A Test of the News (Walter Lippmann)

A Test of the News is a study on the objectivity and neutrality of press coverage using the example of the New York Times . It was written in 1920 by Walter Lippmann and Charles Merz . Both had worked in the same Military Propaganda Unit (CPI ) in France. Merz later became editor of the New York Times . The authors were supported by Faye Albertson Lippmann, Lippmann's first wife.

Subject and method

The theme was the presentation of the Russian Revolution and the Russian Civil War in the New York Times . The study appeared on August 4, 1920 as a 42-page supplement to The New Republic , a magazine that Lippmann had co-founded. The authors' content analysis comprised several thousand newspaper articles in more than 1000 issues that had been published over a period of three years, starting from March 1917 to March 1920.

Requirements and goals

The prerequisite for the study was that healthy public opinion on political issues cannot be formed without access to the most objective information possible about these issues.

According to Lippmann, the reason was a widespread doubt about media coverage, especially during the First World War. their quality should be checked by an empirical study :

"There is today a widespread and a growing doubt whether there exists such an access to the news about contentious affairs. This doubt ranges from accusations of unconscious bias to downright charges of corruption, from the belief that the news is colored to the belief that the news is poisoned. On so grave a matter evidence is needed. ”There is a widespread and growing doubt today as to whether there is such access to news when it comes to contentious matters. This doubt ranges from accusations of unconscious partisanship to blatant accusations of corruption, from believing that news is colored to believing that it is poisoned. With such a serious subject, you need evidence. (P. 1)

The New York Times was chosen for five reasons:

She was unsurpassed in influence.
She had the ability to determine facts herself.
The authors found the technical preparation of the news admirable.
The register made systematic study easier.
The newspaper articles were easily accessible.
The Times was considered one of the greatest newspapers in the world.

The Russian Revolution was chosen as the theme because it was historically significant and “aroused the kind of passion that most tests the objectivity of the reports”.

The question to be answered was:

"... whether the reader of the news was given a picture of the various phases of the revolution that withstood the fact check, or whether he was misled into expecting a completely different result than the actual one." (P. 2)

The study was devoted to seven periods of time and, in retrospect, undisputed main events. The main tendency of press coverage is worked out for each time period.

Section 1 to 2: Purposeful optimism, guided by the hope of a victory for Russia over Germany, based on a one-sided selection of official or reputable sources. The experienced reader could, however, have doubts about the credibility of what was said because of the constant repetition.

Section 3: Hopes are cherished that the communists will reject the peace treaty with Germany.

Section 4: Disappointment in the defeat of the revolutionary troops and fear lead to propaganda for military intervention

Section 5: Fear of the “Red Danger” replaces fear of Germany as a motive for intervention after the armistice

Section 6: Generals of the “whites” are promoted as saviors

Section 7: The fear of the Germans is replaced by the fear of the "reds".

Results

The study found that the Times' reporting was neither impartial nor accurate. The newspaper's "news stories" were not based on facts, but were "determined by the hopes of the men (..) who made up the news organizations". Invoking events that hadn't happened , atrocities that didn't exist , the newspaper reported no fewer than 91 times that the Bolshevik regime was on the verge of collapse.

Lippmann's biographer Ronald Steel sums up that Lippmann and Merz had critically stated that the news about Russia was "an example of the fact that you don't see what was, but what people wanted to see". "The main censor and the main propagandist were the hope and fear in the minds of reporters and editors."

Journalistic standards as a problem

Lippmann and Merz see the causes of the shortcomings in the lack of journalistic standards . According to the authors in the final chapter, the analysis shows

how seriously misguided the Times was in relying on official "suppliers" of information. It turns out that an independent press cannot regard factual statements by governments and circles close to the government, as well as by leaders of political movements, as judgments of fact. This origin indicates opinions that are guided by a special purpose. They are therefore not reliable news. (...) Measured against a high journalistic standard, the statement of a minister on a question of vital importance is only an invitation to an independent investigation. It is even more misleading to rely on semi-official, anonymous statements instead of official communications. Journalists shouldn't have too close ties to politics. (see p. 41)
Not even a newspaper like the Times would meet the need for suitable correspondents . In extraordinary times, you need extraordinary correspondents. Reporting is one of the most difficult professions, it requires expert knowledge and serious training. (see p. 42)
In critical times, the separation of editorials and news breaks down. The editors' stance on Russia policy influenced the news profoundly and in blatant form. The textual design of the news in terms of accentuation and headlines is clearly determined by standards other than professional. This fact is so obvious, the influence of the editors' bias so conspicuous, that “serious reform is required before the code that has been violated can be restored”. (see p. 42)

Further publications

In 1919 Lippmann published two essays, What Modern Liberty Means and Liberty and the News, in the Atlantic Monthly , which came to conclusions and suggestions similar to those of A Test of the News . They were published in the essay collection Liberty and the News in 1920 .

Quotes

By and large, the news about Russia shows that people don't see what was, but what they wanted to see. (…) The main censor and the main propagandist were hope and fear in the minds of reporters and editors. They wanted to win the war; they wanted to fend off Bolshevism. (...)

For subjective reasons, they accepted and believed most of what the Foreign Ministry told them (...) reports from state-controlled intelligence agencies abroad and from correspondents who were overly familiar with the various intelligence agencies and with members of the old Russian nobility. From the point of view of professional journalism, coverage of the Russian Revolution is a disaster. On the key issues, the bottom line has almost always been misleading, and misleading news is worse than none. (…) They had the ultimate duty in a democracy to provide the information on which public opinion feeds, and they have forgotten that duty.

Your motives may have been excellent. They wanted to win the war; they wanted to save the world. They were nervously aroused by exciting events. They were puzzled by the complexities of things and the obstacles the war posed. But whatever the excuses, excuses and glosses over, the fact remains that in an extreme crisis, a great nation could not ensure the minimum of necessary information about an event of paramount importance:

“In the large, the news about Russia is a case of seeing not what was, but what men wished to see. (...) The chief censor and the chief propagandist were hope and fear in the minds of reporters and editors. They wanted to win the war; they wanted to ward off bolshevism. (...) For subjective reasons they accepted and believed most of what they were told by the State Department, (...) reports of governmentally controlled news services abroad, and of correspondents who were unduly intimate with the various secret services and with members of the old Russian nobility. From the point of view of professional journalism the reporting of the Russian Revolution is nothing short of a disaster. On the essential questions the net effect was almost always misleading, and misleading news is worse than none at all. Yet on the face of the evidence there is no reason to charge a conspiracy by Americans. They can fairly be charged with boundless credulity, and an untiring readiness to be gulled, and on many occasions with a downright lack of common sense. Whether they were "giving the public what it wants" or creating a public that took what it got, is beside the point. They were performing the supreme duty in a democracy of supplying the information on which public opinion feeds, and they were derelict in that duty. Their motives may have been excellent. They wanted to win the war; they wanted to save the world. They were nervously excited by exciting events. They were baffled by the complexity of affairs, and the obstacles created by war. "

- Charles Merz, Walter Lippmann : A Test of the News

text

A Test of the News from The New Republic

Secondary literature

The Oxford Handbook of Propaganda Studies, edited by Jonathan Auerbach and Russ Castronovo. New York 2014. ISBN 978-0-19-976441-9 , pp. 308-312

Remarks

↑ Tom Goldstein: Killing the Messenger: 100 Years of Media Criticism . Columbia University Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-231-11833-0 ( limited preview in Google Book Search).
^ ^A ^b ^c Ronald Steel: Walter Lippmann and the American Century. [With portrait] (2nd print.) . Transaction Publishers, 1980, ISBN 1-4128-4115-1 ( limited preview in Google Book Search).
↑ "It is admitted that a sound public opinion cannot exist without access to the news."
↑ "The Russian Revolution was selected as the topic, because of its intrinsic importance, and because it has aroused the kind of passion which tests most seriously the objectivity of reporting."
↑ "The only question asked is whether the reader of the news was given a picture of various phases of the revolution which survived the test of events, or whether he was misled into believing that the outcome of events would be radically different from the actual outcome . "
↑ Michael Schudson: Lippmann and the News . December 13th 2007, ISSN 0027-8378 ( thenation.com [accessed on December 23, 2019]).
^ Geneva Overholser, Kathleen Hall Jamieson: The Institutions of American Democracy: The Press . Oxford University Press, USA, 2005, ISBN 0-19-517283-3 ( limited preview in Google Book Search).
^ Walter Lippmann: Liberty and the News. Harcourt, Brace and Howe, New York 1920. ( Digitized - Internet Archive )
^ Charles Merz, Walter Lippmann: A Test of the News. New Republic, 1920. ( Digitized - Internet Archive )

[1] Tom Goldstein: Killing the Messenger: 100 Years of Media Criticism . Columbia University Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-231-11833-0 ( limited preview in Google Book Search).

[Steel1980-2] A ^b ^c Ronald Steel: Walter Lippmann and the American Century. [With portrait] (2nd print.) . Transaction Publishers, 1980, ISBN 1-4128-4115-1 ( limited preview in Google Book Search).

[3] "It is admitted that a sound public opinion cannot exist without access to the news."

[4] "The Russian Revolution was selected as the topic, because of its intrinsic importance, and because it has aroused the kind of passion which tests most seriously the objectivity of reporting."

[5] "The only question asked is whether the reader of the news was given a picture of various phases of the revolution which survived the test of events, or whether he was misled into believing that the outcome of events would be radically different from the actual outcome . "

[6] Michael Schudson: Lippmann and the News . December 13th 2007, ISSN 0027-8378 ( thenation.com [accessed on December 23, 2019]).

[7] Geneva Overholser, Kathleen Hall Jamieson: The Institutions of American Democracy: The Press . Oxford University Press, USA, 2005, ISBN 0-19-517283-3 ( limited preview in Google Book Search).

[8] Walter Lippmann: Liberty and the News. Harcourt, Brace and Howe, New York 1920. ( Digitized - Internet Archive )

[9] Charles Merz, Walter Lippmann: A Test of the News. New Republic, 1920. ( Digitized - Internet Archive )