Advice Needed?

Who should guard the guardian of the nation's liberties, the U.S. press? The University of Chicago's Robert M. Hutchins, himself no silent partner of democracy, thought he knew the answer. As usual, his answer was irritating. He gave it last week in a speech at Rochester, N.Y.: "If you don't want Government control [or] the abuses almost inherent in the concentration of press ownership, an independent agency freely evaluating and criticizing the press's performance is the only answer."

The answerer was in turn answered by the tabloid New York Daily News. As usual, the News's rejoinder was rough & ready: "Why, Doc, we thought you knew better than that. This agency . . . is already in session. It . . . consists of perhaps 60 million Americans who read the newspapers. . . . They evaluate and criticize the press, and they register their opinions in the most emphatic way possible, by buying papers they like and not buying papers they don't like."

In Bloomington, Ind., two readers used another tried & true method of criticizing the press. Bernard C. Gavit, dean of the Indiana University law school, and Law Professor W. Howard Mann had been called Communists by the Hearst press. They sued for $400,000. Last week, Hearst settled out of court for $25,000 and in seven papers* recanted the libel.

*The New York Journal-American, Chicago Herald-American, Milwaukee Sentinel, Baltimore News-Post, Los Angeles Examiner, Pittsburgh Sun-Telegraph, San Francisco Examiner.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.