This editorial was published in the Seattle Press-Times, May 10, 1895, p. 2, c. 2:
“During the last ten years a remarkable change has taken place in the character of leading newspapers in the United States. Formerly the newspaper was supposed to be primarily a means whereby the editor or the owners might impress his or their individual views upon the public. It was supposed that the paper had a cut and dried policy on every subject which could possibly arise, and if it failed to take sides on all questions as they came up it was thought to have no character. This partisan quality was not confined to the editorial columns, but extended to the news columns as well, and to give prominence to the doings of political opponents was looked upon as unwise. We see these features now in some country weeklies, which will run an account of a meeting of their political opponents interspersed with comments designed to take the point off the news. In some case the news is published but chances are taken of killing it with misleading headlines.
“All the leading papers now publish the news with as near an approach to absolute accuracy as they are able to reach. They feel that there is an implied understanding between them and their readers that what they print shall be true, and that it is a breach of faith to wilfully depart from this rule. Hence any newspaper of credit will correct an error promptly, and the rarity with which such corrections have to be made shows the care that is taken to get the facts.
“Editorially the tendency of newspapers to confine themselves to comments upon current events and to deal with a class of subjects formerly confined to magazines and reviews is growing. There is before us a Minneapolis paper with four columns of editorial. The subjects treated are: “The Sword and the Cross,” “Dietary Progress,” “The Forest Fire Commission,” “Woman and the Bicycle,” “Clubs and the Liquor Law,” “Public School Principals,” and “The Woes of Moving.” A leading Boston paper of the same mail has four columns of editorial, and only about half a column is devoted to matters pertaining directly to Massachusetts interests. Such examples could be multiplied a thousand fold. There are, of course, conspicuous exceptions, such for example as the New York Evening Post, having a full editorial page, which is a persistent and emphatic reflection of the views of its editor. On the other hand, editorials in the New York Herald and World might be read for days in succession without a definite expression of opinion on any subject being encountered. These papers give the news and make running comments on it, but take up the cudgels editorially only when occasion seems to demand it. They do not keep pounding their views into their readers every day, but recognizing that the average run of people can read and think for themselves, give them the facts and withhold argument until an election approaches or there is a chance of influencing legislative or executive action.
“The personal element is largely disappearing from journalism. No respectable paper now thinks of attacking the personnel of the staff of another paper. Indeed, except the owner or editor of a paper is prominent in public life, apart from his newspaper, the rule is never to refer to him. Quarrels between rival newspapers have been banished to the backwoods, and criticism of the opinions of other newspapers is becoming the exception instead of the rule, as it formerly was. Successful newspapers are becoming less and less the organs of cliques and parties and becoming more independent in their tone and treatment of public questions. To persons educated in the school of extreme partisanship this is supposed to indicate a lack of policy. They forget that independence is itself a policy. Newspapers with a mission are following women with a mission into the limbo of oblivion. The modern newspaper is a commercial enterprise and the aim of its management is to hold a mirror up to the every day life of the people and not erect a pulpit from which to thunder forth anathemeas or pronounce benedictions.”