AN ANALYSIS OF THE NIXON AND
STEVENSON FUND STORIES IN FOUR
METROPOLITAN DAILY NEWSPAPERS

Thesis for the Degree of M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
JUDITH B. WAGNER
1963

I
I

    

Michigan State

7 Universit
1...: Y

LIBRARY I

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

AN ANALYSIS OF THE NIXON AND STEVENSON
FUND STORIES IN FOUR METROPOLITAN
DAILY NEWSPAPERS

by Judith B. Wagner

On Thursday, September 18, 1952, a story in the

New York Post cited a fund in California organized for

 

Senator Richard M. Nixon of California, who was seeking

the office of the vice president on the Republican ticket

in the 1952 elections. The news was soon flashed through-

out the country, and a political battle concerning the

ethical implications of such a fund immediately ensued.

On September 23, 1952, another fund, consisting of surplus

campaign contributions, was uncovered for Governor Adlai

E. Stevenson of Illinois, the Democratic presidential nominee.
In this thesis project, I have analyzed the coverage

of the Nixon-Stevenson fund stories in four metrOpolitan

dailies--the Los Angeles Times, the Milwaukee Journal, the

 

 

’New York Times, and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch--to determine

 

 

the manner in which these papers reported the funds.
This analysis includes most sections of the news-
paper-~editorials, columns, photographs, stories, and head—

lines. Statistical evidence constitutes a part of the

Judith B. Wagner

research and includes number of stories, column-inches of
news space, number of headline columns, column-inches of
headline space, point size of headlines, number of photo-
graphs, and column-inches of photographs.

Several other factors were considered in addition
to statistical evidence including writing style, placement,
word usage, and information sources.

It was found that imbalance existed in the coverage
of the funds in all four newspapers analyzed. More editor-
ials, columns, photographs, stories, and headlines pertained
to the Nixon fund than to the Stevenson fund. Due to the
increased newsworthiness of the Nixon fund, however, this
imbalance of coverage was found to be insignificant.

In terms of style, word usage, and other criteria,

it was concluded that the New York Times was the most ob-

 

jective of the four newspapers in reporting the fund stories.

The Milwaukee Journal reflected some editorial support of

 

the Democratic party in the coverage of the funds, but not

to a great extent. The Los Angeles Times and the Post-

 

Dispatch showed substantial bias in reporting the fund
stories. The editorial policies of both papers were re-
flected in the reporting of the funds, particularly in
those columns, stories and headlines concerning the Nixon

fund.

Accepted by the faculty of the School of Journalism,
College of Communication Arts, Michigan State University, in

partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of

yQ/Za

4’;
M/7 Direétpfrof Thesis

Arts degree.

 

AN ANALYSIS OF THE NIXON AND STEVENSON
FUND STORIES IN FOUR METROPOLITAN
DAILY NEWSPAPERS

By
“c

.P.

+\
Judith BS” Wagner

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
School of Journalism

1968

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It is with extreme gratitude that I acknowledge my
indebtedness to the many persons who contributed to my
research project--too many to name. But at the very least,
I must express my appreciation to the professors in the
School of Journalism at Michigan State University who
assisted me in my research and to my husband, whose en-
couragement and help made the completion of this project

possible.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Chapter

I. BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . 10

II. EDITORIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

III. COLUMNISTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

IV. PHOTOGRAPHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
V. STORIES AND HEADLINES . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
VI. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

iii

10.

ll.

12.

13.

LIST OF TABLES

Newspaper Backing of Presidential Candidates
Circulation Figures in 1952 . . . . . . . .
Photographs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Headlines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Headline Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T-Values for Nixon Fund Photographs
(Column Inches) . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T-Values for Nixon Fund Headlines
(Type Size) I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

T-Values for Stevenson Fund Headlines
(Type Size) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T—Values for Nixon Fund Headlines
(COlumn InCheS) o o o o o o o o o o o o o

T-Values for Stevenson Fund Headlines
(Column Inches) . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T-Values for Nixon Fund Stories
(Column Inches) . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T-Values for Stevenson Fund Stories
(Column Inches) . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iv

Page
16
30

105
124
125

126

178

180

180

181

182

183

184

INTRODUCTION

In June, 1952, five months before the American
people set about their business of electing a President,
a "nervous discontent" seemed to permeate the nation.1
Americans were weary of the undeclared war in Korea, and
of the high taxes even though business was good; they re-
sented the military draft and government-imposed controls
on a variety of activity.2 Frustration, bitterness, anXe
iety, and fear seemed to characterize the mood of the
citizenry. It was a "generation in search of its soul,
. . . a generation looking for spiritual and intellectual’
anchorage at a time of uncertainty and upheaval, a peOple
seeking a clearly defined national purpose."3

In Mississippi, a Nobel Prize-winning writer, whose
short stories and novels examined the decline of the South,
with its economic sterility, its moral disintegration, and

its struggle to resist the progressive and materialistic

 

1"Why PeOple Are Worried," U.S. News & World Report,
June 13, 1952, p. 21.

2"Why People Are Worried," p. 21.

3Norman Cousins, "Speech for a Presidential Candi-
date," Saturday Review, August 2, 1952, p. 23 and Cousins,
"The Incomplete Power," Saturday Review, Dec. 1, 1951,
p. 28.

civilization of the North, observed that man's lack of
responsibility was the cause of his widespread frustration
and bitterness. "When we talk of security," he said, "we
. . . mean . . . only for so long as we ourselves can hold
our place on a public relief roll or at a bureaucratic or
political or any other organization's gravy trough."4 The
national attitude, to others, was affected seriously "by
the abundance of things in which the American seems to
place his faith--by cars and television sets and milk
shakes and juke boxes."5
Early in the fifties, the American people, not yet
healed from the trauma of the Great Depression and the hor-
rendous struggle of total war against the global forces of
totalitarian aggression for four long years, bitterly began
to comprehend that world peace was remote. The military
forces of democracy, it appeared, always would have to be
on guard; Soviet Russia seemed headed for world conquest.6

The uneasy truce in the Pacific was shattered when, in 1950,

the armed forces of the Russian-dominated Korean People's

 

4William Faulkner, "Man's Responsibility to Fellow
Man," Vital Speeches, Sept. 15, 1952, p. 729. The Speech
was delivered at the annual meeting of the Delta Council,
Cleveland, Mississippi, on May 15, 1952.

 

5August Heckscher, "Free Souls and Slave," Saturday
Review, May 26, 1951, p. 32.

6Frederick Lewis Allen, The Big Change, Chap. 11,
"The Reluctant World Power" (New York: Harper & Row, Pub-
lishers, 1952), p. 153 and Henry Bund, "Mobilizing Industry,"
Saturday Review, Jan 19, 1952, p. 42.

 

 

Republic crossed the thirty-eighth parallel boundary, in-
vading the American dominated Republic of Korea. North
Korean troops met little Opposition as they slashed south-
ward. By the end of June, they threatened the South Korean
capital at Seoul. The Security Council of the United
Nations called on North Korea to cease firing and to fall
back beyond the thirty-eighth parallel. When the order
was ignored, the United States introduced a resolution to
the Council, urging members of the United Nations to fur-
nish such assistance to the Republic of South Korea as may
be necessary to repel the armed attack and to restore inter-
national peace and security to the area. The resolution
was passed by a vote of eight to two, with the Russian dele-
gate not voting.7

President Truman ordered air and sea forces to aid
the South Koreans, and at the same time he instructed the
American fleet to present bay attack on Formosa and called
on the Chinese Nationalists to cease air and sea operations
against Communist China until their status had been deter-
mined by the United Nations; strengthened United States
military forces in the Philippines, and accelerated aid

for French Indo-China. Naval and air forces operating

 

7New York Times, June 26, 1950, p. l.

 

from bases in Japan immediately began bombing North Korean
supply depots and troop concentration.8

Although an overwhelming majority of the American
pe0p1e agreed that action in Korea was the only effective
means of preventing World War III, and despite virtually
unanimous support lxy the Congress for an extension of the
military draft and for appropriations to increase aid to
Korea, the undeclared war in the Pacific depressed the
American spirit. Russia had announced a policy of non-
intervention, although she continued to provide military
and economic aid to North Korea. In mid—1952, the armed
conflict still continued, and American war dead and injured
were counted in the thousands.9

The American situation at home also caused discon—
tent. In addition to higher taxes and inflation, the exist-
ence of Communists in the United States in the late forties
and early fifties disturbed many Americans.

In August, 1948, an ex-Communist Whittaker Chambers

testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee

 

8New York Times,June 27, 1950, p. 1 and Arthur S.
Link, American Epoch, A History of the United States Since
the 1890Ts, Chap. 29, "The Korean War and the Election of
1952" (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1965), pp. 717-737.

 

 

 

9Thomas A. Bailey, A Diplomatic History of the
American People, Chap. 52, 11Communism and the Korean Con-
flictf—(New York: Meredith Publishing Company, 1964), pp.
823-825 and Julius W. Pratt, A History of United States
Foreign Policy, Chap. 47, "The Struggle for Eastern Asia"
IEHglewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1955), pp.
739-744.

 

 

 

 

that Alger Hiss, a former high official of the State Depart—
ment, had been a member of the Communist party between 1934
and 1938. In December, 1948, Chambers charged that Hiss

had been a Communist spy while working in the Department of
State. Hiss sued Chambers for libel, and Chambers, in turn,
produced documents that demonstrated Hiss's guilt. Hiss
was prosecuted for perjury and was convicted in January,
1950.10

Then on February 3, 1950, the British government
announced the confession of Dr. Klaus Fuchs, an atomic
scientist. From 1943 until 1947, he had passed to Soviet
agents all scientific secrets he could uncover while doing
atomic research for the American and British governments.

How much more could Americans take? The time was
ripe for one Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin.

In February, 1950, the Senate Republican Campaign
Committee assigned McCarthy to Speak before the Ohio County
Republican Women's Club of Wheeling, West Virginia, on
February 9. Less than a month after Hiss had been convicted,
less than a week after the Fuchs confession had been re-
vealed, McCarthy announced in his Lincoln Day oration that

the State Department was "thoroughly infested with Communists."ll

 

10Eric F. Goldman, The Crucial_Decade--And After:
America, 1945-1960, Chap. V, "Year of Shocksfl (New York:
Vintage Books, 1960), pp. 91-112.

llGoldman, Chap. VII, "Dinner at the Colony," p. 142.

 

Thus began a vendetta that continued until 1954 when the
United States Senate censured him.

Anyone with unorthodox ideas was suspected by
McCarthy of holding subversive intentions. Yet McCarthy
was able to continue for so long to damage the reputations
of Americans, because they were in the right mood to be
stirred by McCarthy's sensational disclosures. "The emo-
tional aggressiveness<flchCarthyism vicariously provided
a ready psychological release" from the frustrations of
the postwar years.12

When the time came for the nominating conventions
in the summer of 1952, America was in an ugly mood. Popular
discontent had been caused by a number of situations includ-
ing the Korean War, Soviet Union aggression, Communist in-
filtration in the United States, McCarthyism, and the
economic scene at home. Many Americans were not happy with
the Truman administration and "desired a change of govern—
ment by early 1952."13

The Republicans met in Chicago on July 7, 1952.

The main contenders for the presidential nomination were
Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio and General Dwight D. Eisen-

hower who had resigned his North Atlantic Treaty Organiza-

tion command to enter the campaign. Eisenhower won the

 

12John B. Oakes, "Report on McCarthy and McCarthy—
ism," New York Times Magazine, Nov. 2, 1952, p. 30.

13

 

Link, American Epoch, p. 731.

 

nomination on the first ballot, and the convention dele-
gates nominated Senator Richard M. Mixon of California as
Eisenhower's running mate.14

The Governor of Illinois, Adlai E. Stevenson, wel-
comed delegates to the Democratic National Convention in
Chicago on July 21. The delegates included a host of con-
tenders for the presidential nomination. Senator Richard
B. Russell of Georgia, Vice President Alben W. Barkley of
Kentucky, W. Averell Harriman of New York, Senator Robert
S. Kerr of Oklahoma, and Senator Estes Kefauver of Tennes—
see all jockied for the position.

Stevenson was also a contender, at least for the
members of the National Committee for Stevenson for Presi-
dent, a committee that had been formed in April to secure
the nomination for Stevenson.15 Despite the unofficial
standing of the Stevenson committee and the protestations
of Stevenson until the very eve of the Democratic conven-
tion, Stevenson was nominated on the third ballot on
July 25. Senator John J. Sparkman was nominated as Steven-

. - . l6
son 5 running mate.

 

14George L. Hart, Official Report of the Twenty-
Fifth Republican National Convention (Washington, D.C.:
Republican National Committee, 1953), pp. 405, 421.

15Walter Johnson, How We Drafted Adlai Stevenson
(New York:. Alfred A. KnOpf, Inc., 1955), pp. 49, 54.

16William J. Bray and Venice T. Spraggs, Official
Report of the Democratic National Convention (Washington,
D.C.: Democratic National Committee, 1953 , p. 538.

 

 

Stevenson, once he won the nomination, plunged into
the task of persuading Americans to keep the Democratic
party in power. Eisenhower launched his campaign with a
crusade for honest and efficient government at home and
for freedom in the world. The discontent of Americans
posed a major problem for the Democrats. Americans were
tired of the Democratic administration and were ready for
new persons and policies in the White House.

Stevenson also had Other problems to contend with.
At the beginning of the campaign, he was a relatively un-
known political figure. Many voters knew nothing about
him, his past record, or his political beliefs. Stevenson's
personality also constituted a barrier during the campaign.
He was basically an intellectual with a clever and penetra-
ting wit. As a result, he drew many other intellectuals
to his side. But the average voter did not understand many
of Stevenson's concepts and did not appreciate his wit.

It was during the campaign that the term egghead began to
be used in a derogatory manner, and the intellectual was
dismissed as an oddity.l7

Eisenhower, on the other hand, had the ability to
speak in broad generalities that appealed to most classes

and interests. "Not by any stretch of the imagination

 

l7Richard Hofstadter, Anti-intellectualism in
American Life, Chap. 1, "Anti-intellectualism in Our Time"
(New York: Random House, Inc., 1966), p. 9.

could Eisenhower be called a highbrow or an 'intellectual,'"
John Gunther wrote in his biography of Eisenhower.l8 Eisen-
hower was the extrovert, the man of action who could relate
to the average voter. He was the military hero who em-
bodied for Americans the qualities of goodness, simplicity,
and honesty.

While Stevenson's intellectual capabilities were
great, this was not enough to combat the personal appeal
of Eisenhower. Eisenhower's popularity coupled with the
desire of Americans for a change had much to do with the
Republican momentum in the campaign. On November 5,
Americans cast their ballots and elected Eisenhower as the

thirty-fourth President of the United States. The change

the nation seemed to desire had come about.

 

18John Gunther, Eisenhower: The Man and the Sym-

bol, Chap. 1, "The Man" (New York: Har & Brothers, Pub-
lishers, 1952), p. 24.

 

CHAPTER I

BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY

The Nixon and Stevenson Fund Stories

 

The Republican drive to victory faltered only once
during the campaign. This setback occurred when a politi—
cal fund for Nixon was exposed. On Thursday, September 18,

1952, a story in the New York Post reported a fund in Cali-

 

fornia. The byline story by Leo Katcher, West Coast cor-
respondent for the Post, described the contributors to the
fund as Nixon's "millionaire club."

According to Editor & Publisher, a trade publication

 

of the newspaper industry, information concerning the Nixon
fund came from Dan Green, former night city editor of the
Los Angeles Examiner.l Green relayed the news tip to

Katcher of the Post, Ernest Brashear of the Los Angeles

 

Daily News, and Richard Donovan of Reporter magazine, all

 

collaborators in gathering material on Nixon. The reporters
were directed to the custodian of the fund, Dana C. Smith,
a Pasadena investment banker. Smith verified the existence

of the fund and claimed the money was used for expenses

 

l"Nixon Fund Revelation a Reportorial Chore,"
Editor & Publisher, Sept. 27, 1952, p. 13.

 

10

11

incurred by Nixon in representing the people of California
in the Senate.

With the publication of the New York Post article,

 

news of the fund was soon flashed throughout the country,
and a political battle over the ethical implications of
such a fund immediately ensued. Stephen A. Mitchell, Demo—
cratic National Chairman, called on General Eisenhower to
ask for Nixon's withdrawal as the Republican vice presi-
dential candidate.2 Nixon confirmed the story of the
$18,000 fund but said it had been used entirely for politi-
cal expenses and that he was being smeared by Communists
and crooks.3 Eisenhower voiced confidence in Nixon and
described his running mate as an honest man. Eisenhower,
however, demanded an explanation and said Nixon must come
out of the affair "clean as a hound's tooth--or else."4
Nixon interrupted his campaign on Tuesday, Septem-
ber 23, to fly to Los Angeles. That night he appeared in
a national radio and television broadcast to present an
explanation of the fund to the nation. "I come before you
tonight," Nixon said, "as a man whose honesty and integrity

have been questioned. The usual political thing to do when

charges are made against you is to either ignore them or

 

2New York Times, Sept. 19, 1952, p. 11.

 

3New York Times, p. 11.
4

 

New York Times, Sept. 20, 1952, p. l.

 

12

deny them without giving details."5 Nixon did not ignore
or deny the charges but instead outlined to the radio and
television audience a financial history of his political
career. He also refused to resign as the Republican vice
presidential candidate. Instead he left the decision to
the Republican National Committee and asked the public to
help the national committee make such a judgment.
The calls and telegrams that poured in after the
broadcast were overwhelmingly in favor of retaining Nixon
as the Republican vice presidential candidate. Eisenhower
reported the Republican National Committee had voted 107 to
O in support of Nixon.6 On Wednesday, September 24, Eisen-
hower greeted Nixon in Wheeling, West Virginia, and announced
that his running mate had been completely vindicated.7 On
this note, the fund story ended, an incident that Nixon
later described as "the hardest, the sharpest, and the
briefest of my public life. . . ."8
Nixon, however, was not the only candidate to ex-

perience such a crisis during the 1952 campaign. A fund

consisting of surplus campaign contributions was being

 

5"Text of Senator Nixon's Broadcast Explaining Sup-
plementary Expense Fund," New York Times, Sept. 24, 1952,
p. 22.

 

6New York Times, Sept. 25, 1952, p. l.

 

7New York Times, p. l.

 

8Richard M. Nixon, Six Crises, Sec. 2, "The Fund"
(Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1962), p. 70.

 

13

used by Adlai Stevenson. On September 22, the Chicago

Daily News and the Chicago Tribune reported that funds

 

 

left over from Stevenson's 1948 gubernatorial campaign
were being used for his present presidential campaign.

The Daily News also reported that Stevenson, as Illinois

 

governor, had approved financial assistance for expenses
to members of his administration that he had appointed.

The money had.come from a cash fund contributed by pri-

vate individuals, according to the Daily News story.

Stevenson denied that the 1948 funds were being
used to finance his campaign for the presidency but said
extra compensation had been given to appointed Illinois
state officials. "If it's a crime to help good people in
government," Stevenson said, "then I'm guilty."9 He re-
fused, however, to make public any details concerning the
identity of the recipients or the donors of the money.
Stevenson told aides that such a disclosure would be an
invasion of these individuals' privacy.

Heeding mounting political criticism, Stevenson,
on September 27, gave the names of eight state officials
he had assisted with money remaining from his 1948 guber-
natorial campaign fund. He also made public the names of

1,000 persons who had donated additional money to this fund.10

 

9New York Times, Sept. 23, 1952, p. l.

 

10New York Times, Sept. 28, 1952, p. l.

 

14

Two days later, in a nation-wide radio and television
broadcast,IStevenson accounted for his personal income
from 1942 to 1952 and presented his rationale for the
assistance of the eight Illinois officials. "To attract
and employ better people in state government is never

easy, Stevenson said. "Government . . . must, if it is
to be good government, pay salaries which are not an invi-
tation to carelessness, indolence, or even worse, corrup-
tion."11
This statement ended the publicity concerning
Stevenson's efforts to assist those in positions appointed
by the governor. By September 30, news of the Nixon and
Stevenson funds had disappeared from most of the nation's
newspapers. The impact of the stories, however, was felt
throughout the rest of the campaign, particularly by the

press, for great caution was necessary to report subsequent

campaign stories objectively and impartially.

The 1952 Election and the Press

 

The press, during the 1952 presidential campaign,
was subject to much scrutiny and criticism. During this
period and throughout the following year, numerous persons
attempted to define the role of the press in politics and

to place it in proper perspective. What is the role of a

 

llMajpr Campaignp§peeches of Adlai E. Stevenson,

1952 (New York: Random House, Inc., 1953), p. 190.

15

newspaper in a campaign? Do neWSpapers aid the reader in
his efforts to evaluate the candidate seeking public office
and his platform? Are newspaper accounts of the day's
events and issues objective? Questions such as these are,
of course, often directed toward the press, especially
during an election year. These questions, however, were
particularly evident during the campaign of 1952 when poli-
tical pressures and events were strong and vigorous. Cries
of outrage concerning equal coverage in 1952 fell upon the
newspapers from members of both political parties, and
charges of political bias and distortion fell into two
categories: editorial bias and news story bias.

The nation's press tends to be conservative, and,
as a result, to lean editorially toward the Republican
party. This is only natural in the newspaper field. A
publisher, in order to make profits, must run his news—
paper as any businessman would run his company. Any news-
paper, made, produced, and sold like most products on the
market, is a business. It is, therefore, not unusual that
most publishers, as businessmen running their particular
industry, hold conservative attitudes in keeping with the
businesslike aSpects of the newspaper profession.

According to a poll taken in 1952 by Editor & Pub-

 

lisher, a majority of newspapers since 1932 have always
backed a Republican candidate editorially. The poll,
covering 66.8 per cent of all dailies and 87 per cent of

total circulation, resulted in the following figures:

16

Table 1.--NeWSpaper backing Of presidential candidates?

 

 

 

Y Republican Democratic
ear

Percentage Percentage
1932 55.5 38.7
1936 60.4 34.5
1940 66.3 20.1
1944 60.1 22.0
1948 65.2 19.4

 

aRobert U. Brown, "Shop Talk at Thirty," Editor &
Publisher, August 2, 1952, p. 48.

 

But this leaning of newspapers editorially toward
the Republican party need not be of major concern to the
American public. For newspaper editors have the right to
support whatever political candidate they wish on the edi—
torial page. Freedom to interpret and to express one's
own Opinion responsibly is fundamental to the concept Of
United States democracy. This right has been incorporated
into the American system through the First Amendment Of
the Constitution. TO deny this editorial freedom "would
be tO deny the very principle Of free will and democracy

which sustain the freedom Of the press, according to Malcolm

W. Klein and Nathan Maccoby, then members Of the Division of
Research, School of Public Relations and Communications,

Boston University.12

 

1 .
2Malcolm W. Klein and Nathan Maccoby, "Newspaper

Objectivity in the 1952 Campaign," Journalism Quarterly,
XXXI, No. 3 (1954), 286. "

 

17

The American public should instead concern itself
with factual reporting in the news columns. If bias, dis-
tortion, suppression, or omission exist here, then criti-
cism Of the press is inevitable. A neWSpaper may not
formulate a person's basic beliefs, but its news columns
can have much to do with generating and influencing public
attitudes. Studies by Bernard Berelson, then a member Of
the Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia University,
demonstrated that news story content is generally more ef-
fective in converting Opinion than the content of editorials.l3
Berelson based his research on the premise that events tend
to generate more Opinion than words and issues. Since the
news columns Of the neWSpaper may influence the reader in
this manner, truthful and comprehensive coverage of the
day's events is necessary to an informed public.

During the 1952 presidential campaign, Adlai E.
Stevenson, in a speech to the Oregon Press Association,
accused the nation's newspapers Of being a "one-party
press." Stevenson told the newspapermen:

I am in favor of a two-party system in politics. And
I think we have a pretty healthy two-party system at
the moment. But I am in favor of a two-party system
in our press, too. And I am, frankly, considerably

concerned when I see the extent to which we are de-
velOping a one-party press in a two-party country.

 

l3Bernard Berelson, "Communications and Public
Opinion," in Mass Communications, ed. by Wilbur Schramm
(Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1960), p. 534.

14"Text Of Stevenson's Speech to the Oregon Press
Association," New York Times, Sept. 9, 1952, p. 19.

 

 

18

This particular criticism of the press was con-
sidered by many Americans. It was not that the newspaper
industry had never been criticized before, for this was
certainly not the case. It was, however, the source of
the comment that captured the attention of many persons.
For here was the intellectual Democratic presidential can-
didate making a caustic yet thought-provoking criticism of
the newspaper industry. Those who were impressed by Steven-
son's deep probes intO the state Of the nation listened to
his comments on the press. And journalists listened, too,
some agreeing, others disagreeing. Those who had already
decided that Stevenson spoke far above their heads either
turned aside or disagreed with his one-party press attack.

The decisive and coherent phrasing of Stevenson's
accusation, however, was strong enough to direct many per—
sons' attention to the American newspaper system. During
the remainder of the campaign, many other charges Of news-
paper bias and distortion were put forth. Criticism per-
tained not only to the editorial policies Of the newspaper
but to the news columns as well. Many accused the press
Of distorting the news itself to favor the Republican party.

After the 1952 election, a variety of studies was
conducted to determine the validity of Stevenson's charge
in relation to the news columns of the press. Nathan B.
Blumberg, then assistant professor of journalism at the

University of Nebraska, in his study Of thirty-five daily

19

newspapers during the final thirty days of the campaign,
concluded that "there was slanting in the news columns
during the 1952 election but it was not as wideSpread as

15

some critics have maintained." Arthur Edward Rowse,

copy editor for the Boston Eveninngraveler and free lance

 

writer of newspaper and magazine articles, after analyzing
the manner in which thirty-one neWSpapers handled the
Nixon fund story of the 1952 campaign on September 18 and
19, said that "with the possible exception of the New York
Timgg, all papers-Tboth Republican and Democratic--showed
evidence of favoritism in their news columns in violation
Of their own accepted rules on conduct."16

The Associated Press, on November 3, 1952, released
a study of the 1952 press coverage based on an analysis of
100 newspapers. The results Of this study indicated that
the campaign had been covered more completely than any

17 A number of American authors,

political event in history.
who analyzed twenty-six newspapers in six states, issued a

warning to the public during the campaign that "the press

 

15Nathan B. Blumberg, One-Party Press?: Coverage of

the 1952 Presidential Campaign in 35 Daily Newspapers
(Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 1954), p. 44.

16Arthur Edward Rowse, Stanted News: A Case Study
of the Nixon and Stevenson Fund Stories (Boston: Beacon
Press, 1957), p. 127.

 

 

 

7 .
"Campaign Coverage," Newsweek, Nov. 3, 1952, p. 65.

20

is not giving a reliable picture of the campaign."18 Those
individuals involved in this study included W. H. Auden,
John Gunther, John Hersey, Katherine Ann Porter, Carl
Sandberg, Upton Sinclair, and John Steinbeck.

The various degrees of newspaper distortion alluded
to in these studies demonstrate the problem involved in de-
tecting and analyzing newspaper bias related to the press
as a whole. The analysis Of each daily newspaper in the
nation is not at all feasible, in terms Of the amount of
effort involved and the difficulty of Obtaining such a
vast number of newspaper issues. A representative sample
of newspapers is also difficult to devise, since so many
factors must be taken into consideration. One can not be
at all certain that the papers that comprise a study do,
in fact, adequately represent the American press.

This very problem was considered by Sigma Delta
Chi, professional journalism fraternity, after the 1952
presidential campaign. At the fraternity's national con~
vention in Denver, Colorado, at the end of November, 1952,
a special committee was authorized to eXplore the possi-
bilities Of an impartial study Of the news coverage Of the
Eisenhower-Stevenson presidential campaign. The survey was

undertaken "because numerous and grave charges have been

made that the media for the dissemination Of information

 

18"Page 1 Display Contradicts Authors on Press
Bias," Editor & Publisher, Oct. 25, 1952, p. 59.

 

21

were biased in their news coverage of the campaign," the

fraternity's formal resolution read.19

In April of 1953,
the committee, headed by J. D. Ferguson, editor of the

Milwaukee Journal, reported that the proposed study was

 

not feasible. "The committee knows of no formulae that
would meet the magnitude and complexities of the problem
of evaluating the fairness of public information media in
their news coverage of the 1952 campaign," the committee
members said.20

One can, however, isolate certain newspapers and
analyze the manner in which specific incidents were re-
ported and covered. If a number of criteria are estab-
lished, these can be used as a yardstick to judge the kind
of reporting that was done. Biased reporting can be de-
tected in this kind of analysis. The Nixon and Stevenson
fund stories of the 1952 campaign, for example, provide
particular incidents for analysis to determine the manner
in which certain newspapers reported the news.

But it must be emphasized that conclusions drawn
must be based upon the original criteria used as a basis

for analysis. Findings drawn from a few newspapers cannot

be applied to the newspaper industry as a whole. It would

 

19Robert U. Brown, "SDX Offers to Sponsor Study of

Campaign News," Editor & Publisher, NOV. 29, 1952, p. 7.

20"Study Of Press in 1952 Campaign 'Not Feasible,'"
Editor & Publisher, April 18, 1953, p. 136.

 

22

be highly unfair to direct charges of biased reporting at
the entire American press when incomplete and biased cover—

age Of an event was found in selected neWSpapers.

Content Analysis

 

A content analysis of a neWSpaper must include many
factors and criteria in order to be complete. The column-
inch, while a space unit common to all newspapers, cannot
be used as the sole criterion by which to judge newspaper
coverage Of an event. The assumption that a longer article
is more effective than a shorter one is not necessarily
true. Only when the column-inch space unit is considered
in relation to other aspects of newspaper coverage and com-
ment can a complete and accurate analysis be made.

Photographs constitute an important aspect Of news

coverage. In The Continuing Study of Newspaper Reading,

 

an analysis of 138 daily papers from 1939 to 1950 conducted
by the Advertising Research Foundation in cooperation with
the Bureau Of Advertising of the American Newspaper Pub-
lishers Association, it was found that the size of pictures
is important in news presentation.21 Figures indicated
that reader interest tends to increase as the size of pic-
tures increases, with the sharpest rise in reader interest

occurring between one and two-column cuts. This study also

 

21The Continuing Study Of Newspaper Reading--138

Study Summary (New York: Advertising Research Foundation,
1931) I P. 80

23

indicated that men show greatest interest in pictures re-
lated to events, while women prefer photographs Of people.
The use of picture captions is also important in
an analysis of news coverage. A study concerning the in-
fluence of captions on picture interpretation by Miss Jean
S. Kerrick, then associate professor in journalism at the
University of California, Berkeley, revealed that a caption
may cause a significant modification Of judgment regarding
the picture it accompanies. Miss Kerrick concluded that
"it is possible for a caption to cause a complete change
in interpretation, so that, for example, a picture which
is usually judged a 'happy' picture, will be judged a 'sad'

22 In a similar study, Miss Kerrick demonstrated that

one."
picture and caption combinations can be different in meaning
than pictures alone or captions alone. If a picture and its
caption are similar in original meaning, a more extreme
judgment is produced than when they are not. In the latter
case, element and meanings compete for dominance.23

Sources Of news too must be considered in a content

analysis Of newspapers. Does a story originate with a press

association, a staff correSpondent, a Special wire service,

 

22Jean S. Kerrick, "The Influence of Captions on
Picture Interpretation," Journalism Quarterly, XXXII, No. 2
(1955), 182.

23 . . .
Kerrick, "News Pictures, Captions, and the Point

If Resolution," Journalism Quarterly, XXXVI, NO. 2 (1959),
88.

24

a special correspondent, or a local reporter? This ques-
tion Should be answered, for the source of information may
have an effect on the reader's interpretation of a story.
In a study of initial attitudes toward a source, Percy H.
Tannenbaum, then assistant professor in the Institute of
Communications Research at the University Of Illinois,
demonstrated that the attitude of a reader toward the
source of an article is a significant determinant of at-
titude change.24 This area was further explored in a study
by Carl I. Hovland and Walter Weiss, then professors of
psychology at Yale University, concerning the influence of
source credibility on communication effectiveness. Hovland
and Weiss found that Opinions are changed to a significantly
greater degree in the direction advocated by the communi-
cator when the material is presented by a trustworthy
source.25 The sheer presence of a byline, regardless of
the source, may influence the reader's interpretation of

a story. Bradley S. Greenberg, postdoctoral research
fellow and lecturer at the time of the study at the Uni-
versity of Wisconsin School of Journalism and Mass Communi-

cations Research, and Tannenbaum, in an analysis Of the

 

4Percy H. Tannenbaum, "Initial Attitude toward
Source and Concept as Factors in Attitude Change through
Communication," Public Opinion Quarterly, XX, NO. 2 (1956),
425.

 

25Carl I. Hovland and Walter Weiss, "The Influence

of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness,"
Public Qpinion_guarterly, XV, NO. 4 (1951), 650.

 

25

effects Of bylines on attitude change, demonstrated that

a story with a byline at or near the beginning of a mes-
sage produces greater attitude change in the direction ad-
vocated by the communicator than a story with no byline.26
Thus, information sources are an important factor to be
considered.

Another important factor in a content analysis of
newspapers is the headlines Of stories. A headline estab-
lishes the frame of reference within which the news story
is read. As Tannenbaum noted in his study on the effect
Of headlines on the interpretation Of news stories, a head-
line "provides a lens through which the remainder of the
story or article is perceived."27 Thus, the type size,
number Of column-inches, and style of headlines cannot be
overlooked.

Numerous other aspects Of news presentation may
also have an effect upon the reader and his interpretation
of a story. An analysis of an editorial, for example,
must take into account its position on the page and special
treatment it might receive. As Dean C. Baker, then associate
professor of journalism at the University of Michigan,

and James C. MacDonald, then associate editor Of the Toledo

 

26Bradley S. Greenberg and Tannenbaum, "The Effects

of Bylines on Attitude Change," Journalism Quarterly,
XXXVIII, NO. 4 (1961), 536.

 

27Tannenbaum, "The Effect of Headlines on the In-
terpretation Of News Stories," Journalism Quarterly, XXX,
NO. 2 (1953), 197.

 

26

Blade, revealed in their study Of editorial readership,
more readers are drawn to an editorial that occupies the
lead position on the page or which is given special typo-
graphical treatment. Baker and MacDonald also showed that
a long editorial does not necessarily draw more readers
than a shorter one. Editorial readers are inclined to dis-
regard length and difficulty of the material.28
Placement is an important factor in a content analy—
sis. The front page Of a newspaper, of course, attracts
the greatest number Of readers because the eyes of the
reader naturally fall upon this page first. It is interest-
ing to note, however, that readership figures for inside

pages do not drOp progressively, a factor revealed by The

Continuing Study of Newspaper Reading.29 One cannot assume

 

that a story on page twelve of a paper will receive more
attention than one on page twenty-five. This study also
indicated that little difference is given by readers to
left and right-hand pages. Only a slight difference exists
in favor Of the left-hand page.30 No rigid rule concerning
position on a page is used by researchers. Columns one and

eight, however, are considered to be the preferred positions

 

2
8Dean C. Baker and James C. MacDonald, "Newspaper

Editorial Readership and Length of Editorials," Journalism
Quarterly, XXXVIII, NO. 4 (1961), 479.

29The Continuing Study of NeWSpaper Reading, p. 8.

30The ContinuingpStudy of Newspaper Reading, p. 7.

 

27

on a page, a criterion used by Klein and Maccoby in their
study of eight neWSpapers during the 1952 campaign.31
Sidney Kobre, then professor of journalism at Florida State
University, Tallahassee, in his analysis of the Florida
dailies' coverage Of the 1952 campaign, divided each front
page into four placement zones, with the upper right es-
tablished as the "best front page position for attention."32
In general, preferred display value is usually given to
the front page, the tOp half of the page above the fold,
and columns one and eight.

Klein and Maccoby also included as a part of their
1952 newspaper study the factor Of "newsworthiness," the
utilization Of news Of primary reader interest.33 The
visit of a campaign principal to a city, for example,
would result in heavier coverage of that candidate in the
newspapers of that area. Special local interests are also
related to the factor of "newsworthiness." The statements
and actions of Nixon would clearly be of greater interest
to the people in California than to the inhabitants of

Missouri. Public familiarity also affects news value.

Klein and Maccoby noted that the fact Eisenhower was better

 

3:I'Klein and Maccoby, "Newspaper Objectivity in the
1952 Campaign," p. 291.

32Sidney Kobre, "How Florida Dailies Handled the
1952 Presidential Campaign," Journalism Quarterly, XXX,
No. 2 (1953), 165.

33Klein and Maccoby, "Newspaper Objectivity in the
1952 Campaign," p. 288.

 

28

known than Stevenson at the onset of the campaign was
probably one Of the reasons Eisenhower received more news-
paper coverage at first. As the campaign progressed, how-
ever, and the public grew more familiar with the Democratic
presidential candidate, Stevenson received an increasing
amount of'coverage.34

Robert Batlin noted in his analysis of the San
Francisco newspapers' campaign coverage in 1896 and 1952
that "imbalance toward the party editorially supported
does not necessarily represent bias on the part of the
newspapers." Batlin, writing this article as part Of his
Master's thesis at Stanford University,'cited the size of
a paper's news-hole, the amount of space available for
news, and the relative efficiency Of the political parties'
publicity apparatus as important factors that affect the
presentation of news.35

Another content measure involving the number of
direct quotes found in a story was used by Klein and Mac-
coby in their Objectivity study. These quotes, taken from
the candidate's speeches by the newspaper, were classified

as favorable to the speaker or unfavorable to his Opponent.36

 

34Klein and Maccoby, "Newspaper Objectivity in the
1952 Campaign," p. 288.

35Robert Batlin, "San Francisco Newspapers' Campaign
Coverage: 1896, 1952," Journalism Quarterly, XXXI, NO. 3
(1954), 300.

36Klein and Maccoby, "Newspaper Objectivity in the
1952 Campaign," p. 292.

29

Such a factor could prove useful in an analysis of word
usage. Consideration of the types Of leads in stories

can also be used in the analysis Of words and style.
Charles E. Higbie, then assistant professor of journalism
at the University Of Wisconsin, included such a measure

in his analysis Of Wisconsin dailies during the 1952 cam-
paign. Higbie classified leads in three categories:
summary, situation, and direct quote leads, and used these

37 A diction-

as aids in the detection of biased reporting.
ary can also be used in the analysis of word bias. The
standard definition of a word can be most useful when
studying reporting style.

Many factors such as these should be utilized in
order to analyze newspaper coverage fairly and accurately.
Statistical and quantitative evidence cannot be overlooked,
but such evidence should not constitute the sole criterion
from which conclusions are drawn. Numerous other aspects

of news presentation are important when a content analysis

Of a newspaper is made.

Procedure

 

In this thesis, I will analyze the coverage Of the
Nixon and Stevenson fund stories in four metropolitan daily

newspapers--the Los Angeles Times, the Milwaukee Journal,

 

 

37Charles E. Higbie, "Wisconsin Dailies in the 1952

Campaign," Journalism Quarterly, XXXI, No. 1 (1954), 59.

30

the New York Times, and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. The

 

 

study will extend from the day the Nixon fund was announced,

September 18, 1952, to September 30, 1952, the last day

Stevenson's fund was reported by these four newspapers.
These four newspapers were selected for a number

of reasons. In 1952, each was a metrOpolitan paper, pub-

lished seven times a week, with a daily circulation over

300,000. Circulation figures in 1952 for each Of the

papers in their respective cities were as follows:

Table 2. Circulation figures in 1952.a

 

 

Monday-

 

Newspapers Friday Saturday Sunday
St. Louis Post-Dispatch 400,218b 327,037 440,357
Milwaukee Journal 327,944 446,307
New York Times 507,281b 406,627 1,075,270
Los Angeles Times 399,393 770,054

 

aJ. Percy H. Johnson, ed., N.W. Ayer & Son's Direc-
tory of Newspapers and Periodicals, 1952 (Philadelphia:
N.W. Ayer & Son, Inc., 1952), pp. 95, 550, 710, 1057.

 

bThis figure includes Saturday's circulation.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, established in 1878,

 

is published six evenings a week and on Sunday morning.
Editorially, this Missouri paper is classified as Indepen—
dent Democrat. It is published by the Pulitzer Publishing

Company. The Post-Dispatch is a standard size, eight-column

 

31

newspaper and supported Stevenson during the 1952 campaign.38

No other evening dailies competed with the Post Dispatch

 

in 1952; the Globe-Democrat, with a daily circulation of

 

304,623, was published in the morning.39

The Milwaukee Journal, a daily Wisconsin published

 

in Milwaukee, was founded in 1882. Classified as an Inde-
pendent paper, the Journal supported Stevenson in the 1952
campaign. The Journal is published six evenings a week
and on Sunday morning and is the sole evening paper in
Milwaukee. The Journal is an eight-column newspaper, pub-

lished by the Journal Company.40 The Milwaukee Sentinel,

 

with a circulation of 180,287 in 1952, is the city's morn-

. 41
ing paper.

The New York Times, a morning paper, is classified

 

editorially as Independent Democrat. The Tlmgs supported
Eisenhower during the 1952 campaign. Established in 1851,
the 1232i is published by the New York Times Company. It
is a standard size, eight-column newspaper, and its slogan

is, "All the News That's Fit to Print."42 The Times

 

38J. Percy H. Johnson, ed., N. W. Ayer & Son's

Directory of Newspapers and Periodicals, 1952 IPhilEdelphia:
N. W. Ayer & Son, Inc., 1952), p. 550.

 

9Directory Of Newspapers and Periodicals, p. 549.

40Directoryof Newspapers and Periodicals, p. 1057.

 

41Directory Of Newspapers and Periodicals, p. 1059.

 

42Directoryof Newspapers and Periodicals, p. 710.

 

32

competed with several other daily morning papers in New

York in 1952: the Herald Tribune, circulation, 343,289;

 

the Mirror, 992,720; and the Daily News, 2,251,430. Three

 

evening newspapers also were competitors Of the Times:

the Post, circulation, 372,583; the World-Telegram, 555,017;

and the Journal-American, 692,509.43

 

 

The Los Angeles Times, classified as Independent

 

Republican, supported Eisenhower in the 1952 campaign.

The Tlmgs, established in 1881, is published every morning.
It is a standard size, eight-column newspaper, with the
slogan, "All the News All the Time." Published by the
Times-Mirror Company, the glass was one of two daily morn-

44

ing papers in Los Angeles in 1952. The other morning

paper was the Los Angeles Examiner, with a circulation of

349,320.45

 

Several factors appear among these newspapers to
provide a foundation upon which many comparisons and con-
trasts can be made. Two of the papers are morning dailies
and two are published in the evening. Two supported Steven—
son editorially in 1952, and two, Eisenhower. Two are
Midwestern papers, and two are published on the coast, one

Eastern, and the other, Western. The two morning papers

 

3Directoryof Newspapers and Periodicals, pp. 681,
685, 690, 695, 700, 709, 715.

4Directoryof Newspapers and Periodicals, p. 95.

5Directory of Newspapers and Periodicals, p. 91.

33

are in competitive situations with other papers published
in the city in the morning; the other two are the only
evening papers published in their respective cities. The
four newspapers are all Old and established, founded be-
tween 1851 and 1882. All are eight-column, standard size
newspapers.

Statistical evidence will constitute a part Of my
analysis with computations included for the front pages
and the inside pages Of each newspaper. Headlines, stories,
and photographs will be divided in two categories: Nixon
and Stevenson. A Nixon classification will include photo-
graphs, stories, and headlines on the Nixon fund, origina-
ting with the Republican and Democratic parties, or non-
partisan sources. The Stevenson classification will
include photographs, headlines, and stories that pertain
to the Stevenson fund. For each of these classifications,

the following figures will be computed for each newspaper.

Headlines:

Total number of columns
Total column inches

Stories:

Total number of stories
Total column inches

Photographs:

Total number of photographs
Total column inches

34

These statistics will represent the total coverage
Of the fund stories by each newspaper from September 18
through September 30. The averages for each Of the above
classifications will also be computed. With headlines,
for example, the average number Of columns and column
inches will be presented for the thirteen-day period. The
average headline type size will also be included.

Each Of the Nixon and Stevenson classifications
will be further divided into three categories: Republican,
Democratic, and Neutral. Under the Nixon fund category,
for example, a story concerning the Nixon fund classified
as Republican will be one that originates with the Repub-
lican party. A Nixon fund story placed under the Democratic
category will be one that originates with the Democratic
party. A story, for example, concerning Stevenson's advo-
cacy Of fairness toward Nixon and his fund will be placed
in this category. The neutral classification will include
those stories, headlines, and photographs that originate
with neither party. For example, divided press editorial
comments on Nixon's fund, both negative and positive in
tone, will be included in the neutral category. Thus, the
statistical evidence for the fund stories will be further

divided as follows:.

35

Headlines: Republican Democratic Neutral

Total number of columns
Total column inches

Stories:

Total number Of stories
Total column inches

Photographs:
Total number of photo-

graphs
Total column inches

This type Of classification will also be used for
the Stevenson fund category. A Republican classification
here will pertain to a comment on the Stevenson fund from
the Republican party; a Democratic one, from the Democrats;
and a neutral category, a non-partisan source.

This kind Of classification, in statistical form,
will enable the reader to analyze the general sources
utilized by the newspapers in the fund stories, headlines,
and photographs. These figures will not Show the reader
specific sources of information, such as a press associ-
ation or a correspondent, but they will indicate the general
orientation of the stories, headlines, and photographs.

Several other factors will be considered in addition
to statistical evidence. News stories, particularly those
on the front page of each newspaper, will be analyzed in
terms of a number of criteria: page placement, sources Of

information, types of leads, word usage, and writing style.

36

Headlines will be studied in a similar manner with
the following factors being considered. Where is the head-
line placed On the page? Is the source of information at-
tributed in the headline? IS the style clear and concise?

A number Of criteria will also be used to judge
photographs. Size and placement on a page are important
when reader interest is under consideration. In addition,
each picture will be studied with the following questions
in mind. Is this a picture of persons or of Objects? If
individuals are pictured, what kinds Of facial expressions
appear? Is an event the central element in the photograph?
What kind of action is portrayed? Picture captions too
will be studied, both separately and in conjunction with
the picture they accompany. Is the caption worded clearly
and concisely? Does it specifically describe the picture
it accompanies? Is the caption needed to understand the
picture? Are the picture and its caption similar in
original meaning?

The editorial pages of each newspaper will also
be studied to ascertain the attitudes of the editors
toward the Nixon and Stevenson fund stories. Statistical
evidence will not be taken into account in this aspect Of
the analysis. The main purpose in the study Of this sec-
tion of the papers will be to analyze the editors' comments
on the fund stories in order that the other sections of the

newspapers might be more thoroughly understood.

37

In addition, the analysis will include local and
nationally syndicated columnists. The views and attitudes
of columnists will be studied to determine whether diverse
Opinions were represented in the columns used by the news-
papers.

Subjective judgments will have to be made in the
case of each newspaper, with the exception of the statis-
tical evidence. The extensive coverage Of my study, how-
ever, will justify such judgments. A day-by-day analysis
will enable me to arrive at conclusions that could not be
obtained by looking only at total coverage.

In general, the purpose Of this study will be to
analyze the coverage of the Nixon and Stevenson fund stories
in four selected newspapers. Studies have already been
conducted concerning newspaper coverage of the 1952 cam-
paign in general and Of the Nixon fund story in particular.
Nathan B. Blumberg, for example, analyzed the coverage of
the final thirty days Of the campaign by thirty—five daily
newspapers. Arthur Edward Rowse studied the manner in
which thirty-one newspapers handled the Nixon fund story.
The scope and magnitude Of studies such as these, however,
did not enable the researchers to analyze all aspects of
newspaper coverage.

In this study, all aspects of newspaper coverage
will be analyzed including news stories, headlines, photo-

graphs, editorials, and columns. In addition, the methodology

38

.will include more than just statistical evidence. The
column—inch space unit will be considered in relation to
other aspects of newspaper coverage and comment. Word
style, in particular, will be analyzed to detect the pres-
ence or absence of bias in the coverage Of the fund stories.
Such an analysis indicates how a number of aspects
of news presentation can be used in the detection of news-
paper bias. The use of other factors in conjunction with
statistical evidence serves to present a more complete
picture of newspaper coverage Of an event. Such a method
of analysis is clearer and more comprehensive than metho-

dology that includes only quantitative evidence.

CHAPTER II
EDITORIALS

Editorials concerning the funds must be analyzed
in order to understand the attitude of the editors of each
of the four metropolitan dailies toward the Nixon and
Stevenson fund stories. Balanced coverage of the candidates
will not be a factor in this analysis, for editors and
publishers have the right on the editorial page to express
their Opinions on the events or issues that concern them.
When Stevenson made his charges of a "one-party press,"

the New York Times made the following comment regarding a

 

neWSpaper's editorial page:

It is the business Of publishers and editors to say
what they think. The essential safeguard against what
Mr. Stevenson describes as a “one-party press" does
not consist of an artificially balanced division Of
editorial Opinion but rather of fair reporting of dis-
senting news and a free market for the publication of
organs of dissenting opinion.

In a democratic society such as ours, one should
not expect to find balanced coverage Of two political can-
didates, for example, on the editorial page. Such a right
is undeniable, guaranteed by the First Amendment of the

United States Constitution.

L

l"Mr. Stevenson and the Press," New York Times,
September 9, 1952, p. 30.

 

39

40

A11 editorials concerning the fund stories will be
analyzed only in terms of content.2 Such an analysis will
indicate the opinions and attitudes of the editors toward
the Nixon and Stevenson funds. No editorials will be mea-
sured in terms of column inches or studied in terms of fair
and balanced coverage. These two aspects of analysis should
not be applied to the editorial pages of a newspaper.

Two editorials concerning the fund stories appeared

in the Los Angeles Times during the thirteen-day period

 

that the editorial pages were studied. Both of these edi-
torials pertained to Nixon's fund and both appeared on page
one Of the paper.

The first editorial, "We Stand by Nixon," appeared
on the front page on Tuesday, September 23. The comment
was labeled as an editorial and was placed in columns two
and three next to a story announcing Nixon's radio-television
speech. The glass supported Nixon wholeheartedly and pointed
out to readers his "record of courageous, honorable military
service in World War II," "his concepts of personal integ-

rity and public probity, and "his code Of ethics and . . .
his genuine devotion to the public welfare." The Times

believed Nixon had "exercised some deficiency of political

 

2Editorials were analyzed in the following issues:
Los Angeles Times, Sept. 18-30, 1952; Milwaukee Journal,
Sept. 18-30, 1952; New York Times, Sept. 18-30, 1952; E3.
Louis Post-Dispatch, Sept. 18-30, 1952.

 

 

 

 

41

sagacity" in accepting private financial assistance. This
support, however, according to the Tlmgs, could be "mis-
represented as personal support" only by "professional
political lairs and experienced political smear experts."

The editors stated further that Nixon's critics
were "attempting to raise the molehill of his possible
political shortsightedness into a veritable Himalaya of
misdoing."

Two days later, an editorial occupying columns
three through six appeared on the front page of the glass
beneath a photograph of Nixon and Eisenhower. The article,
"Dick Nixon, vindicated, Carries On," was labeled as edi-
torial comment. In this editorial, those who had "attacked"
the Republican vice presidential nominee were described
as "a band of political jackals." The Democratic party
itself was characterized as a group "beset by a record of
infamy and incapacity that can be neither denied nor dis-
missed."

According to the Tlmgs, Nixon in his national
broadcast speech, had completely vindicated himself.

Nixon's manly and candid submission direct to the peo-
ple . . . was the only recourse he had under the bitter
circumstances. . . . He did not accuse . . . he supplied
the certified facts. . . . The truth, simple and un-
adorned, shows Dick Nixon to be the man, the official

of government, the citizen, whom his friends know and

the public accepts--an adversary of evil and a cham-
pion of the right.

42

"The knavish politican, the venal radio and tele-
vision commentator, the disreputable columnist and the
unscrupulous editor . . . will endeavor to continue their
campaign of lies and slander," the editorial said. But
the American people have responded "in a spontaneous expres-
sion of confidence and encouragement--an expression unprec-
edented in our history for volume and vigor," the Tlmgs
said. "The case is in and the verdict rendered. Dick
Nixon, who says he has just begun to fight, will carry on."

Four editorials concerning the fund stories appeared

in the New York Times. Two of the editorials pertained

 

specifically to Nixon's fund, and two to both the Nixon
and Stevenson funds. All appeared in the editorial section
Of the paper.

On September 20 in an editorial, "The Nixon Fund,"
the Tlmes_wrote that "there is no evidence that any graft
or corruption is involved" in Nixon's fund. "With the
facts we have before us," the editorial read, "there is
also no evidence that any favors were sought by contributors
to the fund." Furthermore, the Tlmgs saw no reason to
question Nixon's statement that the funds had been used
for postage, travel, printing, and clerical expenses in
the course of his duties as California senator.

But the glass did not condone Nixon's action or

judgment regarding the acceptance of private money.

43

There is no doubt that both the Senator and his bene-
factors have indulged in a bad practice that could lead
to vicious abuses. Mr. Nixon must realize that this
practice is not to be condoned, particularly on the
part of a Republican Vice-Presidential nominee whose
campaign is based in large part on raising the moral
level Of government.

The following day, in an editorial, "Mr. Nixon's
Explanation," the Times accepted Nixon's list of the names
of the contributors to his fund and his accounting of the
manner in which the fund was spent. Further criticism,
however, was directed at Nixon for his use Of private funds
for public duties. The Times did believe that members Of
Congress were inadequately staffed and paid for the duties
they must perform.

If this is true, the proper remedy is the apprOpriation
Of additional funds from the public treasury. . . .

It is not sound policy that private individuals should
pay private contributions for the public services of
their representatives in Congress.

After Nixon's national radio and television broad-
cast, an editorial, "Two Funds," appeared in the Times on
September 25. Again the Times saw no reason to doubt the
accuracy of the figures Nixon presented concerning his
financial status. But the newspaper did criticize Nixon's
belief that his acceptance of private financial assistance
was proper. "We think he is wrong," the Times said.
"Senator Nixon does not have to feel guilty Of any pur-
poseful wrongdoing for him to understand that the practice

he and his friends engaged in is full Of evil potentialities.‘

44

The Times applied the same line Of reasoning to
Stevenson's use of private funds to supplement the salaries
of state administrators.

We have not the slightest reason to think that the
donors to this fund sought or received any favor what-
soever from Governor Stevenson. . . . But . . . we
find it hard to see that the evil potentialities Of
the Stevenson fund are much different or much less
than the evil potentialities of the Nixon fund.

And the Times recommendation to Stevenson? "We
think Governor Stevenson should make public the list of
contributors," the Times said.

The furor over the funds, however, was considered
"a healthy one" by the Times, for it brought to the atten-
tion of the American people the extent to which public
servants were underpaid.

It is a reflection on the State of Illinois that . . .
the Governor had to appeal for private funds to supple-
ment state salaries. It is a reflection on all of us
that Senators and members of Congress must seek out-
side sources Of revenue to remain solvent.

On September 28, this belief was expanded further
in an editorial, "Private Pay for Public Jobs." According
to the Times, the blame for both funds lay with the peOple
themselves. "We do not pay enough to those of our public
servants--local, state and national--whom we have a right
to expect to devote all of their time to the public busi-
ness," the Times said.

The Times emphasized that increased pay would not

necessarily make legislators and administrators more effective.

45

It would, however, free them from financial worries and
from the necessity of accepting private money for public
duties. "If the ethical standards of public life have to
be raised," the Tlmss concluded, "one way to start is to
lessen the more Obvious temptations to public servants."
Seven editorials concerning the Nixon and Stevenson

fund stories appeared in the Milwaukee Journal. Four Of

 

these editorials pertained specifically to Nixon's fund,
one to Stevenson's fund, one to the problem of the subsid-
ization of government Officals, and one to the need for
Senator McCarthy Of Wisconsin to publicize his financial
affairs.

The first fund editorial, "Private Senator of the
Rich?," appeared in the Journal on September 19. The
Journal explained the-background of Nixon's "extra income"
and Dana Smith's relationship to the fund. According to
Smith, the Journal said, only he knew the identity of the
contributors. Even if this were the case, the Journal
believed that such a situation enabled Smith "to have undue
influence over his senators." However, "so astute a sen-
ator as Nixon" would surely "insist on knowing who his
benefactors are, to be sure that no racketeers, gamblers,
Communists or other persons of ill repute are among the
contributors."

In general, the Journal believed that "the deplorable

practice . . . of giving rich families their own private

46

senators" must be eliminated in the United States. "A
senator who is on someone's pay roll is certainly in danger
of being 'captive.‘ . . . It is not good practice and cre-
ates the occasion for corruption whether corruption exists
or not." The discovery Of this fund constituted "another
argument for Opening federal tax returns to public inspec-
tion. . . ."

The next day, in an editorial, "Nixon, TOO, Cries
Smear," the Journal criticized Nixon and Eisenhower for
their reactions to the fund exposure.

Nixon's defense against his action is to shout that
he is the victim of "left wing smear" by the "Alger
Hiss crowd." He doesn't deny the charge--he just at-
tempts to smear those who uncovered it. This is tOO
much like the age Old trick of a culprit seeking to
avert attention from himself by yelling "stop thief."
Nixon, who calls exposure of Democratic corruption a
"public service," is trying the hoax of calling expo-
sure Of Republican misdeeds "subversion."

The Journal described Eisenhower's support of
"Senator Nixon's American faith" as "camouflage, pure and
simple." The Journal believed there was no relationship
between Nixon's role in the Hiss trial and "the admitted
fact that he accepted $16,000 to $17,000 from a group of
wealthy Californians."

The Journal also believed that Nixon's acceptance
of private funds was not ethical.

It was contrary to every moral Obligation Of a public
servant. . . . It is a charge serious enough to raise

the question of the qualifications of a man who did
such a thing to sit in the United States senate. . . .

47

Surely there are some things--and this is one--which
cannot be shrugged Off by the cries of "smear" and
"communism" that have succeeded too well and too Often,
in other cases, in covering up even fraud and deceit.

On September 23, in an editorial, "Watchdogs for
Decency," the Journal explored three ways to handle bor-
derline cases such as Nixon's. One solution suggested by
President Truman and Senator Wayne Morse, a Republican
from Oregon, required financial reports from all elected
and appointed Representatives and Senators whose incomes
exceeded $10,000 a year. Such a plan would not work, the
Journal said, because it "would intrude upon what Congress-
men consider the sacred precincts and privileges of their
'club.'"

Another proposal to Open federal income tax records
was also considered. "But Congress shows no interest in
that, either," the Journal commented.

The Journal believed the best suggestion originated
with Professor H. H. Wilson Of Princeton University.
Wilson's plan involved a basic study of national ethics,
government morality and wrongdoing by a foundation such
as Ford, Rockefeller, or Carnegie. "We've come to a sad
state," the Journal said, "when such a plan seems neces-
sary. . . . Perhaps it's time to let nonpartisan nongov-
ernmental people have a crack at it."

The next day, the Journal commented on Nixon's

national radio and television broadcast in an editorial,

48

"Senator Nixon Explains." In general, the Journal believed
Nixon had made an "effective and emotional presentation"
and had "successfully refuted claims that this was another
case of 'corruption' on the scale so frequently revealed

in Washington in recent years." The Nixon case, however,
the Journal said, "may hamper the Republican party's use

of the corruption issue against the Democrats."

If the existence of Nixon's fund had been known,
the Journal said, "Nixon would probably not have been given
the vice presidential nomination." Furthermore, the Nixon
case and its repercussions might have been prevented if
the American public had insisted on "keeping the financial
affairs of the public Official and the politician in the
Open."

On September 26, in an editorial, "Stevenson
Should Give Facts," the Journal commented on Stevenson's
refusal to make public the names Of donors to his fund and
the names of Illinois Officials to whom gifts from the
fund were given. The Journal recognized the need of ade-
quate compensation for government Officials in order to
attract "able and honest men into important positions."
Subsidization of government Officials, however, could lead
"to many abuses, to many possibilities Of evil, to much
suspicion," theJOurnal said. As a result, "Governor Steven-
son should clear up any and all suspicions about his 'pri-
vate fund' and its uses by giving the public all the

details. Nothing less will serve to clear the air."

49

The Journal on September 28 commented on the prob-
lems Of government compensation for public Officials in an
editorial, "Private Funds for Public Men." The Journal
believed the fund cases had raised three major questions
concerning government Officials. "How can good men be
attracted to public service? How can they be compensated
adequately? What are the proprieties and ethics which
must govern their economic and other relationships with
persons and organizations outside government?"

Ideally, an elected or appointed government Offi-
cial is obligated to no one. "Practically, this is impos-
sible," the Journal said. The backgrounds of Officials
shape and influence their approaches to problems. In
addition, public salaries are generally not adequate.

Within this area of public concern, the Journal
believed two things were evident. "Officials elected or
appointed must avoid even the occasion of suspicion. Wise
officials will keep personal finances in the Open and it
would be most wise to require all top Officials to make
public their income sources." Study and discussion Of
these problems must also be carried out, the Journal said.
“If the fund cases lead to such studies, they will have
contributed a real public service."

The next day, in an editorial, "Follow Nixon's
Example," the Journal encouraged Senator Joseph McCarthy
of Wisconsin to follow Nixon's example Of publicly revealing

his financial affairs.

50

McCarthy can do the state a service by giving Wiscon-
sin voters a more complete accounting Of his Obscure
and involved financial transactions, the sources Of
the funds he uses to hire personal investigators and
what he calls "researchers," his various speculation
accounts, his loans, the contributors who finance him,
his income tax history.

In the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, seven editorials

 

appeared concerning the Nixon and Stevenson fund stories.
Six of these editorials pertained to the Nixon fund, and
one to the Stevenson fund. I

The first editorial concerning the fund stories,

"The Charge against Senator Nixon,’ appeared in the Resp:
Dispatch on September 19. In this editorial, the EQEEI
Dispatch criticized Nixon's explanation of his acceptance
of cash gifts and termed it as "not good enough." "It

does not explain," the Post-Dispatch said. "It confirms

 

. . . that while the people of the United States have been
paying Mr. Nixon to represent them in the Senate, a small
group of private individuals has also been paying him to

represent them instead." The Post-Dispatch also commented

 

on Nixon's vehement criticism of members of the Truman
administration who accepted gifts and favors and "very
prOperly condemned those practices as corrupt." Nixon
thus stood "as one who is guilty Of practices which he
himself has condemned in Others in the very strongest terms,"

the Post-Dispatch concluded.

 

The next day, in an editorial, "Crisis for Eisen-

hower," the Post-Dispatch presented what it considered to

 

51

be the crucial issue Of the Nixon "trust fund." The'Post-
Dispatch did not consider what Nixon did with the fund
money to be the important aspect of the case. If all the

funds had been used for postage stamps, the Post-Dispatch

 

said, this would not affect the basic moral principle in-
volved. "That principle is the Old and Simple one," the
newspaper said. "Is it right for a United States Senator
(or any other public Official) to work for two paymasters,
the people who pay his salary and a private group which
supplements his Official compensation with money of its
own?" Such double compensation was the main issue and
could not be concealed by "all the agonized twisting and
turning" of Nixon's apologists, according to the Besp-
Dispatch. "The plain fact is that the Nixon affair is a
dirty business."

The Post-Dispatch also praised Stevenson in this

 

editorial for his "commendable restraint in withholding
final judgment until more facts are in." In addition,

the Post-Dispatch questioned whether Eisenhower would "rise

 

above the muck of partisanship to give the daring demon-
stration of fearless independence which is expected of

him.

The Post-Dispatch on September 21 criticized Eisen-

 

hower's handling of the Nixon case in an editorial, "Eisen-

hower in Missouri." The Post-Dispatch believed Eisenhower

 

had lost a "sense of greatness, a sense Of dedication to

52

the awesome and enormously complex issues" and had become
"a standard party politician, doing and saying what stan-
dard politicians say and do. . . ." The Nixon fund case
and the issue Of double compensation had brought out this

change in Eisenhower, according to the Post-Dispatch. "So

 

far," the Post-Dispatch concluded, "General Eisenhower has

 

not faced that issue. His initial reactions are uniformly
interpreted as condoning in Senator Nixon the same sort
of acts which he so roundly condemns in Democratic wrong-
doers."

On September 22, in an editorial, "NO Questions

Asked," the Post-Dispatch explored another aspect Of the

 

Nixon fund case. "Did neither the General nor anyone who
advised him,“ the newspaper asked, "check into Senator
Nixon's record before they put the young Californian in
line for possible advancement to the presidency?" The
record of the second ranking leader in Eisenhower's cam-

paign certainly should have been looked into, the Post-

 

Dispatch believed. "Questions should have been asked,
questions that would have brought out the facts."

Was this "a sample of the care by which the Gen-
eral would make his appointments were he to become Pres-

ident?" The Post-Dispatch posed still another question,

 

suggested by Eisenhower's decision "to do nothing about
the Nixon dirty business" until Nixon's national radio

and television broadcast. "Is the bold and decisive

53

leader of the 'crusade' waiting on what he thinks is pop-
ular reaction," the Post-Dispatch asked, "before deciding
what to do?"

On September 24, in an editorial, "Mr. Nixon's

Performance," the Post-Dispatch commented on Nixon's radio

 

and television broadcast.

Senator Nixon's television performance had many Of

the elements Of a carefully contrived soap opera. It
is not surprising that he should have tugged some
heartstrings. Poor boy struggling against adversity,
devoted wife and kiddies, the family pet, hero traduced
by mean enemies, and beneath it all the hint Of sin-
ister Red plots--these are always good. They always
bring in the box tOpS.

The Post-Dispatch complimented Nixon on one aspect
of his speech--"his colossal nerve." The paper believed
Nixon's efforts to transform his fund into an asset by
saying he used it to save the taxpayers' money was an

"amazing defense." The Post-Dispatch again pointed out

 

that the main issue involved in this case was not the way
in which the money had been spent but the morality of taking
the money for any purpose. Such a practice, the Eggp-
DiSpatch said, "permits certain constituents to buy a piece
of him, just as promoters buy pieces of prize fighters.“
The worst part of the issue, however, according to the
paper, was not the Operation of the fund itself "but the
brazen way in which Nixon had his defenders try to make
a virtue of it."

The next day in an editorial, "General Eisenhower's

Decision," the Post-Dispatch discussed Eisenhower's

 

54

decision to keep Nixon on the Republican ticket. The Eggp—
Dispatch believed Eisenhower's decision regarding the Nixon
fund was predetermined. In order to retain the loyalty

of the right wing Republicans, headed by Senator Taft,

such a move concerning Nixon was necessary. Taft's com-
ment that Nixon had done no erhg dictated to Eisenhower
"just what . . . he could and could not do if he valued

the sentiments Of the right wing."

Furthermore, the Post-Dispatch said, that Eisen-

 

hower's decision to wait for public reaction to the fund
indicated "that the rightness or wrongness of his running
mate's record is a matter to be determined by the votes
of a pOpularity contest. Is that how he wOuld handle the
case of an official wrongdoer if he became President?"

The Post-Dispatph then quoted from the editorials

 

of three other metrOpolitan dailies. In a New York Times

 

editorial, Nixon was described as having shown "poor judg-

ment." The New York Herald-Tribune said Nixon should Offer

 

to resign, and the Washington Post believed that Nixon's

 

"transgression is a major one." "These judgments by three
able and highly respected newspaper supporters of General
Eisenhower are just as valid now as they were before

Nixon's national broadcast," the Post-Dispatch held. "The

 

Republican nominee rejected them. His decision and the

way he reached it now go before the people for review."

55

In an editorial, "A Splendid Precedent," on Sep-

tember 29, the Post-Dispatch complimented Stevenson for

 

the publication of his income tax returns for the past

ten years. "Governor Stevenson has taken a daring initia-
tive which ought to become a precedent for presidential
and congressional candidates." Income figures alone do
not indicate a man's qualifications for a public office,

the Post-Dispatch said. But "a courageous willingness"

 

to publish them "does demonstrate a candidate's willingness
to expose his whole life to public View."

The Post-Dispatch challenged Nixon "to match the
Governor's initiative on income tax returns." Nixon's
financial account to the public was imcomplete, the RESET
Dispatch said, and his refusal to answer further questions
concerning the fund came "with ill grace from one who so
loudly demanded that others make a full disclosure." "The
public now knows the whole story Of the Stevenson campaign

contributions," the Post-Dispatch concluded. "Similar

 

information must be presented in its entirety to the pub-
lic by Nixon."

The New York Times appeared to be the most cautious

 

in its editorial coverage of the Nixon and Stevenson fund

stories. The Tlmgs_believed the two politicians had shown
poor judgment in accepting private funds, but saw no evi-

dence of favoritism shown toward donors by Nixon or Ste-

venson. The Times did not describe the character or

56

personality of either man or reiterate the events that
followed the announcement of each fund.

Much Of the content of the four fund editorials
concerned the implications Of private funds used by pub-
lic Officials. The Tlmgs described the furor over the
funds as "healthy," for it had brought to the attention
Of Americans the extent to which public officials were
underpaid. It was emphasized that additional money needed
by public servants such as Nixon and Stevenson should come
from the public treasury.

Two front-page editorials, both pertaining to Nixon,
appeared in the Los Angeles Times. NO mention of Stevenson
and his fund was made by the editors. In general, the
Tlmgs praised Nixon highly and severely chastized his
critics. Nixon was described as "an adversary Of evil
and a champion of the right" with a sense of "personal
integrity and public probity." Those who criticized him
were "professional political liars and experienced polit-
ical smear experts" and "a band of political and journal-
istic jackals." Only one criticism Of Nixon was made when
the Tlmgs said that he had "exercised some deficiency Of
political sagacity." No mention was made of the impli-
cations Of such a fund or of methods Of eliminating the
need for private funds by public Officials.

The Milwaukee Journal, on the other hand, criti-

 

cized Nixon quite Openly. The Journal termed Nixon's

57

fund "an extra income" and said his acceptance of such
money "was not ethical." Nixon's cry of smear against

his critics was described as a "lame reaction." The ggpgf
pal_was the only paper of the four analyzed that criticized
Eisenhower's support of Nixon, calling it "camouflage, pure
and simple." Little mention was made Of Stevenson, except
for a demand that he make public the names Of donors to

his fund.

The Journal, like the New York Times, thoroughly
explored the implications Of the funds. The Journal issued
a plea for public inSpection Of federal tax returns and
demanded additional compensation for public Officials. A
study Of national ethics and corruption in government by
nongovernmental persons was also advocated. In addition,
the Journal related the fund stories to Wisconsin politics
and demanded that Senator McCarthy of Wisconsin follow
Nixon's example and publicly reveal his finances.

The Post-Dispatch criticized Nixon more severely

 

 

than the Journal did. The Post-Dispatch termed the Nixon
fund "a dirty business" and "double compensation" and
charged the fund donors with paying Nixon to represent
them. Nixon's radio and television broadcast was described
as "a carefully contrived soap Opera" that brought "in

the box tOpS." The Post-Dispatch charged Nixon with at-

 

tempting to "hoodwink the public" by defending his fund.
Eisenhower too drew the wrath Of the Post-Dispatch and

was accused of "losing his sense of greatness."

58

Stevenson, on the other hand, was praised highly

by the Post-Dispatch. The paper complimented Stevenson

 

for his restraint in withholding judgment on the Nixon
fund and for taking such "a daring initiative" in publi-
cizing his income tax returns.

No attempt was made by the Post-Dispatch to explore

 

the implications of the funds or to suggest ways to halt
the use Of such funds by other public Officials.

In conclusion, two newspapers, the Los Angeles

 

Times and the New York Times, supported Nixon during the

 

thirteen-day period that the editorials were analyzed.

The Los Angeles Times praised Nixon highly, but made no

 

mention of the Stevenson fund. The New York Times believed

 

both Nixon and Stevenson had shown poor judgment in accept-
ing private funds but saw no adverse implications Of the

private funds. The Milwaukee Journal and the St. Louis

 

Post-Dispatch, supporters of Stevenson, criticized Nixon

 

for his acceptance of private funds. The Journal made
little reference to the Stevenson fund except for a demand
that Stevenson make public the names of donors to his fund.

The Post-Dispatch praised Stevenson highly and did not

 

criticize him for accepting private funds.

CHAPTER I I I
COLUMNISTS

Columnists should also be considered in an analy-
sis of newspaper coverage of an event. A study of colum-
nists can give some indication of the type of coverage
that a newspaper gave to an event. If a newspaper, for

”iexample, used only columnists who favored the Republican
party, this would indicate an unwillingness to expose
readers to both sides of the major political issues and
questions at hand. A paper that drew upon columnists with

$ differing interpretations of an issue would present readers

I with a more balanced coverage of an event as far as columns
are concerned.

In this section, an analysis will be made of the
columns, both nationally syndicated and local, that appeared

in the Los Angeles Times, the Milwaukee Journal, the New

 

 

York Times, and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from Septem~

 

 

ber 18 through September 30. Only those columns pertaining
to political candidates or issues will be considered, with
particular emphasis placed on those columns pertaining to
the Nixon and Stevenson fund stories. NO measurement of

column inches will be made. Content alone will be considered

59

60

in order that the reader might see what columnists appeared
and what their interpretation of the issues were.

The Los Angeles Times relied on local and national

 

columnists during this twelve-day period: Kyle Palmer,
Bill Henry, local columnists, and Raymond Moley, Holmes
Alexander, and Frank R. Kent, national columnists.l

On Friday, September 19, two columns, both nega-
tive in tone toward Stevenson, appeared in the IEEEE' In
a column, "A Party's Guilt," Raymond Moley discussed Ste-
venson's comment that guilt is personal and knows no party.
Stevenson's statement had been made in reference to Charles
Evans Hughes' famous alibi for the inefficient and unscru-
pulous men in the Harding administration. "If a party is
willing to accept serious trust of filling offices,"
Moley retorted, "it should be willing to take the blame
if its appointees do poorly."

In the other column, "Stevenson's Angelic Host of
Socialists," Holmes Alexander criticized the Americans
for Democratic Action and described the organization as a
group that "promotes socialism." Alexander cited a book

by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., The Vital Center, as the

 

ADA's Bible. He then connected Stevenson with this group
because of Schlesinger's position on Stevenson's campaign

staff.

 

1Los Angeles Times, September 18-30, 1952.

 

61

On September 21, Kyle Palmer discussed the perplex-
ities Of a presidential campaign in his column, "Weather
Cools as Campaign Warms." Palmer also analyzed the effect
Of the Nixon fund on the campaign and stated that "comfort"
from the disclosure of Nixon's fund "will now be sought
vociferously, sanctimoniously and pharisaically by the
Democratic top brass." In Palmer's opinion, however, this
political battle would be fought to the end by Nixon, "a
fighting Quaker and not a quaking fighter . . . whose
integrity is not Of the substance to be smirched by polit-
ical campaign attacks."

On September 22, the Timgs carried another of
Holmes Alexander's columns, "They Want 'Action,'" criti-
cizing the ADA. Alexander again characterized the orga-
nization as socialistic, a group "whose political hero Of
the moment is Adlai Stevenson." "There's no doubt,"
Alexander said, that "Stevenson reciprocates the esteem
in which he is held by ADA." Alexander assured readers
there was "no question about ADA'S right to back Steven-
son . . . or about America's duty to examine with care
both the candidate and the program."

In a column, "A Strange Campaign," Raymond Moley
described the 1952 campaign "as the strangest of all."
Moley believed that both political parties, in nominating
Eisenhower and Stevenson, had tried "to escape responsi-

bility for their own records." "Almost anything can

62

happen," Moley said, "but the most likely is that Taft
and Truman rather than the candidates will now become the
centers Of public interest."

In the column, "By the Way . . . with Bill Henry,"
on September 24, Henry, writing from Washington, D. C.,
assessed the attitude of Washington observers toward Eisen-
hower's handling of the Nixon fund.

Back here in Washington the feeling now is that:

(l) Eisenhower's reaction has been excellent, person-
ally and politically. . . . (2) The decision to wait
and let Nixon himself clear the atmosphere was very
smart politically, in addition to being realistic and
fair.

Henry also analyzed the attitude Of Washington
"experts" toward Nixon. "Reports in Washington," Henry
said, "indicate that Nixon has carried himself very well
under trying circumstances and that audience reaction to
his public appearances following the disclosure was sym-
pathetic and encouraging."

Another column, "Anti and Anti-Anti," by Holmes
Alexander, appeared in the September 24 edition of the
Timgs. Alexander again discussed Stevenson's affiliation
with the ADA and pointed out that most home town Volun-
teers for Stevenson groups were "organized and launched"
by ADA members. "Unless you come from one of the dozen-
or-so States where ADA doesn't exist," Alexander said,

"it's practically certain that actioneers got the volun-

teers to rolling, after which the actioneers moved back

63

among the shadows. . . . This time next year . . . ADA
may be the elite guard of the Democratic party."

Another column by Bill Henry, writing from Wheeling,
West Virginia, appeared in the Times on September 25.

Henry assessed the impact of Nixon's radio and television
speech upon the nation and said that Nixon's "soul-
searching statement" was successful not only "as his own
personal vindication" but also as a reversal of "the whole
political trend of things." Henry emphasized the high
regard that television "professionals" held for the speech.

Professionals . . . couldn't get over the fact that

. . . he had put together an extraordinarily lucid

and effective combination of defense, explanation,

exposition, appeal and challenge. In short, . . .

it was extremely effective politically and, as was

pointed out by some of the people who claim to be ex-

pert on such subjects, Nixon seemed almost to reach

out from the TV screen and seize the heartstrings of

the viewers.

Henry also criticized Stevenson for failing to
explain "his own mysterious fund" and said that Stevenson's
"failure to Openly criticize Nixon might have been inspired
less by lofty nobility than by the knowledge that he might,
himself, have some explaining to do."

In a column, "Stevenson's Design for Government
by Unions," on September 27, Raymond Moley summarized
Stevenson's speech to the American Federation Of Labor.

Moley severely criticized Stevenson's "radical convictions"

and "his strategy as a campaigner."

64

To get at the meat Of his speeches you must first push
through a heavy coating Of clever and sweet-sounding
phrases, wisecracks and double meanings. Then, care-
fully embedded in the context, you find propositions
that reveal his complete agreement with the boys on
the left.

On September 28, in a column, "And Now, Back to
the Issues," Kyle Palmer criticized Republicans who ques-
tioned the personal integrity of Adlai Stevenson and his
political fund. "The Eisenhower-Nixon cause is not assisted"
by such comment, Palmer said. "Stevenson . . . privately
or publicly . . . measures up to the requirements of a
good citizen and an honest public Official." Palmer then
assessed the campaign and stated that Eisenhower's margin
over Stevenson was so slight that no reliable basis was
afforded for forecasting the probable outcome of the elec-
tion.

On September 29, Bill Henry, in his column, dis-
cussed the reaction Of the reporters to the individual
candidates. Henry described the reporters as generally
a "pretty unhappy lot" due to the candidates' lack of
"personal contact with the reporters" and "the amateurish
management of both campaigns." He criticized Eisenhower's
aloofness from the reporters and Stevenson's habit Of
"writing and rewriting his speeches and never giving them
(the reporters) any information." Henry concluded, how-
ever, that the reporters regarded Stevenson's speeches

as "masterpieces of literature and Of logic" and that Ste-

venson was "personally a little more popular."

65

In a column, "What Republicans May Be Thinking,"
on September 29, Holmes Alexander criticized Eisenhower's
handling of the Nixon case. Alexander described the case
as the "going-down point in Ike's reputation as a peerless
leader" and Republicans are saying "that Ike's Army career
never taught him to stand on his own feet . . . to get
them quickly and clearly out of a bad fix." "If the
G. O. P. fails," Alexander concluded, "that won't be
because the infidels were Ixx: strong. It'll be because
the Republican leadership proved to be something less
than lion-hearted."

The following day in a syndicated column, "You
Never Can Tell How Political Events Will Turn," Frank R.
Kent praised Nixon for his performance during the furor
over his political fund. Kent believed the Nixon disclo-
sure had become "a political asset instead of the devas—
tating liability for the Republican ticket they seemed."
"Nixon's remarkably moving speech," Kent said, "eliminated
from the minds of the peOple all questions of his personal
integrity. Almost no one who listened to that speech
could cherish a doubt of the complete sincerity Of the
man."

Kent then criticized Stephen A. Mitchell, Steven-
son's "handpicked chairman" of the Democratic National
Committee, for his "vicious attack" on NixOn. "It is

incredible," Kent said, "that Governor Stevenson did not

66

know what Mr. Mitchell was going to say." While Stevenson
did not condemn Nixon, "there is more than a mere suspi—
cion of double talk," Kent said.

That same day, two adjacent columns appeared in
the Timgs; one, "In This Corner," by Walter Lippmann, and
the other, "And Over Here," by Raymond Moley. Lippmann
criticized Eisenhower for calling on the general public
to judge the Nixon case. "The evidence, the law and the
moral principles at issue are none Of them single or
obvious. . . . They have to do with the matters which can
be decided only by some sort Of judicial process."
Lippmann believed Nixon's radio and television speech was
"the magnification of modern electronics, simply mob law,"
and should have included "General Eisenhower's decision,
backed up by a full and objective account of the facts
and the points Of the law and of morals . . . involved."

Moley, in his column, charged Lippmann with de-
scribing "his own disturbed state Of mind after witnessing
Senator Nixon's appeal to the American people." Nixon's
speech was not mob law, Moley said, but the attack upon
Nixon instead was "a species of mob violence." ‘Moley de-
scribed the mob that Lippmann had mentioned as a "great
a representative of the American people as ever witnessed
or heard a broadcast. . . . The American public . . . the

ultimate source of sovereignty."

67

One column pertaining to the campaign and the fund

stories was used in the Milwaukee Journal during the period

 

analyzed.2 On September 28, a column, "Nixon Case Makes
the ADA Target for New G. O. P. Attack," concerned the ADA,
by Lawrence Friend of the Journal Washington Bureau.
Friend criticized the Republicans for their attacks on ADA,
particularly their inclination to blame the organization
for the smear of Nixon. "Stevenson himself is not a member
of this anti-Communist, liberal organization," Friend said.
Furthermore, Friend noted, while ADA members seemed mostly
to be Democrats, "ADA has always maintained some links with
the Republicans." Friend cited several past Officers Of
ADA who had been Republicans, including one of the orga-
nization's founders and its first national director.
Friend concluded with a reiteration of ADA'S disenchantment
with Eisenhower and their belief that "General Eisenhower
has apparently turned his back on his own magnificent ser-
vice Of the war and postwar years."

Eleven columns pertaining to the campaign and to

the fund stories appeared in the New York Times from Sep—
3

 

tember 18 to September 30. All were written by members

of the Times staff.

 

2Milwaukee Journal, September 18-30, 1952.

 

3New York Times, September 18-30, 1952.

 

68

On September 21, four columns pertained to the
campaign and the political candidates. In a column,

"Fund Raised for Nixon Has Boomerang Effect," Arthur Krock

discussed the early effects of the disclosure Of the Nixon

fund on the campaign.
The revelation . . . that Senator Nixon . . . is endowed
by private persons out of a continuing fund . . . is a
bombshell and a boomerang. It is a bombshell because
. . . the arrangement reflects a dull sense of ethics
on Nixon's part. . . . It is a boomerang because Gen-
eral Eisenhower and his running mate have been concen-
trating on the low ethical and moral climate of the
Truman administration as a principal reason why there
must be a "change."

Krock praised Stevenson, on the other hand, for
his withholding of judgment on the Nixon case until all
the facts had been presented. Krock added:

Whether the damage to Eisenhower's major campaign
strategy is temporary or permanent, small or irrepara-
ble, cannot be estimated until the itemized accounting
Of the fund has been thoroughly inspected, the pressure
on Nixon to withdraw has ended one way or the other,
and all the attacks and defenses are in the record.

But the exposure has hurt Eisenhower and his chances

of election.

Cabell Phillips' column, "Issue of 'Corruption'
Takes on a New Aspect," also appeared on September 21.
Phillips discussed the corruption issue as a main point in
the Republican campaign and the effect the "Nixon affair"
would have upon this issue. The Republicans have been
hammering away at corruption in government, Phillips

pointed out, but now that the Nixon fund has been closed,

"they are making a dogged fight to neutralize the issue."

69

And the effect of the Nixon fund on the issue of corrup-
tion? "Only time will tell," Phillips concluded. "But
the concensus among Democrats . . . was that the Nixon case
might very well turn out to be the big break they have been
hOping for."

In another column on September 21, "Candidates on
Tour: The Appeal," James Reston contrasted the campaigns
of Eisenhower and Stevenson. "Everything in the Eisenhower
operation is on a larger scale," Reston said. "The gener-
al's train is longer; his crowds are bigger and noisier,
and so is his bank account." Reston also contrasted the
campaign tactics of the two candidates.

Stevenson is the planner and the general the improviser.
The Governor takes plenty Of chances with his subject
matter, his speeches are imaginative, original, often
extremely bold, but all these things are planned in
advance. . . . The general, on the other hand, relies
on . . . the personal touch. His appeal is not to the
mind so much as to the heart.

According to Reston, reporters were naturally at-
tracted to Stevenson's "good writing and his sense of humor"
and were weary of "General Eisenhower's little pep talks."
But the voters were drawn to Eisenhower, Reston said.

They believe him. . . . You see this in their faces
which are always friendly and smiling in anticipation
before they ever see him. . . . And when he utters the
most Obvious platitude, they look at that serious face
as if they had heard something that ought to be graven
in stone and passed on to the third and fourth genera-
tion.

Another series of contrasts between Eisenhower and

Stevenson were drawn on September 21 by W. H. Lawrence in

70

his column, "Candidates on Tour: The Contrast." "Governor
Stevenson's weapon is the rapier," Lawrence said. "His
keen and cutting wit comes quip after quip at Republican
expense. . . . General Eisenhower's weapon is more like a
blunderbuss. He is on the attack constantly, with little
reference to his own positive program. . . ."

Lawrence, like Reston, believed that Eisenhower
drew the larger and more responsive crowds. "The crowds
'1ike Ike' before they have ever seen him," Lawrence said.
"It is not impossible . . . that they may like him more
before they see him and hear him than they do afterwards."
Lawrence did not think highly of Eisenhower's speeches.
They "have contributed nothing new to the American polit-
ical scene," he said, and his messages leave little for the
crowds "to ponder over after he has moved on to the next
stOp."

Like many reporters, Lawrence admired Stevenson's
speeches but believed Stevenson was "too literate and too
learned for the average crowd that turns out for a polit-
ical meeting at midday." Stevenson "is anything but glam-
orous," Lawrence said.

On the stump, he is more of the professorial type.

. . . A considerable portion Of what the Illinois Gov-
ernor has to say is so deadly serious that the crowds'
response is much more restrained when he talks than it

is when General Eisenhower lets fly another round Of
heavy artillery aimed at the "Truman gang."

71

On September 23, in a column, "Are Some Democrats
Shaking in Their Shoes?," Arthur Krock discussed the low
moral climate of American politics, as exemplified by
Nixon's fund and the possibility Of prominent Democrats
accepting the same kind of assistance. Eisenhower has
promised to raise the ethical standards of government,
Krock said. "But the disclosure about his running mate
has, at least temporarily, softened the impact of Eisen-
hower's attack." The Nixon fund made many voters more
aware of the qualifications of the presidential candidates'
running mates, Krock said. Even if voters conclude that
Nixon merely displayed poor judgment, "many may decide they
don't want to take a chance on Nixon becoming President."

Arthur Krock, on September 25, discussed the impli-
cations of political funds in a column, "If Political 'Re-
lief Funds' Are To Be a Fixture." Krock dismissed the
"emotional wave of great intensity" that Nixon's radio and
television broadcast evoked as merely "skillful use of the
techniques of the theatre." "Not until this emotional
wave has subsided, and the episode is reviewed in an atmo-
sphere of calm appraisal," Krock commented, "can there be
any reliable estimate of its effect on the chances of the
Eisenhower-Nixon ticket to carry the national election."

Many problems remain unsolved, Krock said. Amer-
icans do not want to be represented only by citizens of

means. The Congressional payroll, furthermore, does not

72

take into consideration the differences in state area and
population. California and Illinois are vastly more expen-
sive to serve than Vermont and Delaware. "Until the prob-
lem comes nearer to being solved," Krock said, a monthly
accounting Of all Officials receiving private financial

aid might be the answer. "That would bring the practice
into the Open," Krock concluded. "And any failure to ac-
count would, when disclosed, close the door to a national
debate about ethics."

On September 28, four columns concerning the funds
appeared in the Timss. In a column, "G. O. P. Turns Nixon
Case to Its Own Advantage," Arthur Krock discussed the
effects of the Nixon fund on the campaign. The Democrats
erred by demanding that Eisenhower drop Nixon from the
Republican ticket, Krock said, instead of being content
"with the public spectacle Of Eisenhower in political tra-
vail and indecision." The result Of this, Krock added,
"was to put Nixon in a spotlight where his combative nature
and a theatrical technique reminiscent of 'East Lynne'

(the sobbingest of the old-fashioned melodrama) enabled
him to put on a performance that drenched the soil of the
United States with tears."

"But the episode is not ended. . . . For their part,
the Democrats are not through with Nixon," Krock said.
Krock warned, however, that the Democrats must proceed

with caution or the emotional wave of feeling for Nixon

73

might be renewed. "The Democrats will have to be sure of
their ground in further attacks on Nixon," Krock concluded,
"or they will be very sorry, indeed."

Cabell Phillips' column, "Many in Congress Have
Trouble Living on Pay," also appeared on September 28.

In this column, Phillips discussed the financial problems
Of Congressmen that were highlighted by the Nixon and
Stevenson funds. He explored the results Of a question-
naire he had sent to members Of Congress including con-
gressmen's Obligations, income, and budget.

The Obligations of a Congressman, Phillips pointed
out, included: (1) the necessity of maintaining two homes--
one in Washington and one back home, (2) social demands,
(3) traveling, (4) political costs--the costs Of getting
elected and staying in Office.

As far as income was concerned, Phillips found that
the average Congressman spent each year about $3,000 more
than his Congressional salary provided. Members Of COn—
gress bridged this gap in several ways, according to Phil-
lips. "Something over three-fourths of them still have a
stake in some sort of business or professional enterprise
back home," Phillips said. Others lecture, write magazine
articles or appear on paid radio and television programs.
The only answer for some, Phillips said, "is just to go a
little deeper into debt each year." Phillips concluded

with a remedy for the problem.

,m

74

Most students of the question agree that members of
Congress ought to receive salaries of at least $25,000.
. . . Such a salary . . . undoubtedly would attract
abler men to public life. It would force those already
so engaged from many of the financial vicissitudes that
now sap the time and vitality that should be devoted

to more important tasks. . . . Congress, however, has
skirted the issue with rabbit-like timidity. It fears
an unfavorable reaction of public Opinion to voting
itself more money.

In a column, "Stevenson Camp Counts Nixon Affair
An Asset," W. H. Lawrence assessed the feelings of Demo-
crats toward the Nixon fund. According to Lawrence, Demo-
crats felt that General Eisenhower had let "a wonderful
Opportunity pass by" in his failure to force Nixon Off the
Republican ticket. Democrats admitted, however, that, for
the moment, Nixon "had rescued himself from political
Oblivion with a very effective,.Lf 'corny' personal report
to the nation . . . a tribute to the genius of American
advertising agencies." It was the hope of the Democrats,
Lawrence said, "that the boom for Senator Nixon would turn
out to be highly temporary."

Regarding the Stevenson fund, Democrats believed
Stevenson's announcement that he would make public his
personal income tax returns for the past ten years "had
put him on the Offensive in the 'battle of finances.'"
Democrats were also pleased with the American Federation
of Labor endorsement of Stevenson, the first AFL formal

backing Of any presidential candidate, Lawrence said.

"There was also jubilation," Lawrence pointed out, "over

75

the reaction of a Virginia audience in particular and the
South in general" to a talk by Stevenson in Richmond.
In a column, “Reaction to the Nixon Case Mainly
Follows Party Lines," Allan Taylor assessed public Opinion
of the Nixon fund based on reports from regional Times
correspondents. "Much of the immediate reaction was di-
vided along party lines," Taylor said. Taylor, however,
qualified this statement with reports from various parts
of the nation.
By carrying his case to the peOple, Senator Nixon won
the respect of a large segment of the electorate.
Seemingly those who objected to the manner of his pre-
sentation were greatly outnumbered by those who sym-
pathized with him and applauded his "courage." This
response bolstered the G. O. P. campaign, turned the
Nixon affair from a handicap into a possible asset.
As matters stand, Taylor concluded, Democrats
"hope the emotional impact Of the Nixon affair will be

short-lived and have small effect at the ballot'box."

Of the four papers analyzed, the St. Louis Post-

 

DisEatch used the greatest number of columns pertaining
to the political candidates and the fund stories.4 Most

Of the columns appearing in the Post-Dispatch were nation—

 

ally syndicated, including those Of Eleanor Roosevelt,
Samuel Lubell, Drew Pearson, Walter Lippmann, Marquis

Childs, Stewart AlSOp, and Joseph Alsop.

 

4St. Louis Post-Dispatch, September 18-30, 1952.

 

76

On September 18, four columns in the Post-Dispatch

 

pertained to the political candidates. In a column, "Wor-
ries about Ike's Pact with Taft," Marquis Childs discussed
the relationship between Eisenhower and Senator Taft. Childs'
main question concerned who was running--Eisenhower or Taft.

Thomas L. Stokes, in his September 18 column,
"Truman to Answer Eisenhower," analyzed the efforts Of
Truman to assist Stevenson in the campaign. "The Truman
campaigning will be a threat to Eisenhower," Stokes con-
cluded.

In a column, "Eisenhower Tested as Leader of His
Party on Tour of Midwest," Doris Fleeson described Eisen-
hower's campaigning through the Midwest as a supreme test.
"He will end it either with his shield or on it," Miss
Fleeson said. Miss Fleeson also discussed Eisenhower's
recent pact with Taft. "NO fault can be found with this
as a matter of generosity and practical politics," she
said. However, Miss Fleeson warned, Eisenhower might win
votes from the Taft people of the Midwest at the risk of
alienating other sections Of the country.

In a column, "Eisenhower Turning Out To Be Shrewd
Investment by G. O. P.," Joseph Alsop discussed "the
shrewdness of the Republican investment in Eisenhower."
Alsop described Eisenhower as "a nationally advertised
product, well known to all" and "held in warm affection

by all classes and groups." Americans "are anxious to like

77

him and to vote for him as a candidate," AlSOp said. AlSOp
described Stevenson's campaign, on the other hand, as being
"more successful with live audiences than in the press.
His agile barbs do not make good headlines," AlSOp said.
"Here in the Midwest, peOple have largely formed their
impression of Stevenson from the newspapers. . . ." And
Alsop's final conclusiOn? "The race is far from over,"
he said, "but at this moment Eisenhower looks to be in the
lead."

’ On September 18, five columns concerning the polit-

ical candidates appeared in the Post-Dispatch. In a column,

 

"Crowds Look on Eisenhower as Sincere," Miss Fleeson de-
scribed Eisenhower's campaign in the Midwest as successful.
Miss Fleeson appeared surprised by the "astonishing large
crowds General Eisenhower has been consistently drawing
on his Midwest tour." She then discussed Stevenson's
campaign and cited Stevenson's greatest drawback as the
fact that he was "almost unknown compared to the Allied
commander."

In Drew Pearson's "Washington Merry-Go-Round,"
this columnist analyzed certain statistics pertaining to
the campaign. According to a G. O. P. survey, Pearson
said, in twelve key states, 1 or 2 per cent shift of the
vote could swing the election to either the Democrats or

the Republicans. "In these states, there are forty-nine

78

strongly Democratic areas," Pearson said. "If these can
be shifted, the victory will be Ike's."

Walter Lippmann, in a column, "The Korean War and
the Campaign," criticized both Eisenhower and Stevenson for
avoiding the issue Of the Korean War in their campaign
speeches. "Both parties were involved in every mistake
dealing with the war," Lippmann said. "Neither are really
discussing the war."

In Eleanor Roosevelt's column, "My Day," Mrs.
Roosevelt expressed her Opinion concerning the presidential
candidates, the Democratic party, with Stevenson remaining
her choice for the election. "I grow more enthusiastic
about Governor Stevenson each day," she said.

Two political columns appeared on September 21,

both written by Post-Dispatch columnists Donald Grant and

 

Richard L. Neuberger. In Grant's column, "Stevenson Humor,"
Stevenson's sense Of humor was compared to that of Abraham
Lincoln. "During the last week Adlai Stevenson's sense of
humor has become an issue in the campaign," Grant said.
"Whether the Stevenson wit turns out to be a political
asset or a liability cannot be known until November 4;
meanwhile . . . Adlai-isms . . . threaten to become a part
of the American language." Grant then turned to the first
Republican President and showed how Stevenson's humor was
similar to Lincoln's. What these two men have in common,

Grant said, "is an irresistible urge to laugh, and to

79

make others laugh--and the criticism leveled at Stevenson
now is startingly similar to the things said of Lincoln
just about 90 years ago."

An Oregon Republican supporting Stevenson was the
topic of Richard L. Neuberger's column, "Why Oregon Young
Republican Jumped Off General Eisenhower's Bandwagon--

For Stevenson." Steven William Anderson, an Oregon lawyer,
had been a Young Republican state chairman in Oregon and

a vice president of the Young Republicans. Anderson re-
signed from these positions, Neuberger said, because Of
"Adlai E. Stevenson's refusal to banter for the support

of Governor Shiver's of Texas on the issue Of tideland oil."
Neuberger described Anderson as saying that "this courageous
position of Governor Stevenson's seemed in such contrast to
the way General Eisenhower has been surrendering to all
sorts of pressures that I made up my mind then and there

to vote for Stevenson on November 4." Anderson believes,
Neuberger said, "that Adlai Stevenson is 'the finest man
nominated for President by any party since Abraham Lincoln.'"

Five columns concerning the campaign appeared in
the Post-Dispatch on September 22. In a column, "The
People Urged to Think," Marquis Childs discussed the pres-
idential candidates as he traveled with Stevenson's cam--
paign group. Eisenhower's advantage, Childs said, is the
"built-in reception and response that automatically are

accorded" him. Stevenson, however, makes people think,

80

Childs pointed out. Regardless of Eisenhower's advantage,
"there will be a determined individual striving with a
curious stubborness to say what he believes and to say it
in his own way."

In a column, "Well Supplied with Jokes," Thomas
Stokes presented a favorable discussion of Stevenson's
humor.

Stewart Alsop discussed Stevenson's campaign strat-
egy in a column, "Roles Reversed by Stevenson's Clever
Tactics." According to Alsop, the Stevenson campaign
strategy "reflects certain outstanding characteristics
of the Illinois Governor: Intelligence, political bold-
ness, and perhaps most notably, tough-minded and even
rather wily calculations." Even though Stevenson suffers
from anonymity, Alsop said, "his reputation as a humorist
is . . . beginning to draw the crowds." Eisenhower's
reputation as a world leader has always been his greatest
asset, but now "Stevenson, the little known politician,
is somehow managing to sound like a great world leader,
while Eisenhower, the authentic great world leader, is
Often made to sound like a politician. . . . Stevenson's
original campaign formula . . . seems . . . something
which Eisenhower and his campaign managers should recken
with seriously."

In a column, "Truman, Taft Tactics Risky for Nom-

inees," Doris Fleeson discussed the entrance into the

81

campaign of Truman and Taft, "two impulsive, bullheaded
men who are not the candidates.for President this year."
According to Miss Fleeson, "the situation is fraught with
interest." While both Taft and Truman are "talking sound
politics," their campaigning will effect some hazards.
"The hazards would be greatly lessened," Miss Fleeson com-
mented, "if Gov. Stevenson were better known and if Gen.
Eisenhower had been able to stamp his own clear brand on
his campaign.“

Samuel Lubell revealed the findings of his "inten-
sive grassroots survey" of voter Opinion in a column,
"Fairly Strong Shift to Eisenhower of Former Truman-and
Roosevelt Voters Reported in Most of U. S." In the farm
belt, Lubell pointed out, the trend is away from the Demo-
crats, while in the cities this trend is weaker. "Most of
these defections," Lubell said, "are being caused by re-
sentment against the draft, the Korean War and inflation--
rising living costs, higher taxes and 'tOO much spending.'"
According to Lubell, the strongest Democratic asset "is
the haunting memory of the last depression. If Gen. Eisen-
hower is defeated, it will be by this dread Of a possible
return to 'them Hoover times.'" Lubell's general conclu-
sions were:

Neither candidate is setting the voter on fire. . . .
Eisenhower's personality is winning over fair members
of Democrats, more women than men, but the "I like

Ike" enthusiasm runs smack up against two main Obsta-
cles--the fear that "a military man" in the White

82

House may increase the risks of war and the alarm, even
among those who want some change, that too abrupt a
halt in government spending might throw the economy
into a tailspin. . . . Even among Democratic voters,
the prevailing temper is markedly conservative.

Three columns concerning the political candidates

appeared in the Post-Dispatch on September 23. Samuel

 

Lubell presented more of his survey results in a column,
"Draft, Rising Prices and Taxes Appear to Shake Allegiance
of Long-Time Democratic Voters." According to Lubell, the
issues of the draft and the rise in prices and taxes "are
breaking the party allegiance Of even persons who have
never voted for a Republican President before." After
interviewing American workers, Lubell found some were
shifting their vote to the Republicans. While the "over-
whelming bulk of workers are sticking with the Democrats,"
Lubell said, "the Democratic solidarity on economic lines
is weaker today than four years ago."

Doris Fleeson discussed the difficulties of pre-
dicting the outcome of the presidential election in her
column, "Polls as Risky as in '48 Race, Experts Wary."
Miss Fleeson described the experts as being "in a mood for
unwanted humility." Some Of the difficulties involved in
presidential predictions were cited in the column. Due
to the television, Miss Fleeson said, "even the most active
reporters never see a large part of the Eisenhower-
Stevenson audiences. . . . Another difficulty for the ex-

perts is the growing bloc of independent voters."

83

Miss Fleeson also believed the hesitancy Of voters to
express their Opinions publicly constituted a problem.
"PeOple are more reluctant than heretofore," she said,
"to say how they will vote."

Drew Pearson, in his "Washington Merry-Go-Round"
column, discussed a number Of items related to the Repub-
lican campaign. Pearson first described the Nixon fund
as taking "most of the campaign wind out of Ike's sails."
He also mentioned the large numbers of Republicans who were
"flocking aboard the train . . . to ride with Ike." When
a candidate's coattail riders increase," Pearson said, that
is "a sure sign that a candidate is ringing the bell."
Pearson then discussed the absence Of some key Republicans
from Eisenhower's campaign. "Strangely absent from the
Eisenhower train are some Of his original boosters," Pear-
son said.

Six columns concerning the candidates appeared in

the Post-Dispatch on September 24. In a column, "G. O. P.

 

Hunt with Delay in Nixon Affair," Stewart AlSOp criticized
Republicans for their handling Of the Nixon fund. Nixon
was the "first and worst Offender," Alsop said. "Instead
of responding calmly and factually to the first published
reports of the fund, Nixon began shouting that he had been
'smeared' by 'crooks and Communists.'" According to Alsop,
this helped "to put the whole story on page one, and keep

it there." AlSOp also criticized Eisenhower for his

84

indecision and his inability to either call for Nixon's
resignation or defend him "flatly and unequivocally."

In Samuel Lubell's column, "Drafting Youths for
Korean War Reacting Hard against Democrats," the issue Of
the draft was discussed. Lubell said:

Of all the current election issues, the one that stirs
the harshest expressions of anger against the Adminis-
tration is the drafting Of youngsters for the Korean
War. It is causing more of a defection among tradi-
tional Democratic voters than any other issue, except
inflation. Certainly, it is cau ing deeper emotional
anguish among voters than any oth r campaign factor.

According to Lubell, the November 4 choice for many
voters seemed to be between war or depression, the last
two wars having been fought under Democratic presidents,
and the depression being linked with the Republicans.
Eisenhower's nomination has also "sharpened the political
anguish of families with drafted sons," Lubell pointed out.
These persons fear a military man in the White House, he
said. "As a result, sizable numbers of Democrats who were
ready to swing Republican, now feel frustrated, torn between
anger against the Administration and fear of a 'military
man' in the White House."

In a column, "How Nixon Got No. 2 Spot on G. O. P.
Ticket," Drew Pearson discussed the selection of Nixon as
the Republican vice presidential candidate. "The story,"
Pearson said, "is one Of an astute and Opportunistic young

man plus the hit-and-miss habits of a political convention

in picking its candidates, especially the Vice President."

85

According to Pearson, Nixon knew Paul Hoffman, a Californian
who became president of Studebaker and headed the Marshall
Plan. Hoffman then became one of three tOp advisors to
General Eisenhower. As head Of the Citizens for Eisenhower
Committee, Hoffman was concerned about how "to wean the
powerful California delegation away from Gov. Warren and
over to Ike." Senator Nixon agreed to help Hoffman, and,

as a result, won the vice presidential nomination, according
to Pearson.

The selection of vice presidential candidates was
discussed by Thomas L. Stokes in his column, "How Vice
Presidents Are Chosen." According to Stokes, the process
is haphazard. Delegates are called to the convention hall
to ratify the choice of the party bosses. "Customarily,
the delegates, like sheep, accept the decision," Stokes
said, "and ratify it, usually in a weary anti-climax."
According to Stokes, vice presidential candidates are se-

lected for various reasons.

In the case of Senator Nixon, Stokes said, Nixon
was selected "to symbolize and dramatize an issue. . . .
A factor in his nomination was to emphasize the party's
anti-Communism crusade through his part in the Alger Hiss
conviction. He also happened to be from a big key state."
In conclusion, Stokes pointed out that "the usual haphazard,
after-thought way of picking vice presidential candidates
. . . hardly can be the pr0per way to choose the man who may

become President." Stokes also criticized the selection

of Nixon and said that previously the selection of the

86

Republican and Democratic vice presidential candidates had
gone "to an Older man than Senator Nixon and, with but few
exceptions, to one Of much greater political experience."

A discussion of the Nixon case appeared in Marquis
Childs' column, "Why Ike Finds It Hard to Decide." Accord-
ing to Childs, Eisenhower's political advisors accompanying
him on his campaign tour have many different viewpoints
concerning how the Nixon case should be handled. In addi-
tion, Childs said, "they are of limited usefulness in sup-
plying what Eisenhower needs most--information on which he
can rely about how the campaign is going, what peOple are
thinking and how they are reacting." Also, Eisenhower's
military experience did not prepare him for politics,
Childs believed. "All this is so different" from the mil-
itary chain of command, he said. "The rules are written
'down in a book. If you violate them, you pay the penalty
without any ands, ifs, or buts; that is, you do if you get
caught in public." As a result, Childs concluded, "a great
many peOple are beginning to feel deep sympathy for Eisen-
hower, caught in the center of a division which he could
not possibly have anticipated from the remoteness of his
NATO assignment in Paris."

Eleanor Roosevelt in the column, "My Day," presented
her opinion concerning Nixon's acceptance of private funds.
According to Mrs. Roosevelt, Nixon's itemizing his personal

expenditures and resources was a mistake and was "not proper."

87

The Nixon fund, she said, “points up . . . the need that
we must pay higher salaries" to men in state and federal
positions. This suggestion "is the only one . . . that
would make it more possible for a man in public life to
carry on his work efficiently and feel utterly free to any
outside pressures," she said.

On September 25, two columns appeared in the BEBE?
Dispatch, one concerning the Nixon fund, and the other,
Stevenson's campaign. In a column, "Mob Law in the Nixon
Affair," Walter Lippmann said he believed watching Nixon‘
fight for his political life was participation in mob law.

This same column appeared in the Los Angeles Times on Sep-

 

tember 30.

Thomas L. Stokes discussed the campaign techniques
of Stevenson in his column, "Stevenson Winning by Radio."
According to Stokes, Stevenson's skillful use of the media--
radio, television, and newspapers-~had caught on with the
voters. Voters "have found out," Stokes said, "that he is
a tOpranking performer on radio and television, with a
style all his own, and unique for a politician. Beyond
that, his speeches are just as entertaining to read."

As a result, Stokes pointed out, interest in Stevenson has
develOped in the nation's homes. "Maybe there is a 'silent
war' in the living rooms that pollsters overlook," he con-

cluded.

88

On September 26, four columns concerning the can-

didates appeared in the Post-Dispatch. Stewart Alsop dis-

 

cussed Stevenson's intellectual appeal in a column, "Ste-
venson Intellectual Campaign Raises Doubts among His Aids,
in Light Of Nixon's Performance." "The Stevenson campaign,"
AlSOp said, "quite aside from the merits of the issues, is
Obviously the most intellectual and literate of any waged
since the days of Woodrow Wilson. This raises the question:
Is intellect good politics?" According to AlSOp, Demo-
crats were concerned about the number of people that "would
vote for such an Obvious 'egg-head' as Stevenson." This
anxiety was increased by Nixon's national radio and tele-
vision broadcast, "hardly complimentary to the intelligence
of his audience," but "a brilliant performance of its kind."
Democrats were also worried by the large affectionate crowds
that greeted Eisenhower, AlSOp said.

In a column, "Eisenhower Getting Inept Staff Work,"
Doris Fleeson criticized Eisenhower's handling of the Nixon
fund case. "The Eisenhower party was slow to grasp the
Nixon situation and get on tOp Of it," she said. "An Op-
portunity for boldness was missed altogether." Eisenhower
blamed poor staff work for problems such as this, Miss
Fleeson said. "Certainly he seems to lack geniuses. . . .
But it is only his own lack of political intuition that

the public will notice."

89

Drew Pearson, in his "Washington Merry-Go-Round"
column, also discussed the way Eisenhower handled the Nixon
case. "General Eisenhower's period of indecision regarding
his vice presidential running-mate," Pearson said, "was
due largely to the fact that he was torn between a cross-
fire Of advice from two groups of backers." According to
Pearson, the professional politicians urged Eisenhower to
keep Nixon on the ticket, while amateurs and Milton Eisen-
hower, the general's brother, were in favor of dropping
Nixon.

In a column, "Nixon Paid to Sell 'Free Enterprise,'"
Thomas L. Stokes analyzed Nixon's radio and television
broadcast and its effect on the campaign. "The bizarre
sideshow over Dick Nixon's $18,000 expense account . . . ,"
Stokes said, "was the zaniest melodrama put on by a polit-
ician since William Jennings Bryan, back in the middle I
twenties, prosecuted a callow Tennessee mountain high school
teacher for telling his pupils that man ascended--or de-
scended--from a monkey." Stokes believed that Nixon, "as-
suming the roles Of producer, director and principal actor"
and outdoing "Hollywood with a modern Horatio Alger saga,"
temporarily turned a political liability into an asset.
However, Stokes said, while "Senator Nixon has bared his
breast, he still . . . is left . . . with the same facts

that provoked him to explain."

90

On September 27, two columns pertaining to the can-

didates appeared in the Post-Dispatch. In a column, "Re-

 

action to Nixon Case Indicates He Will Both Hurt and Help
Party," Samuel Lubell analyzed the effect of the Nixon fund
on voters. According to Lubell, the voters reactions had
been mixed and relatively mild. However, Lubell said, Nixon
still constitutes a strong symbol in the Conflict over"
McCarthyism. "Vehement expression of both praise and cOn—
demnation Of Nixon for his past," Lubell pointed out, has
been expressed “in what might be labeled the 'McCarthyism
versus CommuniSm'vcontroversy."

In Eleanor Roosevelt's "My Day" column, Mrs. Roose-
velt characterized funds, such as those used by Nixon and
Stevenson, as wrong. She did not believe the mistake could
be rectified by accusing either political party Of dis-
honesty. The fact must be faced, she said, "that we do not
pay sufficiently large salaries in state and federal gov-
ernment positions to attract the kind of men who are needed
to do the job well."

On September 28, two columns, both concerning Nixon,
appeared in the Post-Dispatch. In a column, "How Lightning
Struck Nixon," Herbert A. Trask described the way Nixon
had been selected as the Republican vice presidential can-
didate. "The Eisenhower leaders followed the same haphazard

system" Trask said, "by which the major parties traditionally

91

select their candidates. . . . No attention was given to
the possibility that the man they picked might some day

be called on to take over the full powers and responsibil-
ities of the presidency."

A discussion Of Nixon's radio and television broad-
cast was presented by James A. Kearns, Jr., in a column,
"Soap Opera Veterans Called in to Produce 'Nixon Show' on
TV-—Emotional Appeal Calculated." Kearns pointed out that
"the spectacle" had been "stage-managed by Hollywood soap
Opera experts" and had included a director, props, assis-
tants, and a producer. Kearns also cited the following
advertising appeals that were a part of Nixon's speech:
love Of pets, mother love, Horatio Alger, fear of communism,
friend of the working girl, struggle against adversity,
flattery, dishpan hands, patriotism, stiff upper lip, and
undaunted crusader.

On September 29, four columns appeared in the Resp:
Dispatch. Roscoe Drummond discussed Eisenhower's campaign
techniques in a column, "Eisenhower Is Using Plain Talk,
Plus Bounce and Gusto to Win Crowds that Gather at Train."
According to Drummond, Eisenhower "employs none of the
arts of oratory and most of the arts of plain speech, in-
fectious friendliness, and a sincerity which seems to rise
above the OOpybook maxims and platitudes which would sound
hollow from most anyone else." Eisenhower Often addresses

himself to youth, Drummond said. "He Speaks to youth as

92

father to son; he speaks to women as to men; he speaks to
voters as if they were his nextdoor neighbors."

In a column, "Propriety Issue in Nixon Not Passed
On," Doris Fleeson discussed the need for Eisenhower and
the G. O. P. campaign experts "to rechart their course."
The emotional appeal used by Nixon and Eisenhower "would
not attract the independent vote," Miss Fleeson believed.
In addition, "the American people have not passed on the
prOpriety or imprOpriety" of the Nixon and Stevenson funds.
"Eisenhower would do well to be prudent," she concluded.

Marquis Childs discussed the effects of the Nixon
fund on the campaign in a column, "What Nixon Did Not Ex-
plain." Childs described Nixon's radio and television
broadcast as "a production in every sense Of that word.
He put into it all the devices Of dramatic appeal. . . .
As the center of this drama, Nixon was a star performer."
Childs, however, believed Nixon passed over many points
that had been raised by critics.

In a column, "The Old Guard Takes Over with Nixon,"
Thomas L. Stokes criticized the emotionalism of the Repub-
lican campaign. Stokes described the Republican issues
as "the Korean war, communism, and corruption . . . ex-
ploited skillfully in gory and ghastly and fear-curdling
strokes to divert attention from other issues." It might
be well for Eisenhower to change his tactics, Stokes con-

cluded, and "to discuss the issues which thus far he had

93

done very Skimpily, relying mostly on the 'whistle-stop'
emotional appeal as contrasted with detailed and specific
discussion by Gov. Adlai Stevenson Of virtually every
major issue already."

The columnists whose articles appeared in the Egg
Angeles Times concentrated primarily on the positive as-
pects Of the Republican party and the negative qualities
of the Democratic party. Many of these columns were writ-
ten by local columnists, and they seemed to represent the
Tlmgs editorial support Of Eisenhower and Nixon. Both
these Republican candidates were described in highly com-
plimentary language in most of the columns.

Kyle Palmer, on September 21, for example, de-
scribed Nixon as "a fighting Quaker and not a quaking
fighter," a play on words that could not be considered of
the highest literary merit. Palmer did, however, on Sep—
tember 28, criticize Republicans who had questioned the
integrity of Stevenson and his use of a political fund.

Bill Henry's attitude toward Eisenhower and Nixon
was always positive during the period analyzed. On Septem-
ber 24, he described Eisenhower as "a man of judgment and
loyalty;" the following day, he assessed Nixon's radio
and television Speech as "a soul-searching statement" that
seized "the heartstrings of the viewers." Henry, on Sep-

tember 29, discussed "the amateurish management Of both

94

campaigns" but concluded that Stevenson was "personally a
little more pOpular" with the reporters.

For three days, Holmes Alexander discussed the ADA
and Stevenson's connection with the group. Each column
was similar and concerned primarily the socialistic leanings
Of the organization. Alexander also criticized Eisenhower's
handling of the Nixon case in a column on September 29.

He believed the case represented "the going-down point in
Eisenhower's reputation as a peerless leader."

Raymond Moley also expressed a negative attitude
toward Stevenson in two Timgs columns. On September 19,
Moley criticized Stevenson's comment that guilt is personal
and knows no party. A criticism of Stevenson's campaign
strategy appeared on September 27. Moley described Steven-
son's speeches as having "a heavy coating Of clever and
sweet-sounding phrases, wisecracks and double meanings."

On September 22, Moley criticized both parties for nominating
Eisenhower and Stevenson, in an effort, Moley believed, "to
escape responsibility for their own records."

Only one attempt was made to balance contrasting
opinions Of columnists in the Timgs. On September 30, two
adjacent columns appeared; one, by Walter Lippmann, the
other, by Raymond Moley. Lippmann criticized Nixon for
utilizing "mob law" techniques in his radio and television
broadcast, while Moley charged Lippmann with describing

"his own disturbed state of mind."

95

Thus, the majority of comment in the EEEEE columns
centered on praise Of the Republicans. The columnists
seemed to quickly arrive at conclusions and to concentrate
on descriptions of the personal qualities of Eisenhower,
Stevenson, and Nixon. No attempt was made by any of the
columnists to describe the feelings of voters or to delve
into the issues of the campaign. In reference to the fund
stories, only personal Opinion Of the fund, Nixon's speech,
and Eisenhower's handling of the case were expressed. None
of the columnists discussed the backgrounds of the funds
or prOposed solutions to the problems.

In the New York Times, on the other hand, most of

 

the columnists attempted to analyze the issues, their effect
on the campaign, and the feelings of voters toward the can-
didates and issues. The columnists were hesitant to arrive
at sweeping generalizations and conclusions.

On September 21, for example, Arthur Krock described
the Nixon fund as "a bombshell and a boomerang" and Nixon's
acceptance of the private funds as a reflection of "a dull
sense of ethics." Krock believed the revelation of the
fund had hurt Eisenhower's campaign but would not conclu-
sively estimate the effect of the fund until it had been
thoroughly analyzed.

That same day, Cabell Phillips arrived at a similar

conclusion. While Democrats hope the fund might be "the

96

big break they have been hoping for," Phillips said, "only
time will tell."

On September 23, Krock discussed the low moral
climate of American politics as demonstrated by the Nixon
fund. The fund has made voters more aware of the qualifi-
cations Of the vice presidential candidates, Krock concluded.
The next day he discussed the emotional wave that followed
Nixon's radio and television speech. Again he was hesitant
to draw any immediate conclusions concerning the effect of
the speech on the campaign. NO reliable estimate can be
made, he said, "until this emotional wave has subsided,
and the episode is reviewed in an atmosphere of calm ap-
praisal." Krock also proposed that a monthly accounting
be required of all Officials receiving private financial
aid in order to alleviate some of the debate over political
ethics.

On-September 28, Krock discussed the Democratic
demand that Nixon be dropped from the Republican ticket.
Krock believed this had been a mistake, putting Nixon in
the spotlight and enabling him "to put on a performance
that drenched the soil of the United States with tears."
Krock warned Democrats that the emotional feeling for
Nixon could be renewed if they did not proceed with caution.

Efforts were made by some of the Timgs columnists:
to survey the Opinions and feelings of Americans concerning

the fund issues. Cabell Phillips, for example, had sent

97

a questionnaire to Congressmen regarding their Obligations,
income, and budget. Phillips revealed the findings of
this survey in a column on September 28.

In the same issue of the Timgs,.Allan Taylor assessed
public opinion Of the Nixon fund. His discussion, based on
reports from regional Timgs correspondents, revealed that
much Of the immediate reaction had been divided along party
lines.

Many contrasts between the campaign tactics of
Eisenhower and Stevenson were drawn by the columnists, with
an attraction existing on their part for Stevenson's orig-
inal and erudite oratory.

James Reston, on September 21, said, "Everything
in the Eisenhower Operation is on a larger scale." He then
compared Stevenson and Eisenhower's speeches, concluding
that Stevenson appealed to the mind while Eisenhower relied
on a personal appeal. The voters are drawn to Eisenhower,
Reston said. Reporters, however, he wrote, are attracted
to Stevenson's erudite presentations and are wary of Eisen-
hower's "pep talks."

W. H. Lawrence agreed with Reston on September 21.
He too did not think highly of Eisenhower's speeches,
although he admitted Eisenhower drew the largest crowds.
Eisenhower's messages leave little for the crowds "to ponder
over," he said, while Stevenson's Speeches are comprised

of "keen and cutting wit." Lawrence feared, however, that

98

Stevenson was "too literate and too learned for the average
crowd."
In general, the political columns that appeared in

the New York Times were in sharp contrast to those that

 

appeared in the Los Angeles Times. Little or no analysis

 

appeared in the Los Angeles Times columns. Only the per-

 

sonal opinion of the columnists was presented, with an
emphasis on the personal qualities of the candidates. The

~New York Times columnists, on the other hand, always more

 

analytical, presented many analyses Of campaign issues,
strategies of candidates, and Opinions of the voters.
While personal opinion constituted a part of the columns,
each columnist was hesitant to draw sweeping conclusions.
Most conclusions were qualified by particular issues and
situations that needed to be more fully analyzed before
generalizations could be made.

The columns that appeared in the Post-Dispatch

 

encompassed a wide array of material, ranging from personal

description, like that in the Los Angeles Times, to ana-

 

 

lytical selections as found in the New York Times.
A number Of columnists presented their opinion of
the qualities of the political candidates, using descrip-

tive language similar to that of the Los Angeles Times

 

columnists. Unlike the Los Angeles Times columns, however,

 

the material in the Post-Dispatch columns was largely pro-

 

Stevenson and anti-Eisenhower., Of the four papers analyzed,

99

the Post—Dispatch columns contained the most material con-

 

cerning Stevenson.

On September 19, Eleanor Roosevelt, for example,
praised Stevenson and expressed her growing enthusiasm
for him.

Donald Grant, on September 21, compared Stevenson's
humor to that of Abraham Lincoln. What these two men have
in common, Grant said, "is an irresistible urge to laugh,
and to make others laugh." He believed "Adlai-isms" would
become a part Of the American language, but he hesitated
to state whether Stevenson's humor constituted as asset
or a liability.

That same day, Richard L. Neuberger discussed the
decision of a prominent Oregon Republican, Steven Anderson,
to support Stevenson. "Anderson believes," Neuberger said,
"that Adlai Stevenson is 'the finest man nominated for
President by any party since Abraham Lincoln.'"

Stewart Alsop, on September 22, discussed what he
believed to be "the outstanding characteristics Of Steven-
son: Intelligence, political boldness . . . tough-minded
and even rather wily calculations." AlSOp also praised
Stevenson's humor and said Stevenson's reputation as a
humorist was beginning to draw the crowds.

Drew Pearson, on September 23, discussed the large
number of Republicans who were flocking aboard the Eisen-
hower train. Pearson believed this was a sure Sign that

Eisenhower's campaign was gaining momentum.

100

On September 25, two columns appeared, one anti-
Nixon and the other, pro-Stevenson. Walter Lippmann crit-
icized Nixon's radio and television speech, and Thomas L.
Stokes praised Stevenson for his skillful use of the media.

Many columnists criticized Nixon and Eisenhower's
handling of the fund case. Stewart AlSOp, on September 24,
criticized Nixon for saying that he had been smeared by
crooks and Communists. He also criticized Eisenhower for
his indecision regarding the fund case.

Three columnists criticized the Republican selection
Of Nixon as the vice presidential candidate. On Septem-
ber 24, Drew Pearson and Thomas L. Stokes discussed the
motivation behind Nixon's nomination. Both believed a
more qualified man should have been selected. On Septem-
ber 28, Herbert A. Trask described "the haphazard system"
that was used to select Nixon. NO attention was given to
the possibility that Nixon "might some day be called on
to take over . . . the presidency,” Trask said.

Other criticisms Of the Republicans also appeared

in the Post-Dispatch columns. Doris Fleeson and Drew Pear-

 

son, On September.26, criticized Eisenhower's handling of
the Nixon case. Both believed Eisenhower had displayed a
lack of political intuition and insight.

Columnists also criticized Nixon's radio and tele-
vision speech. Thomas L. Stokes, on September 26, called

the presentation a "bizarre sideshow" and a "zany melodrama."

101

James A. Kearns, on September 28, described the broadcast
as a "spectacle . . . stage-managed by Hollywood soap opera
experts." The following day, Marquis Childs characterized
the broadcast as "a production in every sense of the word"
with Nixon as the "star performer."

As in the New York Times, some of the Post-Dispatch

 

 

columnists contrasted the campaign tactics of Eisenhower
and Stevenson. Joseph AlSOp, on September 18, described
Eisenhower as being "held in warm affection by all classes
and groups." Stevenson, he said, was "more successful with
live audiences than in the press. His agile barbs do not
make good headlines."

The next day, Doris Fleeson described the large
crowds Eisenhower had been drawing in the Midwest. She
believed Stevenson, on the other hand, was "almost unknown
compared to the Allied commander."

Marquis Childs, on September 22, described Eisen-
hower's "built-in reception and response" automatically
according him. While this response did not Occur for
Stevenson, Childs said, he made peOple think.

On September 26, Stewart AlSOp contrasted Steven-
son's intellectual appeal with Eisenhower's personal ap-
peal. AlSOp was impressed with Stevenson's highly literate
speeches but was worried by the large crowds attracted to

"Eisenhower's little whistle-stOp homilies."

102

On September 29, Thomas L. Stokes criticized Eisen-
hower for avoiding the campaign issues and for "relying
mostly on the 'whistle-stop' emotional appeal." Stokes
contrasted this approach with Stevenson's "detailed and
SPeCifiC presentation . . . Of virtually every major issue."

Analyses Of campaign issues and voter Opinion also

appeared in the Post-Dispatch columns. Thomas L. Stokes,

 

for example, on September 18, analyzed the entrance of
Truman in the campaign. The same day, Doris Fleeson dis-
cussed the effect on the campaign on Eisenhower's pact with
Taft. On September 22, she pursued the same topic, with
the inclusion of Truman's effect on the campaign.

On September 19, Drew Pearson analyzed voting
statistics in twelve key states and predicted a l or 2 per
cent shift of the vote in these states could determine the
outcome Of the election.

Samuel Lubell, in four Post-Dispatch columns, dis-

 

cussed political surveys he had made and explored the
Opinions Of voters on a number Of topics. He discussed
gains made by the candidates in certain areas of the coun-
try, voter reactions tO specific campaign issues, voter
Opinion of the candidates, and the effect of the Nixon—
fund on the voting public.

Eleanor Roosevelt was the only columnist to propose
a solution to the problem of public officials' acceptance

Of private financial aid. She believed higher salaries

103

was the only answer to the problem and constituted the
only way that public officials could work efficiently and
be freed from outside pressures.

Thus, a variety of material was presented in the
Post-Dispatch columns. While some analysis was included,

more than in the Los Angeles Times, it did not equal the

 

quality and depth of the New York Times columns. Much

 

subject matter paralleled that of the Los Apgeles Times,
with descriptive personal Opinion of the political candi-
dates being expressed.

It is difficult to include the Milwaukee Journal

 

in this analysis, for only one column concerning the
campaign appeared in the paper during the period analyzed.
Laurence Friend, in the column, criticized Republicans for
their attacks on the ADA. Friend noted that while ADA
members were usually Democrats, links had always been main-
tained with Republicans.

The Journal rarely uses columns and never uses
syndicated material. Most Of the paper's political OOpy
consists of interpretative features, news stories, and
editorials. As a result, discussion of the fund stories
appeared in these sections of the Journal rather than in
regular columns that were used by the other three news-

papers analyzed.

CHAPTER IV
PHOTOGRAPHS

Photographic coverage of the Nixon and Stevenson
fund stories must be analyzed in a study such as this.
Statistical evidence constitutes a part of this photographic.
analysis, as can be seen by Table 3. Photographs appearing

in the New York Times, the Milwaukee Journal, the St. Louis

 

 

 

Post-Dispatch, and the Los Angeles Times have been divided

 

 

into two categories: those pertaining to the Nixon fund,
and those pertaining to the Stevenson fund.

Each of these classifications has been further di-
vided into three categories: Republican, Democratic, and
Neutral. Under the Nixon fund category, for example, a
photograph concerning the Nixon fund classified as Demo-
cratic would be one that pictured a Democrat referring to
Nixon's fund. A Nixon fund photograph placed under the
Republican category would picture Republicans in connection
with the Nixon fund. The neutral classification would in-
clude those photographs that do not originate with either
party.

This classification also holds true for the Steven-

son fund photographs. Thus, a Stevenson fund photograph

104

105

.mcoocw cfisaoo Hmuou uccmcnmcn mucocumo chem cc» OH mcnsoflm

Hadm

 

 

 

 

 

 

om.mma oo.oea mm.mmm oo.HHH cnam mamuoe
ma ma mm OH .02 Odom
om.mm oo.ma oo.Hm mm.m cnwm comm
.>cum
w H oa m .02 Hmuoe
o o o o o o o o cNHm z
o o o o o o o o .02 a
o o o o o o o o cnam m
o o o o o o o o .02 ..
oo.mH om.v~ oo.ma o oo.am o m~.m o cuflm o
m m a o 3 o m 0 .oz ..
oma NNH mN.HHm mn.moa cnwm Odom
coxaz
fl 2 mm m .02 1.369
c o o o o o o o cNHm z
o o o o o o o 0 .Oz
0 o om.mm o o o o o cnam o
o o m o o o o 0 .Oz
mn.mn mm.om oo.mm om.ma mm.mmv oo.mw mh.mm oo.ov mcuam m
m c m H ma m m m .02
coflmcH coo comm cOHmSH cco comm cOfimcH coo comm cOHmOH coo comm
roommmHOIHmom HmcusOb mcawe mcEHB
mfisoq .um ccxsm3aflz ccacocd moq xuow 3cz

 

 

.mnmmuoouonmll.m cHomB

106

classified as Republican, for example, would picture a
Republican commenting on the Stevenson fund.

While no table appears for the outlines, the num-
ber and classification of the cutlines corresponds with
the photographs. Table 3 indicates, for example, that the
New York Times used eight Nixon fund photographs all clas-
sified as Republican and two Stevenson fund photographs
classified as Democratic. These same figures hold true for
the cutlines. Thus, eight Nixon fund cutlines from a Repub-
lican source and two Stevenson fund cutlines from a Demo-
cratic source appeared in the Timgs.

The appearance of cartoons will also be cited in the
discussion, although cartoons are not included in Table 3.

As can be seen by Table 3, the Los Angeles Times

 

used the most photographic space for the fund stories.
thirty-two pictures occupying 562.25 column inches.l
Twenty-two of these pictures pertained to the Nixon fund,
511.25 column inches, and ten to the Stevenson fund, 51
column inches. Three Nixon photographs, 72 column inches,
appeared on page one Of the Timgs.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch used 199.50 column

 

inches for the funds, with a total Of eighteen photographs.
One hundred and sixty column inches, or eleven pictures,
pertained to the Nixon fund, and 39.50 column inches, or

seven photographs, pertained to the Stevenson fund.2

 

1Los Angeles Times, Sept. 18-30, 1952.

 

25t. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sept. 18-30, 1952.

 

107

Six of the Nixon photographs, 80.25 column inches, appeared
on the front page.

In the Milwaukee Journal, thirteen photographs with

 

a total of 140 column inches, were used for the fund sto-

3 Twelve of these, 122 column inches, concerned the

ries.
Nixon fund, and one photograph, 18 column inches, pertained
to Stevenson. The Stevenson photograph did not appear on
page one; one Nixon photograph, 16.50 column inches, was
used on the front page.

Ten photographs pertaining to the funds appeared

in the New York Times, occupying 111 column inches.4

 

Eight of these pertained to the Nixon fund with 106 column
inches, and two, 5.25 column inches, to the Stevenson fund.
Three photographs, 40 column inches, concerning the Nixon
fund appeared on page one of the Timgs.

Table 3 shows that the Nixon fund received more
photographic coverage than the Stevenson fund in all four
of the newspapers analyzed. Statistically, this would
seem to indicate some bias on the part of these papers.
One must remember, however, that the Nixon fund events
generated greater public interest than the Stevenson fund
events. Because of the action and drama involved in the

Nixon fund, this fund became more newsworthy photographically.

 

3Milwaukee Journal, September l8-30, 1952.

 

4New York Times, Sept. 18-30, 1952.

 

108

Nixon's national radio and television broadcast and his sub—
sequent vindication by Eisenhower added drame to the Nixon
fund. Stevenson's fund was not accompanied by such drama. In
addition, the disclosure of Stevenson's fund after Nixon's
gave the Stevenson fund an anti-climactic note and gave

the Nixon fund increased importance and interest in the

eyes of the public.

While photographic coverage of the Nixon and Steven-
son funds in terms Of percentages of total fund photographs
varied, with some papers being more balanced than others,
statistical evidence should not be considered Of great sig-
nificance. Because of the diverse circumstances and events
connected with the two funds, one cannot expect an equal
number Of photographs on the funds in each newspaper. Con-
clusions regarding objectivity, however, can be drawn from
the types of photographs used and from the manner in which
the cutlines were written.

The twenty-two Nixon fund photographs that appeared

in the Los Angeles Times were primarily action shots that

 

did not express concern or anxiety among the Republicans
pictured. The September 21 issue of the Timgs, for example,
carried a Timgs photograph on page twenty-one that showed
the smiling face Of a hospitalized young veteran in his
twenties, with a $100 check to be sent to Nixon.

On September 24, a front page Timgs photograph, 3

columns by 8 inches, showed Nixon and his wife on television,

109

with a look of determination on the face of the vice presi-
dential candidate. Page three contained four Nixon fund
photographs. These included Nixon emphasizing a point in
his speech, Eisenhower and Mamie waiting for Nixon's speech
by their television set, Nixon on tOp of a car talking to
crowds, and Los Angeles Western Union Operators swamped by
messages for Nixon.

On September 25, a 4 column by 8 inch photograph
on page one showed Eisenhower and Nixon waving to a crowd
from a plane in Wheeling, West Virginia. A page two photo-
graph pictured the directors Of the California State Apart-
ment Conference, with arms waving in support of Nixon.

Five photographs on page three also concerned Nixon
fund events. Two photographs from Wheeling, West Virginia,
showed Nixon weeping on Senator William F. Knowland's Shoul—
der, and Eisenhower and Nixon conversing in a car. The
other photographs included Wayne Hood, G. O. P. National
Committeeman, hidden behind mounds of Nixon telegrams; Mamie
Eisenhower and Pat Nixon listening to Eisenhower's vindica-
tion of Nixon; and Nixon's children playing with their dog
Checkers.

The ten Stevenson fund photographs in the Timgs
pictured primarily the fund donors and recipients. One
photograph appeared of Stevenson in connection with his
fund. This 3 column by 5 inch Associated Press photo on
page eighteen on September 25 showed Stevenson with a

worried and concerned expression on his face.

110

The next day, two Stevenson fund photographs, each
1 column by 4 inches, appeared on page eight Of’the Timgs.
These pictured two Chicago men, Herman D. Smith and Walter
V. Schaefer, who had received gifts from Stevenson.

Four similar photos, each 1 column by 4 inches,
appeared at the top of page twenty-one in the September 28
issue of the Timgs. This Associated Press composite in-
cluded pictures of two Stevenson fund donors and two fund
recipients. Photographs of three additional recipients
were included on page twenty-two. These photographs con-
cluded the photographic coverage of the Stevenson fund.

With the exception Of a few isolated cases, the
cutlines that appeared in the Timgsywere Objective and
clearly descriptive of the fund photographs they accom-
panied.

The cutline accompanying the photograph Of Steven-
son contained a certain amount of negativism. The caption
read, "Quizzical--Governor Stevenson wears harried look
tinged with Obvious careful thought as he answers barrage
of questions put to him by newsmen upon arrival at Spring-
field."

The other Stevenson fund photograph cutlines merely
identified the names of the fund recipients and donors who
were pictured, with captions such as "Herman D. Smith," and

"Justice Walter V. Schaefer."

111

The Nixon fund cutlines were clearly and objectively
descriptive of the photographs they accompanied. The photo-
graph Of Nixon and Pat arriving in Los Angeles was accom-
panied by the caption, "Welcomed Back-¥Sen. Nixon accom-
panied by his wife, Patricia, waves to crowd at airport as
he steps from plane en return here for a nationwide speech
today."

Other cutlines read, "Eisenhower and Mamie awaiting
Nixon's speech by their television set," "Western Union

Operators swamped by messages in Los Angeles,‘ and "Nixon
emphasizes a point in speech."

The photograph of Eisenhower and Nixon at the air—
port in Wheeling, West Virginia, was accompanied by the
cutline, "Eisenhower Greets Nixon--Gen. Eisenhower and his
running mate on Republican national ticket, Sen. Nixon,
wave to crowd as they leave Nixon's plane at Wheeling (W.
Va.) airport, where the General greeted the Senator arriv-
ing from Missoula, Montana." The cutline Of the photograph
Of the young veteran with his donation to Nixon read, "$100
More--Walter A. Miller, Jr., hospitalized Navy veteran,
writes $100 check to be sent to Sen. Nixon's Washington
Office as token of faith in candidate."

IOnly one cutline described the mood of the Nixon's,
a cutline that sharply differed from the one that described

Stevenson's thoughts and feelings. The cutline, accompanying

a photograph of the Nixons on their way to the broadcasting

112

station, read, "Confident--With carefree smiles, Sen. Nixon
and his wife Patricia leave Ambassador Hotel for broadcast-
ing station, where the Senator gave the nation an account-
ing of fund raised by Southern California constituents to
further his Official work."

NO cartoons appeared in the Timss that specifically
concerned the Nixon and Stevenson funds.

As can be seen by Table 3, the New York Times used

 

fewer fund photographs than the Los Angeles Times. This

 

can be explained by the fact that the New York Times uses

 

a small number of photographs in its issues. In addition,
the Timgs does not use many action photographs. As a re-
sult, neither the Nixon or Stevenson fund photographs por-
trayed a great deal Of action. A few Nixon fund action
photos were used, but none for the Stevenson fund. This
again can be explained by the very nature of the Nixon fund
which involved more dramatic activity than the Stevenson
fund did.

Like the Los Angeles Times, three photographs per-

 

taining to the Nixon fund appeared on the front pages of

the New York Times. On September 20, a one-column cut of

 

Nixon appeared with the first Timgs story concerning the
Nixon fund disclosure. In the September 24 issue, the day
after Nixon's national radio and television broadcast, a
Timgs photo,3 columns by 6.50 inches, showed Nixon speak-

ing on television. The following day, an Associated Press

113

photograph, 2 columns by 7 inches, of Eisenhower and Nixon
smiling and waving at the Wheeling, West Virginia, airport
appeared on page one. This photo was similar to the one

used by the Los Apgeles Times.

 

Inside page photographs of the Nixon fund pictured
Nixon declaring he had been smeared, Nixon and Pat inside
a plane bound for Los Angeles, Arthur E. Summerfield,

G. O. P. Chairman, announcing "his stand for retention of
Senator Richard M. Nixon's candidacy," and Nixon breaking
down on the shoulder of Senator Knowland in Wheeling.

Two photos concerning the Stevenson fund appeared
in the Timgs on page fifteen on September 26. The two
pictures, one of Schaefer and the other of Smith, both
linked with the Stevenson fund, had been used by the 29s

Anggles Times on the same day.

 

The cutlines that accompanied the fund photographs
were clearly written and were more concise than those used

by the Los Angeles Times. Very few descriptive words and

 

phrases appeared in the New York Times cutlines.

 

The first photograph of Nixon that appeared in the
Timgs was accompanied by the cutline, "Senator Richard M.
Nixon." The caption of the photo of Nixon on television
read, "Explains Special Expense Fund: Senator Richard M.
Nixon, Republican Vice Presidential nominee, as seen on
television screens here." The photograph of Eisenhower and

Nixon at the Wheeling airport was accompanied by the cutline,

114

"They Stand Together: General Dwight D. Eisenhower and
his running mate, Senator Richard M. Nixon, respond to
cheers of crowd that greeted them after they met last night
in Senator Nixon's plane at airport in Wheeling, West Vir-
ginia."

The cutline of the photograph Of Nixon declaring
he had been smeared consisted of a quotation from Nixon's
speech. The caption read, "Nixon: 'This whole issue [is]
a deliberate smear attempt by persons intent on perpetu-
ating the present Administration in power.'"

Other cutlines read, "Nixon and Pat on plane, bound
for Los Angeles," "Arthur E. Summerfield during press con-
ference in Washington yesterday when he announced his stand

' and

for retention of Senator Richard M. Nixon's candidacy,’
"Overwhelmed . . . Nixon breaking down on shoulder Of Sena-
tor William F. Knowland in Wheeling, West Virginia."

The cutline of the two Stevenson fund photos used
on September 26 read, "Linked with Stevenson fund."

The Timgs used no cartoons of its own concerning
the funds. Six cartoons, however, appeared in the Timgs
on September 28 from other newspapers throughout the coun-
try. All Of the cartoons ridiculed the funds, as is the

very nature of the art of cartooning. A cartoon from the

Buffalo Courier-Express showed an elephant and a donkey

 

boiling in a pot over a fire labeled, "Private EXpense

Funds." The caption read, "Stewing in their own broth."

115

In a Chicago Daily News cartoon, Stevenson is shown gaping

 

at a glass house that is being shattered by a cannon ball,
termed, "Adlai's Fund." The caption read, "Dweller in a
glass house."

Another cartoon from the Philadelphia Bulletin

 

pictured an elephant and a donkey both pointing at rings
in a bathtub. The bathtub was labeled, "Political Contri-
butions," and the caption read, "Both: But you left that

ring yourself." Another cartoon from the St. Louis Post-

 

Dispatch pictured the G. O. P. elephant and Nixon standing
in the heavens with Nixon holding a bag of money. A "Cru-
sade for Purity" banner hangs in the sky, and the elephant
is asking Nixon, "Why, where have you been, Dickey boy?"

As can be seen by Table 3, one Stevenson fund photo-
graph and twelve Nixon fund photographs appeared in the

Milwaukee Journal. The 3 column by 6 inch Stevenson fund

 

photo, a composite of the eight men who had received gifts
from Stevenson, appeared on page two Of the Journal on
September 28.

Two of the twelve Nixon fund photographs that ap—
peared in the Journal were not particularly complimentary
to Nixon. One photo, 2 columns by 5.75 inches, on page
two of the Journal on September 21 showed a young college
student carrying a sign that read, "Give Nickels for Nixon."
Another, appearing on page two Of the Journal on September
23, pictured Nixon and his father in Los Angeles, with grim

looks on their faces.

116

The other Nixon fund photographs were similar to
those used by the other three newspapers. An Associated
Press photo Of Nixon at the Los Angeles airport appeared
on the front page of the Journal on September 24. Page
three included an Associated Press photo of Wayne Hood,
Wisconsin Republican chairman and executive director Of
the Republican national committee headquarters in Washing-
ton, seated behind a mass of telegrams.

On September 25, an Associated Press photo on page
two showed Eisenhower and Nixon at the Wheeling airport.
Another Associated Press photo on page eight pictured Dana
C. Smith seated behind a desk that was piled with letters
in response to the Nixon funds.

Photographs of Nixon's two homes also appeared in
the Journal. The two United Press photos on page three of
the Journal on September 23 showed Nixon's home in Spring
Valley, Maryland, and in Whittier, California.

As indicated by Table 3, the Journal was the only
paper to use any photographs picturing Democrats referring
to the Nixon fund. One Associated Press photograph, appear-
ing on page twelve Of the Journal On September 24, showed
Senator Estes Kefauver, a Democrat from Tennessee, making a
comment on Nixon's fund. The other photo in this category
was the one of the young college student, who was a member

of the Young Democrats.

117

The cutlines that accompanied the fund photographs
in the Journal were clear and concise. The cutline of the
Stevenson fund photograph simply named the eight men who
appeared in the composite. The photograph Of the college
student with the Sign was accompanied by the caption,
"Carrying a tin cup and a Sign, Clark Colby, president
of a Portland College Young Democrat club, was at the
train station to greet Senator Richard Nixon." The cap-
tion of the photograph of Nixon and his father read, "Nixon
greeted by his father Francis A. as he arrived in Los An-
geles."

Other captions included, "Nixons greeted by crowd
at Los Angeles airport after speech," and "Wayne Hood:
state Republican chairman, who is executive director of
Republican committee's headquarters in Washington—-seated
behind a mass of telegrams." The cutline of the Kefauver
photograph consisted of a quotation from Kefauver's state-
ment on the Nixon fund. The caption read, "Would be sur-
prised if Nixon did anything intentionally wrong." The
photograph of Eisenhower and Nixon was accompanied by the
cutline, "Shoulder to shoulder, Eisenhower and Nixon on
airplane ramp . "

Two front-page cartoons concerning the Nixon fund
appeared in the Journal. One, on September 20, pictured
Nixon grinning widely at the door of a building on which

was written, "Foundlings Taken In, No Questions Asked."

118

Nixon is reaching into a box filled with $16,000 and labeled,
"California Sun-Ripened Cash." Another cartoon, three days
later, pictured an Old man seated behind a desk with "The
Nixon Fund" and a warped ruler in front of him. The man is
labeled "Nixon Defenders in Congress" and the ruler, "Warped
Washington Ethics." "By my yardstick, it's O.K.," the man:
is saying.

As Table 3 indicates, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch

 

used eleven Nixon fund photographs and seven Stevenson fund
photographs. Three of the eleven Nixon fund photographs
showed Nixon with facial expressions that were not compli-
mentary to him. A front—page United Press photo on Septem-
ber 22 pictured newsmen with Nixon, who looked very serious
and gloomy. The next day, an Associated Press photo on
page one showed Nixon and Pat arriving in Los Angeles, with
a twisted and contorted expression on Nixon's face. On
September 24, a front-page Associated Press photograph
showed Nixon and his wife during the national radio and
television broadcast. A very forced kind of smile was
pictured on Nixon's face.

The other Nixon fund photographs that appeared in

the Post-Dispatch did not picture Nixon with such negative

 

facial expressions as those just described. On September
19, an Associated Press photograph, 2 columns by 6-1/2 inches,
of Dana C. Smith appeared on the front page Of the Post-

Dispatch. The next day, an Associated Press photograph on

119

page one showed Nixon delivering a speech from the back of
a train at Marysville, California.

Other photographs included one from United Press on
page two on September 24 that showed Eisenhower watching
Nixon's speech on television. A page two photograph on
September 25 showed the Eisenhower and Nixon meeting at the
Wheeling airport. Two photographs on page six pictured the
cover and inside page of Nixon's Christmas card that had
been mailed to his constituents the previous Christmas.

The front-page photograph on September 25 showed Nixon
weeping on the shoulder of Senator William F. Knowland.

The Stevenson fund photographs were similar to
those used by the other newspapers analyzed. On September
26, five photographs, appearing on page six of the Resp;
Dispatch, pictured five Illinois men who were connected
with the Stevenson fund.

The two front-page Stevenson fund photographs indi-
cated in Table 3 appeared on September 29. One showed a
page from Stevenson's United States tax report, and the
other pictured Stevenson working at his desk.

The cutlines that accompanied the fund photographs

in the Post-Dispatch were clear and Objective, with the

 

exception of those that described three of the Nixon fund
photographs. In the photograph of Nixon and the newsmen,
Nixon was described as "serious-faced" as he told newsmen

of his intention to give an "explanation of his 'expense

120

fund.'" The cutline of the photo of Nixon and Pat arriving
in Los Angeles read, "Senator Richard Nixon makes wry face
as he and his wife, Pat, greet welcomers at Los Angeles
airportJ' The photograph of the national broadcast was ac-
companied by the caption, "Nixon's face set in frozen smile,
boyish grin missing as he talks."

The other cutlines were more objectively written.

The outline of the photograph of Dana C. Smith read, "Dana C.
Smith." The photo of Nixon speaking from the train was ac-
companied by the caption, "Nixon replies to 'expense fund'
charges." The cutline Of the photograph of Eisenhower watch—
ing Nixon's speech on television read, "Listening to Nixon
Speech."

The cutline describing the photograph of Nixon and
Knowland read, "Putting hand to face, Sen. Richard Nixon
breaks down and sobs on shoulder Of Sen. William Knowland
of California after concluding speech before Wheeling rally."
The photograph of Eisenhower and Nixon was accompanied by
the caption, "G. O. P. nominees in 'exoneration reunion.'"

The cutline for the five men connected with Steven-
son's fund identified the names of the persons who were
pictured. The photograph of Stevenson's tax report was
described as "Page from Stevenson's U.S. Tax Report." The
outline of the photograph of Stevenson at his desk read,

"Gov. Stevenson lists lO-year income and taxes."

121

Thus, one can see that the photographic coverage
of the fund stories was similar in each Of the four news-
papers analyzed. As Table 3 indicates, the Nixon and Steven-
son fund photographs were not balanced in any of the news-
papers in this study. One, however, cannot expect an equal
number of photographs on the funds because the Nixon fund
events involved more drama and action than the Stevenson
fund events and thus generated greater public interest.

With the exception of the New York Times, each of

 

the paper's editorial policies was occasionally reflected

in the fund photographs and cutlines. The Los Angeles

 

glass, a supporter Of Eisenhower and Nixon, at one point
described the Nixons as "confident, with carefree smiles,"
yet described Stevenson as "quizzical," wearing a "harried
look."

The Milwaukee Journal, a supporter of Stevenson,
used two photographs that were negative in tone toward
Nixon. One photograph showed a college student with a
sign that read, "Give Nickels for Nixon," and another
photograph pictured Nixon and his father with grim looks
on their faces.

The Post-Dispatch, also a Stevenson supporter,

 

used three fund photographs that showed Nixon with unhappy
expressions on his face.
The New York Times carried the most Objective photo-

graphs with the clearest and most concise cutlines. None of

122

the Timgs_photographs and cutlines seemed to reflect the
Times support of Eisenhower and Nixon in the campaign.
While editorial political attitudes were reflected
in certain instances, this reflection was not significant
to a degree where one could charge any of the four news-
papers with bias in the photographic coverage of the Nixon

and Stevenson fund stories.

CHAPTER V
STORIES AND HEADLINES

The analysis of stories and headlines concerning
the Nixon and Stevenson funds will involve a number of
criteria. As can be seen by Tables 4, 5, and 6, statis-
tical evidence constitutes a part of this analysis.1

The fund stories have been divided into two cate-
gories: Nixon fund and Stevenson fund. Each of these
classifications has been further divided into three cate-
gories: Republican, Democratic, and Neutral. Under the
Nixon fund category, for example, a story concerning the
Nixon fund classified as Republican will be one that orig-u
inates with the Republican party. A Nixon fund story
placed under the Democratic category will be one that
originates with the Democratic party. The neutral classi-
fication will include stories and headlines that do not
originate with either party. Divided press editorial com-
ments, for example, will be included in the neutral cate-
gory.

This type Of classification will also be used for

the Stevenson fund category. A Republican classification

 

1Stories and headlines were analyzed in the fol-
lowing issues: LOS An eles Times, Sept. 18-30, 1952; Mil-
waukee Journal, Sept. I8-30, I952; New York Times, SepET—lB-
30, 1952; St. Louis Post Dispatch: Sept. 18-30, 1952.
123

 

 

124

 

 

 

 

mN.mhm mN.HhH oo.va mN.hHm mcoOoH oEoHOU comm
m m m m comm .Hm EOHM .uoOU .>cum
ha oa ma oa Hcoeoz Hmuoa
o o o o o o oo.mv o ccoOoH oEoHOU
o I o I o I o I comm .Hm EOHM .uoou «z
o o o o o o H o Hcofioz
oo.mm o mN.HN o oo.ov oo.¢a mh.m o mcoooH oEoHOO
o I o I m I o I mama .um Scum .paoo am
v o N o N N N o Hcoaoz
mn.NmN oo.Nm oo.om oo.on m>.mma om.hm oo.NMN oo.mm mcoooH oEoHOU
a I m I m I m I comm .um Scum .pcoo an
m m N m m c m m ucofioz
om.moma mh.om> mN.HmNH om.HONH mcoOoH.oEoHOO ooom
mN ON Ha MN comm .um Bonn .uooo ooxflz
Nb no mm mm Hcofioz Hmuoa
oo.NmN oo.am mN.va mn.a mh.an o mN.hNH om.ma ccoooH ofioHOO
a I o I o I N I comm .Hm EOHM .uooo z
o v m H m o h N chfioz
oo.oma oo.0N mN.mm oo.ma om.m¢ o oo.mna mN.>v mcoOoH oEoHOU
N I o I o I m I comm .um Scum .uaoo a
MA N m N m o m m Hcofioz
om.amm mh.N¢N mN.mom oo.NmH oo.mvoa mN.Hoa oo.mmm oo.mma mcoOoH oeoaoo
NH II om II Ha II ma II comm .um scum .uaou m
HN NN ma ha he AH ma ma Hcofioz
cOHmoH coo comm coamoH coo comm cowmoH coo comm cowcoH coo comm
ocummmNOIumom HmouoOb mcfiwa mcENB
mason .um ccxom3awz mcacood moo goo» 3cz
.mcanoum m3cZII.¢ caoma

125

om.mN
mm.H
oo.H
ma
om.ma
oH

om.vN
mm.H
mm.d
0N
oo.mN
ma

oo.mN
mo.a
mv.H
ow
mN.hm
mm

oo.bN
mN.N
oo.H

om.m

oo.mm
om.N
om.H

oo.m

oo.om
mv.N
mm.H
om
om.mm
hN

oo.vN
om.H
mm.H
NH
om.ma

oo.HN
oo.H
oo.H

oo.m

VB.MN
mo.H
mo.H
mN
om.vN
MN

oo.ma
om.
oo.H

om.

oo.¢m
mh.H
mm.N

mN.m

mm.Hm
mm.a
oo.N
mo
om.mv
MN

om.mN
HN.H
no.a
0H
om.m

om.bN
mm.H
om.H

mh.m

hm.mN
HN.H
mh.H
had
oo.Hm
no

OOOOOO

OOOOOO

Ah.om
mm.a
oh.N
om
mN.MN
vH

mm.HN
HH.H
oo.H
o
00.0H
.o

oo.HN
oo.a
oo.H
oH
mN.mH
oH

mm.NN

0H.H

mm.H
NV

mN.vm

Hm

oo.hN
mo.a
om.H

mN.m

oN.mN
mm.N
VH.H

mb.oH

mm.oN
mm.N
om.H
mm
mN.mo
ma

cNHm cmma omcz

mcoooH ofioaoo * omcz
moEoHoo * omcz
mofioaoo # Hmuoa
mcoooH oEoHoo # Hmuoa
ccowaomcm * HmuOB

cNHm cmha omcz

mcoOoH oEoHoo # omcE
moEoHoo w omcz
moEoHOU * Hmuoe
mcoOoHIoanoo t Hmuoa
mcowaomcm t Hmuoa

.cuflm cmhs omcz
mcoOoH ofioaoo # omcz
coEOHoo # omcz
mossaoo * Hmpoe
mcoooH ofioaoo * Hmuoa
mcoaaomcm * Hmuos

Z

O

05

 

coflmoH coo comm

ooummmHqumom
mason

E

.um

cowmoH coo comm

HmoHoOb
ccxom3HHz

coamoH coo comm

mcEHB

mcacooo moo

councoH coo comm

ccEHB
xuow 3cz.

 

IIII

IIII

 

 

.mmgamtammII.m magma

126

 

OOOOOO

om.mN
mN.N
mN.H

oo.m

om.¢N
mm.H
mm.H
ma
oo.mH
NH

000000

000000

mm.mm

5H.m

hm.H
HH

mb.NN
h

OOOOOO

oo.¢N
mN.H
oo.H

om.N

oo.¢N

om.H

oo.H
m

om.h
m

000000

000000

mN.Nm

oo.N

MH.N
ha

oo.mH
N

000000

oo.hN
om.
om.H
m
mh.m
Ho

Nm.hN
Nm.
mo.H
ma
oo.o
AH

OOOOOO

oo.om

oo.H

oo.N
o

oo.N
N

mN.mm

mo.H

om.N
ON

mN.MH
m

oo.vN
mh.H
oo.H

mh.H

oo.mH
om.
oo.H

oo.H

oo.hN

Ho.a

om.H
NH

mN.HH
N

000000

000000

oo.hN

HN.m

hm.H
0H

mN.mH
m

cuflm cmhe omcz

mcoooH oEoHOU * omcz
coEoHoo * omcz
moanoo * Hmuoa
mcoooH oEoHOU * Hmuoe
mcoflaomco # HmuOB

cuflm cmma omcz

mcoOoH oanoo * omcz
moEoHoo # omcz
moEoHoo # HmuOB
mcoooH oEoHoo # HmuOB
mcoflaomco a HmpOB

cNHm cmme omcz

mcoooH oEoHoo # omcz
moEoHoo # omcz
moEoHoo # HmuOB
ccoooH ofioaoo # Hmuoa
mcoflaomco * Hmuoe

*2

{m

{D

 

cowmoH coo comm

ooummmHqumom
mason

.um

coamoH coo comm

HmouoOb
ccxomzawz

coamoH coo comm

ccEHB

ccacooo con

cowmoH coo comm

ccfiwa
xuow BcZ

 

 

.ltmsaopaoOoII.m magma

127

 

 

 

 

 

Table 6.--Headline Totals.
Los . St.Louis
Ne¥.:::k .n..... “Sifiififiie Post-
Times Dispatch
Total # Headlines 82 92 65 91
Total Total # Column Inches 128.75 117.50 93.25 175-00
Nixon Total # Columns 110 174 96 124
Fund Mean # Columns 1.36 1.89 1.55 1.43
Mean # Column Inches 1.57 1.28 1.43 1.93
Mean Type Size 24.44 30.52 26.77 27.16
Total # Headlines 17 25 15 23
Total Total # Column Inches 33.25 28.00 26.00 50.75
Stev. Total # Columns 25 43 19 27
Fund Mean # Columns 1.47 1.95 1.36 1.23
Mean # Column Inches 1.96 1.12 1.73 2.21
Mean Type Size 25.41 31.20 28.40 28.96
Total # Headlines 99 117 80 114
Total # Column Inches 162.00 145.50 119.25 226.75
Grand Total # Columns 135 217 115 151
Total Mean # Columns 1.36 1.90 1.44 1.32
Mean # Column Inches 1.64 1.24 1.49 1.99
Mean Type Size 24.61 30.67 27.08 27.53

 

128

here will pertain to a comment on the Stevenson fund from
the Republicans; a Democratic one, from the Democrats; and

a neutral category, a non-partisan source or divided Opinion
from both parties.

Headlines have been classified in a similar manner.
However, as can be seen by Tables 5 and 6, additional sta-
tistical information appears, including the average number
of columns, column inches, and type size for the headlines
in each Of the newspapers analyzed.

One will note in Tables 4 and 6 that more headlines
appeared under any single category than did stories in the

same category. In the New York Times, for example, fifty-

 

five Nixon fund stories were used, according to Table 4.
Eighty-two Nixon fund headlines, however, appeared in the
Timgs, according to Table 6. This happens because banner
and front-page main headlines were tabulated in addition
to those accompanying the stories. Also, stories often
appeared with multiple headlines. In a case such as this,
one story may have been tabulated with two or three head—
lines.

As can be seen by Tables 4, 5, and 6, more Nixon
fund stories and headlines appeared in all of the news-
papers analyzed than Stevenson fund stories and headlines.
As was noted in Chapter IV on photographs, this lack of
balance can be explained by the fact that the Nixon fund

events involved more drama and action than the Stevenson

129

fund events and thus generated greater public interest.

In addition, the disclosure of Nixon's fund before Steven-
son's added to the increased interest Of the public in the
Nixon fund. Thus, on the basis of statistics alone, one
cannot comment on the Objectivity Of any of the four papers
in covering the fund stories. Conclusions regarding the
stories and headlines, however, can be drawn on the basis
Of page placement, types of leads, word usage, and writing.
style.

Table 6 indicates that the Los Angeles Times used

 

more Nixon and Stevenson fund headlines than any of the
other newspapers analyzed, and Table 4 Shows the use of

more fund stories by the Times than by the Milwaukee Jour-

 

nal and the New York Times. This can be explained, in

 

part, by the fact that California was Nixon's home state
and that Nixon's national radio and television speech was
broadcast from Los Angeles. In addition, Nixon's fund
had been sponsored by Californians. Thus, the Nixon fund
held much local interest for the people of California.

A large number of the sixty-eight Nixon fund stories

that appeared in the Los Angeles Times reflected the support

 

of the Republican party by the Times. This Republican sup-
port by the Times appeared not in the number of Nixon fund
stories and headlines used but in the manner in which the

stories and headlines were written.

 

130

PlaOement was also a factor during the first two
days that‘the Nixon fund stories appeared in the Times.
Despite the local interest in the disclosure Of Nixon's
fund, the first Nixon fund story, appearing in the Timgs
on September 19, was placed on page four. In the lead of
“the story, written by Kyle Palmer of the Times, Palmer
said the fund revelation "drew fire from Democratic sources
and prompted an equally Sharp retort from Nixon." The head-
line, written from a Republican point of View, read, "Ex-
' pense Fund forvNixon Explained by Friends, Democratic At-,
tempt to Attach Corrupt Motives to Contribution Refuted."

On September 20, the Nixon fund stories also ap-
peared on the inside pages of the ZEEEE' A story on page
two, written by a Timgs reporter, reflected the Timgs
Republican point of View. The headline, defending Nixon,
read, "Attacks Leveled at Nixon Denounced, Eisenhower De-
fends Running Mate, Sen. Mundt Charges Red Smear." The
lead Of the story, also in support of Nixon, read, "The
furor over Senator Richard M. Nixon's expense fund . . .
brought forth statements by General Eisenhower backing up
his running mate as an honest man, by Senator Taft, by
Senator Mundt labeling Nixon's attackers as left wingers
guilty of a 'smear' maneuver, by Senator Knowland, and by
Nixon himself." Several politicians' reactions to the
fund were used in the story; all supported Nixon and his

acceptance of the fund money.

131

Many other Nixon fund headlines and stories that
appeared in the Times were written in a Similar manner.
Support of the Republicans was Often expressed in glowing
terms with numerous adjectives used.

A front page story by Chester Hanson on September
21 reflected the Times support of Nixon. The headline Of
the story read, "Nixon Blasts 'Big Lie' on Expense Fund."
The first two paragraphs of the story were set in larger
and bolder type than the rest of the story and read:

Senator Richard Nixon nailed what he characterized

as "the big lie" as he Opened his Oregon campaign at
Eugene today.

In a vigorous speech to an enthusiastic crowd of
2,000 persons at the Eugene depot and in a formal state-
ment later, the G. O. P. Vice presidential candidate
expressed confidence that when all the facts are known
honest critics of the situation will be satisfied that
the fund . . . involves no taint to his integrity.

Hanson concluded the story by saying that "Nixon's
peOple recognize that the best procedure is to show the
books and put an end to it on the theory that if you let
them get away-with repeating 'the big lie' Often enough
the peOple might begin to believe it."

In a front page story on September 22, Hanson,
writing from Portland, Oregon, discussed Nixon's plans to
return to Los Angeles to give a national radio and tele-
vision broadcast. Hanson also described the reception re—
ceived by Nixon in Portland. "Saturday night at the giant

high school here the place was jammed," Hanson said. "He

got a fine reception and they flocked to the platform

132

after his talk to shake him by the hand, wish him well
and urge him on."

After Nixon's national broadcast, several stories
appeared in the Timgs_that praised Nixon highly. On Septem-
ber 24, a front page Timgs story was headed, "Nixon Explains
All Finances to U.S.," with the accompanying headline, "Dem-
Ocratic Plea Stirs Nation, Senator Rests His Case with Peo-
ple; Will Confer with General." Nixon was described in the
story as having spoken "calmly, sincerely." His "Obvious
sincerity," the story said, "loosed a rising flood of re-
sponse from all America."

Other front page stories on September 24 also de-
scribed Nixon in favorable terms. This support of Nixon
was evident in the headlines that accompanied these stories.
An Associated Press story, describing the favorable tele-
grams for Nixon "that poured into Washington," was headed,
"Wire Deluge Follows Nixon Radio-TV Plea, Facilities
Swamped with Messages Favoring Nominee." Another Associ-
ated Press story, concerning a law firm's investigation
of Nixon's fund, was headed, "Documents Show Nixon Blame-
less." Two other front page headlines read, "Eisenhower
Lauds Nixon as Brave Man," and "'Just Begun to Fight,‘

Says Nixon as He Leaves."

All Of page two on September 24 contained stories

concerning the Nixon fund. All of these stories were favor-

able tO Nixon, with headlines appearing such as "Avalanche

133

of Commendation Follows Nixon's Broadcast," and "Nixon
Speaks with Wife as Only 'Live' Audience; Broadcast Orig—
inates in Simple TV Studio, but Technicians Declare It a
Huge Success."

The text of Nixon's speech appearing on pages six
and eight Of the Timgs on September 24 was headed, "Text
of Nixon's Radio-TV Speech, Senator Goes to PeOple as Man
Whose Integrity Has Been Injustly Questioned."

It is interesting to note that a SCOOP on the Nixon
case, rather negative in tone to Nixon, appeared on an in-

side page Of the Times on September 24. The Associated

 

Press story on page four reported that Smith, the trustee
of Nixon's fund, had enlisted the aid Of an employee in
Nixon's Washington Office in connection with a tax refund
claim of between $500,000 and $600,000.
A front page story on September 25, written by
Warren B. Francis Of the Times, was headed, "General De-
clares Senator Subjected to Vicious Attack." Francis
wrote in the lead of the story:
Declaring his colleague had been "completely vindicated,"
General Eisenhower tonight told a breathless crowd that
had waited for nearly four hours for his verdict that
California Senator Richard Nixon will go forward with
him in the Republican crusade to restore honest govern-
ment to America.
Page two of the September 25 issue of the Times,

like that on September 24, was made up entirely of stories

expressing confidence in Nixon and Eisenhower.

134

Headlines included, "Hoover Praises Senator Nixon," "Women
Voters Form Brigade for Eisenhower," "Flood of Telegrams
to Washington Favors Nixon," and "Eisenhower's Lead Holds
in State Poll."

A story on page twenty-five concerning money sent
to Nixon after his fund disclosure was headed, "Dollars
for Nixon Sent In by Friends, Campaign Contributions Pile
Up after Nominee's Dramatic Address to Nation."

Thus, one can see that many of the Timas stories
and headlines concerning the Nixon fund reflected the Timgs
editorial support of the Republican party. A few of the
Nixon headlines and stories, however, were written more
concisely and objectively.

On September 19, a story on page three described
a group of Southern California Republicans who had launched
a new fund, "Crusading Dollars," for Nixon. The story
stated expressly this, and the headline read, "Crusading
Dollars New Fund for Nixon Launched."

The other stories on September 19 were concisely
and objectively written. One concerned a Los Angeles hos-
pitalized Navy veteran who sent $100 to Nixon, and another
discussed Senator Robert A. Taft's belief that to demand
Nixon's withdrawal as the Republican vice presidential
nominee was ridiculous.

It should be noted that the Los Angeles Times used

 

the fewest number of Nixon fund stories that originated

135

with a Democratic source. As can be seen by Table 4 five
Nixon fund stories appeared under the Democratic category.
The five that appeared in the Timgs concerned Democratic
criticism of the fund. All of the five stories were placed
on the inside pages of the Timgs.

As can be seen by Tables 4 and 6, the Los Angeles

 

Times used the greatest number of headlines for the Stevenson

 

fund and more Stevenson fund stories than the Milwaukee

 

Journal and the New York Times. Generally, the Stevenson

 

fund stories and headlines that appeared in the Times_were
more objectively written than the Nixon fund headlines and
stories.

There were a few stories, however,'that reflected the
editorial policies of the Timgs. While many of the Nixon
fund stories and headlines reflected support of the Repub-
1ican party, an element of negativism appeared in some of
the Stevenson fund headlines and stOries.

A story, appearing on page one of the Timgs on
September 24,seemed to emphasize the withdrawing of Steven-
son from the campaign. The headline of the story read,
"Quit Race, Demand on Governor Stevenson; Former Illinois
Senator Flays Aids Fund; Congressional Probe of Collections
Urged." The lead of the story read, "Governor Adlai E.
Stevenson's withdrawal from the Presidential campaign was
demanded today because of his using a Special cash fund to

augment State salaries of some of his aides."

136

On September 25, an Associated Press story appeared
on the front page concerning Stevenson's refusal to name
recipients of fund money. "Stevenson Won't Say Who Got
Paid," the headline read.

On September 28, an Associated Press story appeared
on page twenty-one of the Timgs_that concerned a Washington
lawyer who had contributed to Stevenson's fund in 1948.

The story was headed, "Stevenson Donor Aids Eisenhower,"
and emphasized the point that this donor "now supports Eisen-
hower."

The other Stevenson fund stories and headlines that
appeared in the Timgs were objectively written and did not
reflect the editorial policies of the Times, The first
story concerning the fund appeared on the front page of the
Timgs_on September 23. The Associated Press story con-
cerned details of the fund that had been disclosed, and
the headline read, "Stevenson Illinois Fund under Fire."

A front page story on September 26 concerned two
Illinois men who had received money from Stevenson, while
working in positions appointed by Stevenson. The Associated
Press story was headed, "Two Illinois Officials Admit Gifts
from Stevenson Fund."

When Stevenson announced he would reveal fund donors,
an Associated Press story appeared on page four of the Timgs
on September 27 with the headline, "Stevenson Promises to

Reveal Fund Donors, Governor Declares Sources Of Revenue

137

SO Numerous List Required Considerable Time." The lead of
the story read, "Snowballing political charges growing from
Governor Stevenson's special expense fund drew a promise
from the Democratic Presidential nominee today to name
contributors."

On September 28, a story on page twenty-one con-
taining names of fund donors and recipients was headed,
"Stevenson Lists Donors to Fund and Officials Who Got Gifts."
Below this story on page twenty-one, a United Press story
noted that Stevenson's list of donors would be "scanned
closely" by Eisenhower aides for persons doing business
with the state of Illinois. This story was headed, "Gen-
eral's Aides to Scan List of Stevenson Donors."

AS can be seen by Table 4, the St. Louis Post-

 

Dispatch used the most Nixon and Stevenson fund stories.

Table 6 Shows that the Post-Dispatch used more fund head-

 

lines than the Milwaukee Journal and the New York Times.

 

 

The Post-Dispatch and the Los Angeles Times both

 

 

devoted several stories to the Nixon fund; seventy-two and
sixty-eight stories, respectively. In both cases, the edi-
torial policies of the papers were reflected in the manner
in which the Nixon fund stories were written. The SEES:
Dispatch supported Stevenson during the campaign, and this
support of Stevenson was evident in the Nixon fund stories

that appeared in the Post-Dispatch. It is interesting to

 

note the contrast that exists between the Post-Dispatch

 

138

coverage and the Times coverage of the Nixon fund. In many
of the Times stories, very positive attitudes were reflected

toward Nixon. This was not the case in the Post-Dispatch

 

Nixon fund stories. The use of certain words and phrases

reflected the Post-Dispatch support of Stevenson and the

 

paper's negative attitude toward Nixon.
The contributors to Nixon's fund, for example, were

often referred to as "angels" and "wealthy Californians."

The first Nixon fund story to appear:h1the Post-Dispatch,

 

a front page United Press story on September 18, was headed,
"'Angels' Paid Nixon $16,000 to 'Sell Free Enterprise,‘
Paper Is Told, Disburser Says Wealthy Men Set Up Trust Fund
because Senate Salary Was 'Inadequate.'" In the lead of
the story, it was noted that "a group of wealthy Califor-
nians had paid . . . Richard Nixon between $16,000 and
$17,000 since his election to the Senate two years ago."
The ternI Wmillionaires' club" was also used several times
throughout the story.

On September 19, an Associated Press story on page
eleven said Nixon "had admitted that he accepted $16,000
from wealthy supporters. . . ." The story was headed,
"Calls Attack 'Typical Leftist Smear'--Democrats Demand
He Quit as Ike's Running Mate."

On September 20, an Associated Press story on page
nine concerned new fund develOpments. The headline of this

story read, "Son of Hoover among Wealthy Californians Who

139

Gave $500 Each, Political Controversy Boils across Nation--
Demands He Quit Race Countered with Smear Charges."
A list of Nixon fund contributors appeared on page

two of the Post-Dispatch on September 21 with the headline,

 

"List of Wealthy Californians Who Contributed to Nixon
Fund."
Other Nixon fund stories and headlines that appeared

in the Post-Dispatch also seemed to reflect a negative atti-

 

tude toward Nixon. A front page story on September 19 was
headed, "Hasty Huddle by Ike's Staff." Written by a Resp:
Dispatch correspondent, the story noted that the Nixon fund
had created "a furor in the campaign staff quarters" of
Eisenhower. "For the Democrats," the story said, "this was
a windfall far richer than anything they had hoped for."

A front page story by Edward F. Woods of the Ppspf
Dispatch on September 21 seemed to emphasize the possibility
of Nixon being drOpped from the Republican ticket. The
headline of the story read, "Eisenhower Insists Nixon Ex-
plain Gifts Completely, If Report Is Satisfactory Senator
Can Stay on Ticket, If Not He Will Be Dropped." In the
lead of the story, Woods wrote that Nixon "will have to
supply Dwight D. Eisenhower with a completely satisfactory
set of facts . . . or the vice presidential candidate will
be drOpped from the Republican ticket. . . ."

Another story, appearing on page twenty-one on
September 21, was headed, "National Committee Would Fill

Vacancy if Nixon Quit G. O. P. Ticket."

140

On September 22 in a story on page two written by

Post-Dispatch Washington correspondent George H. Hall, it

 

was noted that Stevenson's top advisers considered "Poor
Richard's Fund" to be a decisive event in the presidential
campaign. According to "seasoned political reporters,"

Hall said, "the Opinion is unanimous that the Republicans
have dealt themselves a serious blow." The story was headed,
"Democrats Think Eisenhower Missed Boat by Defending Nixon,
Stevenson Advisers Were Fearful General Would Kick Senator
Off Ticket--Believe Case May Decide Election."

A front page story on September 23 concerned the
financial status of the Republican and Democractic parties.
"Republicans Have Twice as Much Cash as Democrats," the
headline read.

In a front page story on September 23, Edward A.

Harris, Post-Dispatch Washington correspondent, described

 

the mood of Washington politicians, as the time for Nixon's
national radio and television broadcast approached. In

the lead of the story, Harris said that "as the zero hour
neared for Senator Richard M. Nixon to make a clean breast
of his finances, the conviction grew in political circles
here that he will be unable to withstand the gale of con-
troversy over his . . . fund." The headline of the story
read, "Capital Hears Nixon May Offer to Quit Ticket, Belief
Grows He Will Be Unable to Withstand Storm--Eisenhower

'Crusade' at Stake."

141

While the Los Angeles Times coverage of Nixon's

 

speech was quite complimentary, the Post-Dispatch seemed

 

critical of the broadcast in some of the stories that ap-

peared. On September 24, James A. Kearns, Post-Dispatch

 

reporter, assessed Nixon's speech in a story on page two.

The story was headed, "Wife, Too, Is Somber as He Makes

Most Important Speech of Career in Empty Theater." Accord-
ing to Kearns, Nixon received "a mixed reaction . . . to

his defense of an $18,000 fund put up by wealthy Californians
for his benefit." Kearns also described Nixon's appearance
as he arrived at the theater to deliver his speech. "His
boyish grin and backslapping manner were CODSPiCUOUSlY
absent," Kearns said. "His face was set in a frozen smile."

Another story on page two concerning the audit of
Nixon's fund was headed, "Nixon Fund Audit Shows $11,000
Remains to Be Accounted For."

It is also interesting to note that most of the
press comments on the Nixon fund that appeared in the Resp:
Dispatch were critical of Nixon. The headlines that accom-
panied two of these press comment stories also reflected
a negative attitude. 'On September 20, one headline read,
"Press Comment on Gifts to Nixon, Some Papers Urge His With-
drawal, Others Ask for All the Facts; Question whether
Candidate's Usefulness Hasn't Been Fatally Impaired, Says

New York Times--Herald Tribune Proposes He Offer to Get

 

 

Out of Race." A Similar headline, appearing in the Post-

142

Dispatch on September 21, read, "Varied Press Reaction on
Nixon, Most of Papers Demand Facts, Some Ask for His With-
drawal; Usefulness May Have Been Fatally Impaired, Says

New York Times--Chicago Sun Times Urges He Make 'Clean

 

Breast of the Transaction.'"

The Post-Dispatch also included remarks concerningtflua

 

Nixon fund in the upper left hand corner of the front page
of the paper during the period analyzed. These statements
were headed, "Weatherbird Comments." No such comments con-
cerned the Stevenson fund. The satirical Nixon fund com-
ments that appeared in the Post-Dispatch were: (1) Septem-
ber l9--"Nixon Enterprise Not So Free," (2) September 21--
"$18,235 Question Up to Ike," (3) September 23--"True Con-
fessions on TV," (4) September 24--"Pure Richard's Almanac,"
(5) September 25--"Just Good, Clean Fund," (6) September 26--
"Gen. Ike Indorses Gen. Overhaul."

It must be noted, however, that not all of the

seventy-two Nixon fund stories in the Post Dispatch reflected

 

the negative tone that appeared in the fund stories just
discussed. Some of the Nixon fund stories were written
objectively and did not reflect the Democratic leanings of

the Post-Dispatch.

 

A front page story on September 19 described the
reaction of Eisenhower to the fund disclosure and contained
primarily comments that Eisenhower had made regarding the

fund. The story's headline read, "Eisenhower Says 'I

143

Believe Nixon Is Honest Man,‘ Long Admired Him, 'Confident'
Running Mate Can Explain Gifts--Disclosure Creates Furor on
General's Train." In the lead of the story, it was noted
that Eisenhower had said he believed Nixon "to be an honest
man who could explain 'fairly and squarely' the unofficial
expense account provided for him."

Another story on page nine also contained primarily
statements made by Eisenhower. In the story, Raymond P.
Brandt, chief Washington correspondent of the Post-Dispatch,
wrote that "Dwight D. Eisenhower last night accepted as
'an honest statement' the explanation of Senator Richard
Nixon, the vice presidential candidate, that the 'public
Spirited citizens' had contributed $16,000 to the California
Senator for 'legitimate political purposes.'"

On September 21, an Associated Press story on page
one contained the names of contributors to Nixon's fund
and an itemization of how the fund money was spent. This
story was headed, "Oil, Realty Men, Manufacturers among
Those Who Donated $18,235, Major Disbursements for Office
Supplies, Travel--All Spent before Vice Presidential Nom-
ination."

A concisely written story on page two concerned
comments made by Nixon about his fund. The story was headed,
"Nixon Says Facts Will End Doubts on $18,235 Fund--He

Asserts Money Was for Strictly 'Political Activities.'"

144

On September 23, several Nixon fund stories were
clearly and objectively written. In a front page story,

Robert H. Collins, Post-Dispatch staff correspondent, in-

 

formed readers that a Los Angeles law firm had been retained
"by the Eisenhower forces 'to determine whether any laws
were violated in the collection and use of the $18,235
expense fund given to Senator Richard M. Nixon.'"

An Associated Press story on page one described
the costs of the national radio and television broadcast.
Another story on page one concerned how Dana C. Smith en-
listed Nixon's aid in connection with a tax refund claim.

The story, a Post-Dispatch scoop, was headed, "Senator's

 

Office Helped Lawyer Expedite Action on Tax Refund, 'Some
Progress' Made on $500,000 Claim sinceIkaWas Introduced to
Justice Department Official."

A front page story on September 24 described
Eisenhower's reaction to Nixon's speech and referred pri-
marily to statements made by Eisenhower about the broadcast.
The story was headed, "All Indications Eisenhower Will Keep
Californian as Running Mate, General Says Made 'Error in
Judgment' in Accepting $18,000 but Praises His Courage
Highly." I

In an Associated Press story on page five, a sum-
mary of Nixon's speech appeared. Details of Nixon's finan-
cial background were also given. The headline of the story

read, "Senator Appeals to Listeners to Help Party Heads

145

Make Decision, Flying to Talk with General--Release Audit
of Funds and Law Firm's Opinion on Legal Aspects."

The Stevenson fund stories that appeared in the
Post-Dispatch did not reflect the paper's support of Steven-
son in the campaign. The seventeen Stevenson fund stories
indicated by Table 4 were objectively and concisely written
with few adjectives and other descriptive phrases used.

The first Stevenson fund story that appeared in

the Post-Dispatch contained details from a Chicago Daily

 

Regs story concerning Stevenson's fund. This front page
story on September 22 was headed, "Democrats Listed Suppli-
ers; Gifts Sought in Illinois, Ex-Employee Quoted as Saying
He Named 1,000 Firms--Shifting of Stevenson Fund Denied."

A story on page two of the Post-Dispatch the next
day concerned Stevenson's defense of his fund. The story,

written by a Post-Dispatch special correspondent, contained

 

primarily quotations from Stevenson's fund statement. The
headline of the story read, "Gov. Stevenson Admits Using
Gift Funds to Assist State Employees, 'Never Any Secret I
Have Tried to Reduce Financial Sacrifice of Men Induced
to Leave Private Employment.'"

On September 24, another story, consisting mostly
of comments made by Stevenson, appeared on page three of

the Post-Dispatch. The story by George H. Hall, Post-

 

Dispatch Washington correspondent, concerned Stevenson's

refusal to reveal the names of fund donors and recipients.

146

The story's headline read, "Gov. Stevenson Refuses to Name
Gift Fund Donors or the Recipients, Asserts It Would Be
Breach of Faith--Salary Supplements Paid Officials in Form
of Christmas Presents."

Another Stevenson fund story appeared on the front

page of the Post-Dispatch on September 25. This United

 

Press story reported that Herman Donlap Smith, national
chairman of the Volunteers for Stevenson, revealed that two
or three Chicago businessmen had donated money to Steven-
son's fund. The story was headed, "Chicagoan Tells of
Turning Over '$500 to $1,000' to Stevenson's Fund, Backer

of Nominee Says 'Two or Three' Businessmen, One a Republican,
Donated Voluntarily through Him."

On page two, a story from the Chicago Daily News

 

revealed that Justice Walter V. Schaefer had received a
gift from Stevenson at Christmas in 1950 while serving as
chairman of the Illinois Little Hoover Committee.

The text of Stevenson's defense of his fund appeared
on page twenty-two on September 25. The associated Press
story was headed, "Stevenson Text; 'I Used Fund to East Key
Aids Sacrifice.'"

On September 26, a front page United Press story
announced that Stevenson would make public a list of fund
donors and recipients. Again the story contained primarily
comments from Stevenson's public statement concerning his

decision to reveal the fund donors and recipients. The headline

147

of the story read, "Gov. Stevenson to Name Illinois Gift
Fund Donors and Recipients, Announces He Will Make Statement
Today or Tomorrow--Says '8 or 9' Officials Got Money to
Supplement Pay."

After Stevenson revealed the fund donors and recip-

ients, the front page headline of the Post-Dispatch on

 

September 28 read, "Stevenson Reveals $18,150 in Gifts to

8 Key Officials, Lists Donors." A story on page one iden-
tified the fund donors and recipients and disclosed the
amounts of money that had been received by them. It was
also reported that Stevenson and Sparkman would make public
their income tax returns. The headline of the story read,
"Will Make Public His Tax Returns, Says Sparkman Will Do
Likewise, Governor Explains Money Paid to Illinois Employees
Came from 1948 Campaign Balance and Later Donations."

All of page ten on September 28 was devoted to
details of StevenSon'S fund. A banner headline appeared
on the page, reading, "List Of Donors to Fund from Which
Stevenson Paid Officials." A boxed story, revealing Illi-
nois employee recipients, was headed, "State Employees Who
Received Gifts from Gov. Stevenson."

Only one Stevenson fund story seemed to reflect

the Post-Dispatch support of Stevenson in the campaign.

 

The front page story on September 29 by George H. Hall
concerned Stevenson's disclosure of his financial back-
ground. In the story, Hall criticized Nixon's financial

account and praised Stevenson's.

148

The difference between the Stevenson and Nixon accounting
is that the public has only Nixon's word for the accuracy
of what he said, and what he said was far from complete.
Stevenson's statement is complete and was made under

the equivalent of an oath; it is a serious violation of
federal law to falsify an income tax return.

The Milwaukee Journal, like the Post-Dispatch, sup-

 

 

ported Stevenson during the 1952 campaign. Unlike the Post-
Dispatch, however, the Journal did not incorporate its
editorial policies into the fund stories and headlines to

the extent that the Post-Dispatch did. The Nixon fund

 

stories, in particular, were written much more objectively

than those that appeared in the Post-Dispatch. Only a few

 

of the Journal Nixon fund stories seemed unnecessarily
negative in tone toward Nixon.

The first Nixon fund story that appeared in the
Journal was similar to some of the Post-Dispatch stories
in which the fund donors were described as wealthy angels.
The disclosure of the Nixon fund appeared on the front page
of the Journal on September 18. The story by Peter Edson,
Washington correSpondent for Newspaper Enterprise Associ-
ation, was headed, "Rich 'Angels' Aiding Nixon, Anonymous
to Senator, They Help Pay for His Office Costs." In the
lead of the story, Edson wrote that "Republican vice pres-
idential candidate Richard Milhous Nixon has been receiving
an extra expense allowance from between 50 and 100 well-to-

do southern California political angels. . . ."

149

Another story, not particularly complimentary to
Nixon, appeared on page two of the Journal on September 21.
'The Associated Press story concerned Nixon's campaign in
Oregon and was headed, "Nixon Irked by Placards, 'NO Mink
Coats, Just Cold Cash,’ Sign at Whistle StOp." The story
noted that "Senator Richard Nixon angrily defended his
acceptance of an $18,235 expense fund Saturday as taunting
placards and signs appeared in his whistle stOp campaign
crowds. A near riot broke out at Eugene, Oregon, as his
train pulled away, and the crowd tore a placard to bits."

The headline of another story on page two concerning
newspaper opinions of the Nixon fund seemed to emphasize
the negative aspects of Nixon's fund. "What Press Is Saying
of Donations to Nixon, Comments on 'Gifts' Keep On; Even
Ike's Friends See Episode as Handicap," the headline read.

On September 23, an Associated Press story on page
three concerned Nixon's return to Los Angeles to deliver
his national radio and television broadcast. The headline
of the story read, "Crowd Greets a 'Sick' Nixon, Senator
Flies Back to California for His Talk Tonight." In the
story, Nixon was described as looking tired and feeling
sick over the fund furor.

The rest Of the Nixon fund stories and headlines
that appeared in the Journal were objectively written and

did not reflect a negative attitude toward Nixon.

150

A story on page five of the Journal on September 20
contained various opinions of the Nixon fund from newspapers
throughout the country. The story was headed, "What They
Say-about Nixon."

An Associated Press story on September 21 concerned
Eisenhower's reaction to the Nixon fund. The headline read,
"Must Come Out 'Clean,‘ His Feeling, Expression 'Clean as a
Hound's Tooth' Used; Has Not Yet Studied Detailed Report."

In the Journal on September 22, four stories and
'the main headline pertained to the Nixon fund on the front
page. The main headline read, "Nixon Sets Radio, TV Talk
Tuesday to Explain Finances." Two stories pertained to
I'the Nixon fund. One concerned the demand of Wilbur Renk,
chairman of the Eisenhower-Nixon Committee for Wisconsin,
that Nixon resign. "Renk Urges Candidate to Leave Race,
Leader of Campaign Force in Wisconsin Has Made 'Calls' on
Situation," the headline read. The other story, an Asso-
ciated Press story, concerned a statement made by Arthur E.
Summerfield, Republican national chairman, that the bill
for Nixon's speech would be paid by the Republican National
Committee. The story was headed, "Nixon's TV Talk Will
Cost $75,000."

In a story from the New York Times News Service,

 

James Reston discussed Eisenhower's handling of the Nixonv
case. The story on page two was headed, "Ike Making up

Mind Whether to Keep Nixon, General Spent Sunday Going over

151

Fund List; Gets Little Help from Divided Advisers." In
the lead of the story, Reston described Eisenhower's inde-
cision regarding the case and said he "remained alone in
his railroad car . . . most of Sunday trying to decide
whether to keep Senator Nixon as the vice presidential
nominee or recommend his withdrawal."

After Nixon's national radio and television speech,
several stories appeared in the Journal on September 24.
The main headline on the front page read, "Nixon Places
Case before People; Signs Grow He'll Remain on Ticket."
A front page Associated Press story contained comments from
G. O. P. committee members concerning the fund. This story
was headed, "Summerfield 'Certain' Ike to Keep Him, G. O. P.
Chairman Says Democrats Probably 'Sorry They Brought Matter
Up.'"

Another front page Assocated Press story summarized
Nixon's broadcast and contained primarily quotations from
the speech. "Senator Tells Why $18,000 Was Accepted, Can-
didate Lists His Assets, Debts, Urges Stevenson,.Sparkman
To Do Same," the headline read.

Several inside stories in the Journal also concerned
Nixon's speech and person's reactions to it. A story on
page two said that "in political circles reactions to Sen-
ator Nixon's broadcast generally followed party lines."
The story was headed, "Views at Odds over Speech, G. O. P.

Hails Nixon Talk; 'Didn't Give Answers,‘ Democrats Say."

152

An Associated Press story on page three concerning
Eisenhower's reaction to Nixon's speech was made up pri-
marily of comments that Eisenhower had made. The headline
of the story read, "Ike Applauds Nixon Speech, 'Example of
Courage,‘ He Tells Cleveland Crowd after Talk."

The main headline of the Journal on the front page
on September 25 read, "Nixon Vindicated, Ike Says after
Reunion with Senator." The Associated Press story with the
main headline contained details on the Nixon and Eisenhower
meeting at Wheeling. This story was headed, "Party Powers
Vote 107-0 to Keep Him, Californian Acted as a 'Man of
Honor,’ His Running Mate Tells Cheering Crowd."

The Stevenson fund stories that appeared in the
Journal were objectively written. 'The Journal's support
of Stevenson was not reflected in these stories in most
cases.

The first Stevenson fund story to appear in the
Journal on September 22 was not placed on the front page
as was the first Nixon fund story. The Associated Press
story on page three of the Journal gave details of Steven-

son's fund that had been reported by the Chicagp Tribune

 

and the Chicago Daily News. "'NO Fund Shift for Stevenson,‘

 

Chicago Newspapers' Stories Denied by Illinois Democrat,"
the headline read. This headline and story did reflect to
a certain extent the support of Stevenson by the Journal

as it was written from a defensive point of view. In the

153

lead of the story, it was reported that W. Donald Forsyth,
former Illinois manager of Stevenson's campaign for gover-
nor, had said that "no part of a fund raised for Stevenson's
campaign for re-election as Governor has been or will be
used for his presidential campaign."

The other Stevenson fund stories, however, that
appeared in the Journal were objectively written. On Sep-
tember 23, a front page Associated Press story concerned
Stevenson's acknowledgement of his fund. The story, con—
taining primarily statements made by Stevenson, was headed,
"Fund to Help Officials OK'd by Stevenson, He Acknowledges
Use of Private Donations to Retain 'Good Men' at Spring-
field." The lead of the story read, "An Eisenhower sup-
porter's assertion that Governor Stevenson promoted a cash
fund from private individuals to augment salaries of some
state officials was acknowledged by the Illinois governor
Monday night."

Another story, made up primarily of comments made
by Stevenson, appeared on the front page of the Journal on
September 24. The United Press story reported that Steven—
son had rejected "Senator Nixon's demand that he disclose
the names of Illinois state officials whose salaries he
augmented with cash gifts." The story was headed, "My
Fund OK, Is Stevenson's Reply to Foes, But Nominee Refuses

to Reveal Names of the Recipients in His Illinois Staff."

154

Another story on September 24 on page twelve con-
cerned Wisconsin Governor Kohler's demand that a disclosure
be made by Stevenson. The story's headline read, "Kohler
Pokes at Stevenson, Asks for Accounting."

On the front page of the September 25 issue of the
Journal, an Associated Press story reported that Justice
Walter V. Schaefer had received a $500 gift from Stevenson
while serving as his aide. "Former Aide to Stevenson Got
$500 Gift, Illinois Supreme Court Justice Says Fund Given
whilg He Had Nonpaying Post," the headline read.

On September 26, the main headline and one story
on the front page pertained to the Stevenson fund. "Steven-
son Contacts Donors, May Reveal Names to Public," the main
headline read. The Associated Press story, concerning
Stevenson's agreement to reveal the fund donors, was headed,
"Nominee Says 'Great Many' Gave Funds, 'Eight or Nine'
Illinois Officials Benefited, He Says; Promises Statement
'Later On.'"

On the front page of the Journal on September 27,
an Associated Press story reported that Stevenson had given
newsmen in Indianapolis a list of fund donors but had ordered
the list withheld from publication until the night of the
27th. The story was headed, "Fund Donors To Be Named,
Stevenson Gives OK to Disclosure; List in Reporters' Hands."

On September 28, the main headline and one story

on the front page pertained to Stevenson's release of

155

information concerning fund donors and recipients. The
main headline read, "Stevenson Lists Eight Officials Who
Got $18,150 from His Fund.“ An Associated Press story sum-
marized the information Stevenson had disclosed. This
story was headed, "1,000 Names of Campaign Donors Given;
Governor, in Defending Money's Use, Says He Will Disclose
His 10 Year Income.'"

In a New York Times News Service story on page two,
details were given concerning those who had contributed to
Stevenson's-fund. The story's headline read, "Illinois
Donor List Is Varied, Socialites, Businessmen among Con-
tributors to Stevenson." The contributors were described
as being "persons high and low in business, social and
political life . . . from racketeers to socialites."

The fund stories that appeared in the New York
Rises were carefully and objectively written. The fifty-
three Nixon fund stories shown by Table 4 did not reflect
the 21222 support of Eisenhower and Nixon in the campaign.

The first Nixon.fund story in the Rises_appeared
on the front page on September 19. The story, written by
Gladwin Hill of the Rises, was headed, "Nixon Affirms Getting
Fund of $16,000 from Backers." Hill wrote in the lead of
the story that "Senator Richard M. Nixon, Republican nominee
for Vice President, today confirmed reports that since his
election to the Senate he had accepted about $16,000 in

contributions from supporters."

156

On page eleven, an Associated Press story reported
that Stephen A. Mitchell had called on Eisenhower to demand
Nixon's resignation. "Asks Nixon Be Told to Quit," the
headline read. Directly below this story, another Associated
Press story concerned Nixon's rejection of Mitchell's sug-
gestion as "a political smear." This story was headed,
"Nixon Retorts to Mitchell."

On September 20, three stories and the main head-
line on the front page concerned the Nixon fund. The main
headline read, "Eisenhower Defends Nixon; Report on Fund
Is Promised; Senator Charges 'Smears.'" In column six,
Lawrence E. Davies, a Rises reporter, described Nixon's
reaction to the disclosure of the fund. The story was
headed, "Vice Presidential Nominee Says 'Crooks' Attack
Him, He Also Delays His Train on Coast to Reply to Query
on $16,000 Aid."

An Associated Press story in column seven containing
Stevenson's comments on the Nixon fund was headed, "Steven-
son Urges Fairness to Nixon, Says 'Condemnation without
All Evidence' about $16,000 Fund 'Would Be Wrong.'"

A story by James Reston was headed, "Backed as
Honest, Possibility of Getting Him to Quit Race Weighed
but Is Not Pushed, General Attacks Rival, Asserts in Kansas
City that 'Bosses' Blocked Kefauver to Boost Stevenson."

In the lead of the story, Reston said, "General Dwight D.

Eisenhower announced that a completed accounting would be

157

made of the $16,000 given to his running mate, Senator
Richard M. Nixon, by some of the Senator's political sup-
porters. It is known that the possibility that Senator
Nixon might have to be asked to withdraw from the race was
discussed."

On September 21, several stories appeared on the
front page of the Rises concerning the Nixon fund. The
main headline, referring to both Nixon and Stevenson, read,
“Nixon's Fund $18,235, Donated by 76; He Indicates He Will
Not Withdraw; Stevenson, in South, for Rights Plank."

Laurence Davies, Rises reporter, who was traveling
with Nixon, discussed Nixon's intention of remaining on
the Republican ticket in a front page story. The headline
of the story read, "Nixon Not Quitting, His Tone Indicates;
Senator Defends Expense Fund as Legitimate--He Campaigns
in Oregon."

Another front page story by Gladwin Hill was headed,
"Hoover Son on List, Many Prominent Men Helped Senator
Meet Expense in Office, Accounting Is Rendered, Pasadena
Attorney Itemized Outlay, Says Nixon Never Handled Any
Money." The story discussed primarily the seventy-six
persons who had contributed to Nixon's fund.

On the front page of the Rimes on September 23, a
story by Gladwin Hill reported that Nixon would appear on
a national radio and television broadcast to discuss his

fund. The headline of the story read, "Senator Cuts Trip,

158

Interrupts His Campaign in Portland, Ore., and Flies to
Los Angeles, Will Give an 'Accounting,‘ Summerfield Says
Republican Committee Will Pay $75,000 for Radio-TV Broad-
cast."

On September 24, James Reston described Eisenhower's
reaction to Nixon's speech in a front page story headed,
"Praise by General, He Commends Senator for ‘Magnificent'
Talk on His Finances, Stumps Ohio with Taft, Then Discards
Cleveland Text to Laud Running Mate as a Courageous Person."
The story contained primarily comments from Eisenhower's
speech. In the lead of the story, Reston said that "Gen-
eral Dwight D. Eisenhower listened to Senator Richard M.
Nixon's explanation of his defense tonight and immediately
indicated that he would retain the Senator as his Vice
Presidential running mate."

Gladwin Hill described Nixon's radio and television
broadcast in another front page story on September 24. The
story also contained mainly quotations from Nixon's speech.
In the lead of the story, Hill wrote that Nixon "defended
his $18,235 'supplementary expenditures' fund as legally
and morally beyond reproach." Hill described Nixon as
having delivered his address "with composure and assurance."
The story was headed, "I'm Not a Quitter, Senator Says
He'll Let Republican National Committee Decide, He Reviews
His Finances, Accepts Bid to Meet General--Cites Legal

Opinions on Use of $18,235 Fund."

159

In a story on page twenty-one, the general reactions
to Nixon's speech were described as favorable, "at least
from those on the Republican side of the fence." The story
was headed, "Nixon Replies Tax Phone Wire Lines, Most
G. O. P. Leaders Voice Approval, But Gabriels Is Critical,
Lodge Silent."

On September 25, the front page headline referred
to both funds with, "Eisenhower Calls Nixon Vindicated;
Committee Votes to Retain Nominee; Stevenson Bars Data on
Illinois Fund." In a front page story, James Reston dis-
cussed the meeting Of Eisenhower and Nixon and described
the greeting as warm. Containing primarily comments from
EisenhOwer and Nixon, the story was headed, "Candidates
Meet, Airport Greeting Warm--Genera1 Calls Senator a 'Man
of Honor,‘ Ticket Harmony Assured, Californian Now 'Stands
Higher than Ever,‘ Eisenhower Says of His Explanation."

On September 26, a front page story by Clayton
Knowles reported that the formal approval of Nixon by the
Republican National Committee "marked an Official end to
the controversy." The headline of the story read, "G. O. P.
Officially Closes Book on Nixon Expense Fund Case, Summer-
field Goes through Formality of Notifying Senator He Will
Stay on Ticket--Messages Still Pour In."

The Rises also conducted three surveys concerning
the attitude of persons throughout the nation toward the

Nixon fund. One survey, appearing on the front page of

160

the Times on September 22, was described as "the first of
a series of surveys to be printed Monday mornings, of the

progress of the campaign based on reports of New York Times

 

regional and state correspondents in all 48 states."

James A. Hagerty, writer of the story, compiled statements
from Rises reporters throughout the country and concluded
that reaction to the Nixon fund "was distinctly unfavorable,
and regarded as likely to hurt the chances of election of
both General Eisenhower and Senator Nixon if the latter
continued on the Republican ticket."

A survey conducted by Rises reporter William M.
Blair appeared on page twenty-six of the Rises on Septem—
ber 25. Blair surveyed the reactions of Mid-Westerners to
the Nixon fund and concluded that "farmers and townsfold
appeared to be split in party lines over the right or wrong
of Nixon's fund."

On September 29, another Rises political survey
appeared on the front page and concerned reactions to Nixon's
speech. The report concluded that Nixon's speech generally
"gave impetus to the Republican campaign." The survey was
headed, "Nixon's Speech 'Shot in Arm' to the G. O. P.,
SurveyAFinds."

As Table 4 indicates, ten Stevenson fund stories
appeared in the Rises. Like the Nixon fund stories that
appeared in the Rsses, the Stevenson fund stories and head-

lines were written objectively.

161

The first Stevenson fund story appeared on the front
page of the Rises on September 23. The story, written by
Richard J. H. Johnston of the Rises staff, was headed,
"Subsidy for Illinois Aides Charged; Eases 'Sacrifice,‘
Stevenson Says." In the lead of the story, Johnston wrote,
"Governor Adlai E. Stevenson of Illinois, the Democratic
Presidential nominee, was challenged today to 'acknowledge
publicly' that he had approved financial assistance to
appointed members of his administration in Springfield
during the last four years."

In a front page story on September 25, W. H. Laurence
discussed Stevenson's refusal to name the fund donors and
recipients. The story, containing primarily comments made
by Stevenson, was headed, "Gift Plan Backed, Governor Says
Program Lessened Sacrifice of Low-Paid Key Aides, Recipients'
Names Secret, Nominee Undecided on Listing the Identities
of Donors, He Tells Baltimore Backers."

W. H. Laurence discussed in a front page story on
September 26 Stevenson's decision to publicize details of
his fund. In the lead of the story, Laurence wrote, "Heeding
mounting political criticism, Governor Adlai E. Stevenson
of Illinois changed his mind today and decided to speak
out in greater detail about the funds he used to supplement
salaries of key state employes and for his own political
expenditures." Laurence's story was headed, "Stevenson

Decides to Break Silence on Illinois Funds, Wyatt Says

162

Governor Will Give Further Details on Sums Received by His
Aides, $100,000 Donation Cited, Ex-Purchasing Agent Reports
Collection from Concerns Serving State in 1949-1950."

A story on the front page of the Rises on Septem-
ber 27 revealed persons who had received gifts from Steven-
son. The story was headed, "More 'Gifts' Revealed, Two
Illinois Officers Assert They Got Christmas Cash from the
Governor."

On September 28, the main headline and one story
on the front page concerned Stevenson's revealed fund donors
and recipients. The main headline read, "Stevenson to Bare
Own Tax Files; Lists 8 He Aided and 1,000 Donors; Says
Rival Twists Korea Policy." The front page story reported
the details of Stevenson's fund and noted that Stevenson
and Sparkman would make public their personal income tax
returns. The headline of the story read, "Cited Fund
Details, Disburses $18,150 Total to Key Workers from '48
Campaign Surplus, Challenges His Rivals, Implicitly Bids
Them Join Him and Sparkman in Listing Income Data for 10
Years."

Details concerning the eight Stevenson fund recip-
ients appeared in a story on page fifty-nine. The text
of Stevenson's statement of his fund appeared on page sixty-
two. A list of contributors and the sums of money to

Stevenson's fund also appeared on this page.

163

On September 29, a survey by Rises correspondents
concerned nationwide interest in the two fund stories.
The survey was headed, "Man in Street Is More Interested
in Nixon's Fund than in Stevenson's, Nation-Wide Survey
Indicates."

It is evident that all four newspapers used more
Nixon fund stories and headlines than Stevenson fund stories
and headlines. This imbalance, however, cannot be described
as bias on the part of the newspapers, because, as was
previously discussed, the Nixon fund events generated greater
public interest than the Stevenson fund events.

Bias in the fund stories and headlines, however,
can be analyzed on the basis of writing style, placement,
and types of leads that appeared in the newspapers. Of

the four papers analyzed, the Los Angeles Times and the

 

St. Louis Post-Dispatch were the most biased in stories

 

and headlines concerning the funds. While the Stevenson
fund stories and headlines that appeared in these two papers
were objective, the Nixon fund stories and headlines re-
flected the editorial policies of these two papers.

The Los Angeles Times supported the Republican

 

party during the 1952 campaign, and this support was evident
in the Nixon fund stories and headlines that appeared in

the Rises. Despite a great deal of local and state inter-
est in the fund, the Nixon fund stories were placed on the

inside pages of the Times during the first two days of the

164

(paper's coverage of the fund. This seemed to be an attempt
by the Rises to deemphasize the impact of the fund disclo-
sure.

Many of the Nixon fund stories and headlines were
written from a Republican point of view and defended Nixon
and his fund. Other stories and headlines described Nixon
and Eisenhower in glowing terms and praised the two men
highly.

The Post-Dispatch, a supporter of Stevenson, was

 

also biased in stories and headlines concerning the Nixon

fund. While the Los Angeles Times stories and headlines

 

reflected a very positive attitude toward Nixon, the Resp:
DiSpatch stories and headlines reflected a negative atti-
tude toward him.

The contributors to Nixon's fund, for example,
were Often referred to as "angels" and "wealthy Californians."
Many Nixon fund stories and headlines seemed to emphasize
the possibility of Nixon being drOpped from the Republican
ticket. Most of the newspaper comments on the Nixon fund
that appeared in the Post-Dispatch were critical of Nixon,
and the headlines accompanying these stories also reflected
a negative attitude. In addition, the satirical "Weather-
bird Comments" were critical of Nixon and his fund.

The Milwaukee Journal also supported Stevenson

 

during the 1952 campaign. The Journal stories and headlines,

165

however, did not reflect as negative an attitude toward

Nixon as the Post-Dispatch stories and headlines.

 

Only a few of the Journal Nixon fund stories re-
flected a negative tone. The first Nixon fund story that
appeared in the Journal described the Nixon fund donors as
rich political angels. Another story described Nixon as
feeling "sick" over the fund furor. Most of the Nixon fund
stories and headlines, however, were objective. Few biased
phrases were used, and many of the stories and headlines
consisted primarily of quotations from Nixon and Eisenhower.

The New York Times, a supporter of the Republican

 

party during the 1952 campaign, was the most Objective of
the four newspapers in stories and headlines concerning
the funds. The fund stories were objectively and concisely
written.

In the first Nixon fund story that appeared in the
Rises, for example, Nixon was cautiously described as having
"confirmed reports that . . . he had accepted about $16,000
from supporters." Rather than ignore or emphasize the pos-
sible withdrawal of Nixon from the campaign, the Rises
reported that "the possibility" of Nixon's "withdrawal from
the race was discussed." Headlines, particularly those on
the front page, often referred to both funds. The Rises
also conducted surveys on the funds to assess the attitude

of Americans toward the funds.

166

All four newspapers reported the Stevenson fund
objectively. Only in a few cases were the editorial pol-
icies of any of the papers reflected in the Stevenson fund
stories and headlines. Since the Stevenson fund lacked
the dramatic impact of the Nixon fund, it appears that the
Nixon fund events that were of greater public interest
were more susceptible to distortion, omission, and bias in
the four newspapers analyzed. Thus, bias in the news cov-
erage of the funds was reflected in the Nixon fund stories
and headlines. Such bias was most evident in the Res

Angeles Times and the St. Louis Post-Disptach, with some

 

appearing in the Milwaukee Journal. The New York Times

 

was most objective in stories and headlines concerning the

Nixon and Stevenson funds.

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSION

It must be emphasized that statistical evidence
regarding the coverage of the funds is insignificant as
far as the detection of bias is concerned. In all of the
four newspapers analyzed, more editorials, columns, photo-
graphs, stories, and headlines pertained to the Nixon fund
than to the Stevenson fund. Yet, such imbalance cannot be
described as bias on the part of the newspapers because
the Nixon fund events generated more public interest than
the Stevenson fund events. The Nixon fund events involved
much action and drama, including Nixon's national radio
and television broadcast and his vindication by Eisenhower
in Wheeling, West Virginia. Stevenson's fund did not in-
volve such dramatic activity. The disclosure of Nixon's
fund prior to Stevenson's also gave the Nixon fund greater
impact. Thus, one cannot expect to find statistical bal-
ance concerning the funds in any of the newspapers analyzed.
This holds true regardless of the fact that in certain in-
stances significant statistical differences were found in
the coverage of the funds, as indicated by the statistical

material in the Appendix.

167

168

Of the four newspapers analyzed, the New York Times

 

covered the Nixon and Stevenson funds most objectively. In
all aspects of newspaper coverage that were considered, in-
cluding editorials, columns, photographs, stories and head—
lines, the Rises reported the funds concisely and cautiously.

In the fund editorials the Rises said that Stevenson
and Nixon had shown poor judgment in accepting private funds
but saw no evidence of favoritism shown toward donors by
Nixon or Stevenson. Much of the editorial content concerned
the implications of the use of private funds by public
officials.

The columns concerning the funds were also written
carefully and cautiously. Most of the columnists attempted
to analyze the fund issues, their effect on the campaign,
and the feelings of voters toward the candidates and issues.
Sweeping generalizations and conclusions were rarely arrived
at in the Rises columns.

None of the Nixon and Stevenson photographs and cut-
lines reflected the editorial policies Of the Rises. The
photographs were objective with clear and concise cutlines.

The Rises was also the most objective of the four
newspapers in stories and headlines concerning the funds.
Events were described objectively in a style that was gen-
erally free from numerous adjectives and biased word usage.
Caution was used in the reporting of the funds, particularly

the Nixon fund.

169

The Los Angeles Times, on the other hand, did not

 

report the fund stories as objectively as the New York
Times. Many of the fund columns, stories, and headlines

reflected the Los Angeles Times support of Eisenhower and

 

Nixon in the 1952 campaign.
The fund editorials that appeared in the Los

Angeles Times indicate the attitude of the paper toward

 

the Nixon and Stevenson funds. Two editorials concerning

the Nixon fund appeared in the Los Angeles Times, both on

 

the front page. NO Stevenson fund editorials appeared in

the paper. In the Nixon fund editorials, the Los Angeles

 

Rises praised Nixon highly and described him as "an adver-

sary of evil and a champion of the right." Critics of the

Nixon fund were severely chastized and termed "professional
political liars and experienced political smear experts."

The fund columns that appeared in the Los Angeles

 

Times concentrated primarily on the positive aspects of
the Republican party and the negative qualities of the Dem-

ocratic party. The Los Angeles Times editorial support of

 

Eisenhower and Nixon was reflected in the highly compli-
mentary style used to describe the two men.

The fund photographs and cutlines concerning the
funds were, in most cases, Objective. Two photographs and

outlines, however, seemed to reflect the Los Angeles Times

 

support of the Republican party. One photograph, rather

negative in tone toward Stevenson, showed the Democratic

170

presidential candidate with a worried and concerned expres-
sion on his face. The cutline described Stevenson as
wearing a "harried look tinged with Obvious careful thought."
In sharp contrast to this cutline was another accompanying

a photograph of the Nixons on their way to the broadcasting
station. The pair was described as "confident with care-
free smiles."

The fund stories and headlines in the Los Angeles

 

Rises reflected support of the Republican party, particu-
larly in those stories concerning the Nixon fund. Many
adjectives were used in praise of Eisenhower and Nixon,
with a defensive point of View reflected in many of the
Nixon fund stories and headlines.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch also lacked objectivity

 

in the reporting of the funds. The Post—Dispatch support

 

of the Democratic party was often reflected in the coverage
of the funds.

In the fund editorials, the Post-Dispatch praised

 

Stevenson highly and criticized Nixon severely. The Post-

 

Dispatch complimented Stevenson for his restraint in with-

holding judgment on the Nixon fund and for taking such a
daring initiative" in publicizing his income tax returns.
Nixon, on the other hand, was charged with attempting to
"hoodwink the public" in the defense of his fund. The
Nixon fund was described as "a dirty business," and Nixon's

national radio and television broadcase was termed a

"carefully contrived soap Opera."

171

Many of the fund columns reflected the Post-Dispatch

 

support of Stevenson, expressing enthusiasm for him and
praising his erudite wit and humor. Criticism of Nixon
and Eisenhower's handling of the fund, of the Republican
selection of Nixon as the vice presidential candidate, and
of Nixon's radio and television speech appeared in several

of the columns. Unlike the Los Angeles Times, however, the

 

Post-Dispatch did make an effort to analyze campaign issues

 

and voter Opinion.

The fund photographs and outlines were fairly ob-
jective. Three Nixon fund photographs, however, showed
Nixon with uncomplimentary facial expressions. Cutlines
accompanying these photographs described Nixon as looking
"serious-faced," making a "wry face," and wearing a "frozen
smile, boyish grin missing."

The Stevenson fund headlines and stories in the

Post-Dispatch were objective. Those concerning the Nixon

 

fund, however, reflected a negative attitude toward Nixon.
The contributors to Nixon's fund were often described as
"angels" and "wealthy Californians." The possibility of
Nixon being dropped from the Republican ticket was empha—
sized. The use of the satirical "Weatherbird Comments"
served as additional criticism of Nixon and his fund.

The reporting of the funds by the Milwaukee Journal,

 

while not as objective as the New York Times, did not

 

172

reflect the editorial policies of the paper to the extent

of the Los Angeles Times and the Post—Dispatch.

 

 

The editorials indicate the Journal's support of

 

Stevenson in the 1952 campaign. Here Nixon was openly
criticized. The Journal described Nixon's acceptance of
private funds as unethical and called Eisenhower's support
of Nixon "camouflage, pure and simple." Little mention of
Stevenson was made except for a demand that he make public
the names of fund donors. The Journal, like the New York
Rises, thoroughly explored the implications of the funds
and also related the funds to Wisconsin politics by de-
manding that Senator McCarthy of Wisconsin follow Nixon's
example and publicly reveal his finances.

An assessment of the Journal columns cannot be
made Since the Journal does not carry any syndicated
columns. Most of the paper's political copy consists of
interpretative features, news stories, and editorials.
Regular columns with standing headlines did not appear in
the Journal.

The Journal fund photographs and cutlines were
generally objective. Two photographs did appear, however,
that were negative in tone toward Nixon. One photograph
showed a young college student with a Sign that read,
"Give Nickels for Nixon," and the other pictured Nixon and

his father with grim and sour facial expressions.

173

The fund stories and headlines in the Journal were,
in most cases, concise and objective. Very few of the
Nixon fund stories reflected a negative attitude toward
Eisenhower and Nixon. In the firsthixon fund story that
appeared in the Journal, the fund donors were described
as rich political angels. Another story said Nixon was
"sick" over the fund furor. Other stories and headlines
concerning both funds did not reflect the editorial poli-
cies of the Journal.

As indicated by the material in the Appendix,
several statistically significant differences were found
in the coverage of the funds by the four newspapers analyzed.

The Los Angeles Times devoted significantly more
mean column inches of photographs to the Nixon fund than
any of the other newspapers. The Rises also used a sig-
nificantly larger mean headline type size for the Nixon
fund than the other papers.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch used significantly more
mean column inches of photographs for the Nixon fund than

the Milwaukee Journal and a significantly larger mean head-

 

line type size for the Nixon fund than the New York Times.

 

The Post-Dispatch also used significantly more mean column
inches for Nixon fund headlines than any of the other news-
papers and significantly more mean column inches for Steven—

SOn fund headlines than the Los Angeles Times.

 

174

There were no statistically significant differences
among any of the newspapers concerning the mean headline
type size of Stevenson fund headlines.

The New York Times used significantly more mean

 

column inches for Nixon and Stevenson fund headlines than

the Los Angeles Times. The New York Times also used sig-

 

 

nificantly more mean column inches of Nixon fund stories

than the Milwaukee Journal and significantly more mean

 

column inches of Stevenson fund stories than the Milwaukee

 

Journal and the Los Angeles Times.

 

The Milwaukee Journal used significantly more mean

 

column inches for Stevenson fund headlines than the Los

Angeles Times.

 

As was previously pointed out, statistical evidence
alone is not sufficient to detect bias in newspaper coverage.
The Significant differences that were found in the coverage
of the Nixon and Stevenson funds, however, do substantiate
the point made that among the four newspapers analyzed,
varying amounts of space were devoted to the fund stories.

Thus it can be concluded that imbalance was evident
in the coverage of the funds with the Nixon fund receiving
greater coverage than the Stevenson fund. Due to the drama-
tic impact of the Nixon fund and the increased public interest
created, however, this imbalance cannot be characterized as

biased coverage.

175

In terms of word style and other criteria, however,

the New York Times was the most objective in reporting the

 

fund stories. The Milwaukee Journal reflected some edi-

 

torial support of the Democratic party in the coverage of

the funds, but not to a great extent. The Los Angeles

 

Times and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, however, showed

 

substantial bias in reporting the fund stories. The edi-
torial policies of both papers were reflected in the
coverage of the funds, particularly in those columns,
stories and headlines concerning the Nixon fund.

The findings of this study are similar to those of
Blumberg and Rowse in that evidence of bias was detected
in the coverage of the 1952 campaign. It must be emphasized,
however, that the conclusions reached in this study are
based upon both quantitative and qualitative evidence, in-
cluding statistical material, word style, and placement in
all aspects of newspaper coverage. By analyzing news
stories, headlines, photographs, columns, and editorials,
a comprehensive analysis of the four newspapers was made.

In assessing the objectivity of the press at any
time, researchers are often prone to rely strictly on sta-
tistical information. Such methodology is not complete.
Conclusions based solely on the column-inch space unit are
incomplete and misleading, for equal coverage of an event
or issue cannot necessarily be equated with balanced

coverage. The reverse may also be true. Unequal coverage

176

does not always indicate bias on the part of the newspapers.
Other aspects of newspaper coverage must be considered in
relation to the column—inch space unit in order to fairly
and comprehensively assess newspaper coverage.

Further research, in fact, needs to be done regard-
ing those qualitative areas used in an assessment of news-
paper coverage of an event. The study of word style, in
particular, should be more thoroughly explored in order
that varying degrees of word bias can be determined. Such
research would enable others to more completely analyze
newspaper coverage and to more adequately assess newspaper
accounts of the day's events and issues. Only through con-
tinued research in the various methods of measuring and
detecting bias can newspaper coverage be fairly and com-

prehensively assessed and be placed in a prOper perspective.

APPENDIX

It is evident from Tables 3, 4, 5, and 6, found in
the main body of this paper, that differences exist among
the newspapers in the amount of space devoted to photographs,
headlines, and stories, but the tables do not indicate
whether these differences are significant.

By using the appropriate statistical tests, one can
determine whether the observed differences are due to pure
chance or if the differences are statistically significant.

All of the tests used to determine statistical dif—
ferences among the four newspapers followed the same pro-
cedure, although mathematical formulas varied in order to
correct for small samples. The mean and the variance were
first found for all newspapers on the variable being mea-
sured. These measurements were then used in a statistical
test to find the difference of the means. To determine
whether the difference between the means was significant,

a t-test or critical ratio was computed. This is a ratio
comparing the difference found between the means in the
experiment and the difference that could be expected due
to chance. If the difference between the means obtained
in the experiment were larger than the difference expected

to occur by chance, it was reported that the difference was

177

178

statistically significant. The minimum level of significance
used in all tests was the standard .05 level.

One test was run on the mean difference of column
inches devoted to photographs among the four newspapers
analyzed. This test concerned the mean column inches used
in the Nixon fund photographs. It was not possible to run
a separate statistical test on the differences of column
inches used in Stevenson fund photographs because of the

limited number of such photographs used by the Milwaukee

 

Journal and the New York Times.

 

The mean column inches of Nixon fund photographs

used by the Los Angeles Times was 23.24; the Post-Dispatch,

 

 

14.55; the New York Times, 13.22; and the Milwaukee Journal,

 

 

10.17. Table 7 contains the obtained t—values for the dif-

ferences of Nixon fund photographic space.

Table 7.--T-values for Nixon fund photographs.a

 

 

 

St. Louis Milwaukee Los Angeles
Post-Dispatch Journal Times
New York b
Times .53 1.08 2.78
Los Angeles 3.45b 4.83b ____
Times ~
Milwaukee b
Journal 2'73 ---- ---—

 

aFor the differences of column inches.

bSignificant beyond .01 level.

179

It was found that the Los Angeles Times devoted

 

significantly more mean column inches of photographs to
the Nixon fund than did any of the other newspapers

analyzed. It was also found that the Post-Dispatch devoted

 

significantly more mean column inches of photographs to the

Nixon fund than did the Milwaukee Journal.

 

Four tests were run on the mean differences of
column inches and type size devoted to headlines among
the four newspapers analyzed. Two of the tests concerned
the mean differences of type size used in the headlines
pertaining to the Nixon and Stevenson funds. The other
two tests concerned the mean differences of column inches
used in the headlines of the two funds.

The mean type size of headlines used in reporting

the Nixon fund by the Los Angeles Times was 30.52; the Post-

 

Dispatch, 27.16; the Milwaukee Journal, 26.77; and the New

 

York Times, 24.44. Table 8 contains the obtained t—values

 

for the differences of type size in Nixon fund headlines.

It was found that the Los Angeles Times used a sig-

 

nificantly larger mean type size in reporting the Nixon fund
than did any of the other newspapers analyzed. The Post-
Dispatch used a significantly larger mean type size in re-

porting the Nixon fund than did the New York Times.

 

The mean type size of headlines used in reporting

the Stevenson fund by the Los Angeles Times was 31.20; the

 

Post-Dispatch, 28.96; the Milwaukee Journal, 28.40; and

 

 

180

the New York Times, 25.41. Table 9 contains the obtained

 

t-values for the differences of type size in Stevenson

fund headlines.

Table 8.--T—values for Nixon fund headlines.a

 

 

 

St. Louis Milwaukee Los Angeles
Post-DiSpatch Journal Times

New York b c

Times 2.37 1.50 5.33
Los Angeles b b

Times 2.73 2.33 -—--
Milwaukee

Journal .24 ---- ----

 

aFor the differences of type size.
bSignificant beyond .05 level.

cSignificant beyond .01 level.

Table 9.—-T-values for Stevenson fund headlines.a

 

 

 

St. Louis Milwaukee Los Angeles
Post-Dispatch Journal Times
New York
Times 1.34 .78 1.97
Los Angeles
Times .77 .70 ----
Milwaukee
Journal .15 -—- ----

 

aFor the differences of type size.

181

There were no significant differences among any of
the newspapers concerning the mean type size of Stevenson
fund headlines.

The mean column inches of Nixon fund headlines

used by the Post-Dispatch was 1.93; the New York Times,

 

 

1.57; the Milwaukee Journal, 1.43; and the Los Angeles

 

 

Times,l.28. Table 10 contains the obtained t-values for

the differences of column inches of Nixon fund headlines.

Table lO.--T-values for Nixon fund headlines.a

 

 

 

St. Louis Milwaukee Los Angeles
Post-Dispatch Journal Times
New York b I b
Times 2.12 1.08 2.23
Los Angeles c ____
Times 4.64 1.50
Milwaukee c '
Journal 3'57 ---- ---_

 

aFor the differences of column inches.
bSignificant beyond .05 level.

CSignificant beyond .01 level.

The Post-Dispatch used significantly more mean

 

column inches in headlines of the Nixon fund than did any
of the other newspapers analyzed. It was also found that

the New York Times used significantly more mean column

 

inches in its headlines of the Nixon fund than did the

Los Angeles Times.

 

182

The mean column inches of Stevenson fund headlines

used by the Post-Dispatch was 2.21; the New York Times,

 

 

1.96; the Milwaukee Journal, 1.73; and the Los Angeles

 

 

Times, 1.12. Table 11 contains the obtained t~values for

the differences of column inches of Stevenson fund headlines.

Table ll.--T-values for Stevenson fund headlines?

 

 

 

St. Louis Milwaukee Los Angeles
Post—Dispatch Journal Times
NeW.Y°rk .56 .64 2.33b
Times
Los Angeles c c ____
Times 3.52 3.59
Milwaukee
Journal 1'55 __-— --—-

 

aFor the differences of column inches.
bSignificant beyond .05 level.

CSignificant beyond .01 level.

It was found that the Post—Dispatch, the Milwaukee

 

 

Journal, and the New York Times used significantly more

 

mean column inches of Stevenson fund headlines than did

the Los Angeles Times.

 

Two tests were run on the mean differences of
column inches devoted to stories among the four newspapers
analyzed. One test concerned the mean differences of column

inches in the Nixon fund stories, and the other concerned

183

the mean differences of column inches used in the Stevenson
fund stories.
The mean column inches of stories used in reporting

the Nixon fund by the New York Times was 22.67; the Post-

 

Dispatch, 20.95; the Los Angeles Times, 18.84; and the Mil-

 

waukee Journal, 15.97. Table 12 contains the obtained

 

t-values for the differences of column-inches of Nixon

fund stories.

Table 12.--T-values for Nixon fund stories?

 

 

 

St. Louis Milwaukee Los Angeles
Post-Dispatch Journal Times
NeW.Y°rk .51 2.31b 1.15
Times
Los Angeles ____
Times .63 1.01
Milwaukee
Journal 1‘75 --_- ---_

 

aFor the differences of column inches.

bSignificant beyond .05 level.

It was found that the New York Times used signifi—

 

cantly more mean column inches of Nixon fund stories than

did the Milwaukee Journal.

 

The mean column inches of stories used in reporting

the Stevenson fund by the New York Times was 31.73; the

 

Post-Dispatch, 22.25; the Los Angeles Times, 17.60; and the

 

 

Milwaukee Journal, 17.13. Table 13 contains the obtained

t-values for the differences of column inches of Steven-

son fund stories.

Table 13.—-T-va1ues for Stevenson fund stories.a

 

 

 

St. Louis Milwaukee Los Angeles
Post-Dispatch Journal Times

NeW.Y°rk 1.31 2.29b 2.34b
Times

Los Angeles 1.26 .09 ____
T1mes

Milwaukee 79 ____ ____
Journal '

 

aFor the differences of column inches.

bSignificant beyond .05 level.

It was found that the New York Times used signifi—

 

cantly more mean column inches of Stevenson fund stories

than did the Milwaukee Journal or the Los Angeles Times.

 

 

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Allen, Frederick Lewis. The Big Change. New York: Harper
& Row, Publishers, 1952.

 

Bailey, Thomas A. A Diplomatic History of the American
People. New York: Meredith Publishing Company,
1964.

Berelson, Bernard. "Communications and Public Opinion."
Mass Communications. Edited by Wilbur Schramm.
Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1960.

 

Blumberg, Nathan B. One-Party Press?: Coverage of the
1952 Presidential Campaign in 35 Daily Newspapers.
Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 1954.

Goldman, Eric F. The Crucial Decade--And After: America,
1945-1960. New York: Vintage Books, 1960.

 

Gunther, John. Eisenhower: The Man and the Symbol. New
York: Harper & Brothers, 1952.

 

Hofstadter, Richard. Anti-intellectualism in American
Life. New York: Random House, Inc., 1966.

 

Johnson, J. Percy H., ed. N. W. Ayer & Son's Directory of
Newspapers and Periodicals. Philadelphia: N.W.
Ayer & Son, Inc., 1952.

 

Johnson, Walter. How We Drafted Adlai Stevenson. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1955.

Link, Arthur S. American Epoch, A History of the United
States Since the 1890's. New York: Alfred A.
Knopf,41965.

 

Major Campaign Speeches of Adlai E. Stevenson, 1952. New
Yofk: Rafidom House, Inc.,“1953.

 

185

186

Nixon, Richard M. Six Crises. Garden City, N. Y.: Double-
day & Company, Inc., 1962.

 

Pratt, Julius W. A History of United States Foreign Policy.
Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1955.

 

Rowse, Arthur Edward. Slanted News: A Case Study of the Nixon
and Stevenson Fund Stories. Boston: Beacon Press,
1957.

 

 

The ContinuingiStudy of Newspaper Reading--l38-Study Summary.
New York: Advertising Research Foundation, 1951.

Articles and Periodicals

Baker, Dean C., and MacDonald, James C. "Newspaper Editorial
Readership and Length of Editorials." Journalism
Quarterly, XXXVIII, No. 4 (1961), pp. 473-79.

 

Batlin, Robert. "San Francisco Newspapers' Campaign
Coverage: 1896, 1952." Journalism Quarterly,
XXXXI, No. 3 (1954), pp. 297-303.

 

Brown, Robert U. "SDX Offers to Sponsor Study of Campaign
News." Editor & Publisher, Nov. 29, 1952, pp. 7,
48a, 48b.

 

. "ShOp Talk at Thirty." Editor & Publisher,
August 2, 1952, p. 48.

 

. "Study of Press in 1952 Campaign 'Not Feasible.'"
Editor & Publisher, April 18, 1953, pp. 13, 136.

Bund, Henry. "Mobilizing Industry." Saturday Review, Jan.
19, 1952, p. 42.

 

"Campaign Coverage." Newsweek, Nov. 3, 1952, pp. 64—66.

Cousins, Norman. "Speech for a Presidential Candidate."
Saturday Review, August 2, 1952, pp. 22-24.

"The Incomplete Power." Saturdangeview, Dec. 1,
1951, p. 28.

 

Faulkner, William. "Man's Responsibility to Fellow Man."
Vital Speeches, Sept. 15, 1952, pp. 728-30.

 

Heckscher, August. "Free Souls and Slave." Saturday Review,

 

187

Higbie, Charles E. "Wisconsin Dailies in the 1952 Campaign."
Journalism Quarterly, XXXI, No. 1 (1954), pp. 56—60.

 

Hovland, Carl I., and Weiss, Walter. "The Influences of
Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness."
Public Opinion Quarterly, XV, No. 4 (1951), pp.
635-50.

 

Kerrick, Jean S. "News Pictures, Captions, and the Point
of Resolution." Journalism Quarterly, XXXVI, No.
2 (1959), pp. 177—82.

 

. "The Influence of Captions on Picture Interpre-
tation." Journalism Quarterly, XXXII, No. 2 (1955),
pp. 183—'88.

 

Klein, Malcolm W., and Maccoby, Nathan. "Newspaper Objecti-
vity in the 1952 Campaign." Journalism Quarterly,
XXXI, No. 3 (1954), pp. 285.96.

 

Kobre, Sidney. "How Florida Dailies Handled the 1952 Presi-
dential Campaign." Journalism Quarterly, XXX, No.
2 (1953), PP. 163-69.

 

Los Angeles Times. Sept. 18-30, 1952.

 

Milwaukee Journal. Sept. 18-30, 1952.

 

New York Times. June 26-27, 1950; Sept. 9, 18-30, 1952.

 

"Nixon Fund Revelation a Reportorial Chore." Editor &
Publisher, Sept. 27, 1952, p. 13.

 

Oakes, John B. "Report on McCarthy and McCarthyism." New
York Times Magazine, Nov. 2, 1952, pp. 12, 26, 28,
30.

 

"Page 1 Display Contradicts Authors on Press Bias." Editor
& Publisher, Oct. 25, 1952, pp. 7, 59.

 

St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Sept. 18-30, 1952.

 

Tannenbaum, Percy H. "Initial Attitude toward Source and
Concept as Factors in Attitude Change through Com-
munication." Public Opinion Quarterly, XX, No. 2
(1956), pp. 413-25.

 

"The Effect of Headlines on the Interpretation
of News Stories." Journalism Quarterly, XXX, No.
2 (1953), pp. 189-97}

 

188

Tannenbaum, Percy H., and Greenberg, Bradley S. "The Ef-
fects of Bylines on Attitude Change." Journalism
Quarterly, XXXVIII, No. 4 (1961), pp. 535-37.

 

"Why People Are Worried." U. S. News & World Report, June
13' 1952, pp. 21-22.

 

Reports

Bray, William J., and Spraggs, Venice T. Official Report
of the Democratic National Convention. WaShington,
D. C.: Democratic National Committee, 1953.

 

 

Hart, George L. Official Report of the Twenty-Fifth Re-
publican National Convention. Washington, D. C.:
Republican National Committee, 1953.

 

 

HICHIGQN STQTE UNIV. LIBRRRIE

312‘llll III ”III” Illslll ll