A modern Pulitzer & a 19th century editor

The 2021 Pulitzer Prize for commentary and editorial writing, won by Richmond Times Dispatch columnist Michael Paul Williams,  begins by noting that there were objections to the massive statues of Robert E Lee and other Confederate heroes erected in the 1890s in the former capitol of the Confederacy.
Williams wrote:

The original opponent of the Robert E. Lee statue issued a stern prophesy after the monument was erected in 1890.  John Mitchell Jr. — newspaper editor, politician, banker and civil rights activist — predicted that the monument “will ultimately result in handing down to generations unborn a legacy of treason and blood.”  

John Mitchell, Jr., was editor of the Richmond Planet from 1884 – 1925.   A resident of Richmond, Va.’s  Jackson Ward area, Mitchell was born into slavery in 1863, but his family was freed when Union troops liberated the city in April 1865.

Beginning in December, 1884, Mitchell started reporting on injustice and lynchings. For example, he reported on a lynching in Smithville,  Charlotte county, Virginia in May, 1886. Afterwards, someone sent Mitchell a rope with a note attached to it, warning that he would also be lynched if he ever set foot in Smithville. He responded with a line from Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar:

“There are no terrors, Cassius, in your threats, for I am so strong in honesty that they pass by me like the idle wind, which I respect not.”

Afterwards, armed with two Smith & Wesson pistols, Michell took a train to   Smithville and walked  five miles from the station to see the site of the hanging.

Continue reading

A silent movie and the right to be forgotten


By Bill Kovarik  (for The Conversation

In 1915, Gabrielle Darley killed a New Orleans man who had tricked her into a life of prostitution. She was tried, acquitted of murder and within a few years was living a new life under her married name, Melvin. Then a blockbuster movie, “The Red Kimono,” splashed her sensational story across America’s silver screens.

The 1925 film used Darley’s real name and details of her life taken from transcripts of the murder trial. She sued for invasion of privacy and won.

In deciding in favor of Darley, a California court said that people have a right to rehabilitation. “We should permit [people] to continue in the path of rectitude rather than throw [them] back into a life of shame or crime,” the court said. It is a sentiment that is harder to put into practice today, when information is much more readily available. Nonetheless, policymakers and media outlets are looking at the issue.

As a scholar of media history and law, I see Darley’s story as more than an interesting slice of legal and cinematic history. Her case provides an early example of how private people struggle to escape their pasts and how the idea of privacy is linked to rehabilitation.

Continue reading

Media, antisemitic lies and censorship in 1938

By Bill Kovarik
Published in The Conversation, Jan. 15, 2021
Creative Commons license for non-profit republication.

In speeches filled with hatred and falsehoods, a public figure attacks his enemies and calls for marches on Washington. Then, after one particularly virulent address, private media companies close down his channels of communication, prompting consternation from his supporters and calls for a code of conduct to filter out violent rhetoric.

Sound familiar? Well, this was 1938, and the individual in question was Father Charles E. Coughlin, a Nazi-sympathizing Catholic priest with unfettered access to America’s vast radio audiences. The firms silencing him were the broadcasters of the day.

As a media historian, I find more than a little similarity between the stand those stations took back then and the way Twitter, YouTube and Facebook have silenced false claims of election fraud and incitements to violence in the aftermath of the siege on the U.S. Capitol – noticeably by silencing the claims of Donald Trump and his supporters.

A radio ministry

Coughlin’s Detroit ministry had grown up with radio, and, as his sermons grew more political, he began calling President Franklin D. Roosevelt a liar, a betrayer and a double-crosser. His fierce rhetoric fueled rallies and letter-writing campaigns for a dozen right-wing causes, from banking policy to opposing Russian communism. At the height of his popularity, an estimated 30 million Americans listened to his Sunday sermons.

Continue reading

Centennial of radio’s first election

From the roof of the nine story Westinghouse K Building at the East Pittsburgh Works, radio station KDKA first covered the 1920 presidential  election a century ago. Westinghouse publicity claimed the election night broadcast was “a national sensation,” but that is only part of the story.   In fact, three other embryonic ratio stations were also broadcasting the election results that night —  the Detroit News’ “Radiophone” service, a temporary Saint Louis Post-Dispatch radio station, and the Buffalo Evening News broadcast through an affiliated with an amateur station.

The fact that KDKA is best remembered is probably because the station was a leader in radio technology with pioneering engineer Frank Conrad and also that the content of the broadcast was better organized with the help of Duquense University. About 1,000 people heard the election results in Pittsburg, thanks to Conrad’s suffragette wife, Flora, who helped organize listening parties. Flora had something to celebrate that night too. It was the first national election where women could vote.

The best editorial of the 20th century

Eugene Patterson was an editor for the Atlanta Journal and Constitution when he wrote this editorial of Sept. 16, 1963, a day after the notorious 16th Street Baptist Church bombing, which killed four children. The editorial is a classic in American journalism and probably the best of the 20th century.  

“A Negro mother wept in the street Sunday morning in front of a Baptist Church in Birmingham. In her hand she held a shoe, one shoe, from the foot of her dead child. We hold that shoe with her.

Every one of us in the white South holds that small shoe in his hand.

It is too late to blame the sick criminals who handled the dynamite. The FBI and the police can deal with that kind. The charge against them is simple. They killed four children.

Only we can trace the truth, Southerner — you and I. We broke those children’s bodies.

We watched the stage set without staying it. We listened to the prologue unbestirred. We saw the curtain opening with disinterest. We have heard the play.

We — who go on electing politicians who heat the kettles of hate.

We — who raise no hand to silence the mean and little men who have their nigger jokes.

We — who stand aside in imagined rectitude and let the mad dogs that run in every society slide their leashes from our hand, and spring.

We — the heirs of a proud South, who protest its worth and demand it recognition — we are the ones who have ducked the difficult, skirted the uncomfortable, caviled at the challenge, resented the necessary, rationalized the unacceptable, and created the day surely when these children would die.

This is no time to load our anguish onto the murderous scapegoat who set the cap in dynamite of our own manufacture.

He didn’t know any better.

Continue reading

Changing up the look of news

Judy Woodruff of PBS News Hour now anchors the show from home.

The visual design of television news is becoming less busy, says Hunter Schwarz in an article in  Eye on Design as the coronavirus has shifted us into new ground.

“Guests no longer speak to us in front of in-studio green screens with professional makeup and lighting, but are instead beamed in from home offices on laptop cameras.

Walter Cronkite, radio news anchor, made the switch to TV news in the 1940s, before green screens and chyrons.

Historically, the busy visual design with fast moving graphics has only been with us a few decades.  In the early years, Schwarz says,  TV news wasn’t much to look at.    “The guys who started off in the television news business were radio guys,” said Bill Kovarik, a professor at Radford University and author of Revolutions in Communication. “There were not a lot of visual artists to start out with.”

 

A laughable attempt to muzzle the press

The last time a sitting president sued a newspaper for libel, laughter broke out on the floor of the US Senate as a clerk read the news.

That was December 15, 1908, and the president was Teddy Roosevelt. He was said to be  “furious” that the New York World  newspaper linked him to corruption over the Panama Canal. Teddy ordered federal attorneys to file criminal libel suits against newspapers carrying the story all over the country. Democrats considered it to be outrageous, and one US attorney resigned in protest rather than prosecute for libel.

New York World publisher Joseph Pulitzer said in response:  “He cannot muzzle the World.”  (See Pulitzer’s Reply Dec. 16, 1908)

Roosevelt’s lawsuit,  US v Press Publishing,  is today considered the “last gasp” of seditious libel. The US Supreme Court ruling  in 1911 was only two pages, and it didn’t even bother to touch on the merits of the case. Instead, the court simply sustained an objection by the newspaper that “the court has no jurisdiction in this case, because there is no statute of the United States authorizing the prosecution.”

The case was thought to be a First Amendment landmark at the time, but it is barely remembered in communications law textbooks today.  After all, what sitting president would lower himself to file such a suit?  Even outright allegations of murder did not tempt President Bill Clinton to wield that cudgel against critics like Jerry Falwell. What president would be so foolish as to sue for libel just because a newspaper published a disagreeable opinion?

Which brings us to Donald Trump, who sued the New York Times  on Feb. 26, 2020, and the Washington Post, on March  3, 2020, for daring to publish an apparently disagreeable opinion about Trump’s relationship with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. In the suit, Trump claimed that the Times knowingly published the supposedly false charge that there was a “quid pro quo” with the Russians in return for  their help in the 2016 election.  (The plaintiff’s petition can be read here.) 

This “quid pro quo” was described in  an op-ed written by former New York Times editor Max Frankel and published March 27, 2019.  In the op-ed, Frankel rejected  small concerns about “collusion” with Russia in the Trump campaign. The much larger issue, he said, involved the relationship between Trump and Putin.

Continue reading

Did the 2010s prove McLuhan’s determinism?

Nausea at the Newseum

(Now that the Newseum is closing down in Washington DC, We’ve dusted off an old column to remember its heroic glory and add to the accolades both pro and con).

“We got the bubble-headed-bleach-blonde who comes on at five,
She can tell you bout the plane crash with a gleam in her eye
It’s interesting when people die, we love dirty laundry …”
— Don Henley

If you want to meet that bubble-head, just drop a Jackson and visit the shiny new Newseum on the Mall in Washington DC. She’s there in her natural element, enshrined in a vast warehouse of media fantasies, in a vacuum so complete that even a news chopper hanging from the ceiling virtually vanishes into irrelevance.

It’s not just the unbelievable architecture that gives you vertigo. The enormous empty space is a perfect reflection of the modern profession: Beautiful exteriors, vacuous interiors. A $450 million monument to a profession that is devouring its young.

It’s a saccharine sepulcher of the supine press. A tomb, not a monument. Or, as Steven Colbert said, a “Newsoleum.”

Wait. Are we being unfair? Gosh! Gee! Whiz! What’s not to like about the press? Even Superman commits journalism. Kent Brockman … Clark Kent … Dan Rather …. whats the diff? And why shouldn’t Fox “News” owner Rupert Murdoch have more or less the same place in the history of the news media as Joseph Pulitzer?

Continue reading

End of the Chicago Defender

linotypes at the Chicago Defender

Setting type at the Chicago Defender, 1941.

Resistance to injustice, bearing witness to the suffering of the innocent,  never  lacking sympathy for the poor — these have always been among the  sacred duties of the press, and no newspaper has  performed  with more courage and intelligence than the Chicago Defender.

The announcement that the news organization will stop printing its 114-year old print edition, and switch to online-only publication, is not unusual in the news business these days, but it does mark the passing of an era and a moment for reflection on the status of the African American press.

When over 100 African Americans were killed and thousands of homes burned during in the East St. Louis riots in July, 1917,  only the African American press, especially the Chicago Defender, covered the eyewitness accounts of brutality by white mobs.  The same is true of many other major riots and incidents. Continue reading