The special
place of The Christian Science Monitor in journalism history comes in part from
its emergence in 1908 as a "reformist" influence -- at a time
sensational "Yellow
Journalism" seemed to dominate
American newsrooms.
Even today the tension between The Monitor's
approach and that of "yellow journalism" echoes in many of the fiercest
debates over American journalism.
Mary Baker Eddy
(1821-1910), the "discoverer of
Christian Science," founded The
Monitor
in
1908, in part, to combat
the influence of
"the yellows" and the attacks of Pulitzer newspapers upon her. At the
beginning of the twentieth-century Mrs. Eddy was a highly controversial figure. She drew sometimes virulent
attack from the pen of Mark Twain.
By the time Mrs. Eddy established The Monitor, the
"yellow press" were well established as profit makers and crusaders for
political and social causes with sensational headlines and lurid
appeals to the emotions. "Yellow Journalism" is best known through the
national chains of William
Randolph
Hearst, (1863-1951) and Joseph
Pulitzer (1847-1911).
The
writer,
a non-Christian Scientist who worked for The Monitor
from 1971 to 1984, at first
accepted the established view
that "Yellow Journalism" was a journalistic excess, a nationalist,
sensational force which tended to drag public discussion down.
Today this writer views "Yellow Journalism" as both a problem and a
solution, as in part a "progressive" foundation block for the modern
human rights reporting.
Several years of research, first in the newspaper
microfilms of Penn State libraries,
then a visit to
the Pulitzer archival collection at Columbia University, led in this
unexpected direction.
At the Columbia collection there were original notes of Pulitzer
newspaper front page planning meetings, as well as staffers' written
explanations as to why they chose to cover certain stories, dispatch
certain correspondents.
It was a familiar "story" -- looking for impact, looking to boost
newspaper sales, looking to defeat the competition, looking to win
fame, looking to spotlight the issues of the day.
True, "the yellows" were emotional, boastful, profit seeking,
nationalistic, and sensational. Even as they covered the world, they
sometimes promoted a racially tinged view of the "White Man's Burden."
Still, they were often aggressive, often
enterprising in their reporting. If they sought to shock, they also
were a watchdog and a conscience.
"Yellow Journalism" could be a powerful reform force, spotlighting
social injustice -- even while being crass, emotion mongering, and
sometimes pro-war. "Yellow Journalism" is sometimes credited with
helping to bring about the Spanish-American War of 1898. "The yellows"
prided themselves on their ability to sometimes outrage their readers,
to influence governments of their times.
The cartoon
character known as "The
Yellow Kid,"
as developed by
R. F. Outcault,
symbolized competing
mass circulation dailies associated with Yellow
Journalism.
See W. Joseph Campbell's What's
Good About Yellow Journalism,
as well as his introduction
to
Yellow
Journalism:
Puncturing
the
Myths, Defining the Legacies
See Journalism
and
the
Spanish
American War
******
James Creelman, a
pioneer in exposing war atrocities,
first in China, then in Cuba, wrote for two "yellows," first Joseph
Pulitzer's New York World,
then William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal.
The
competition between
Hearst and Pulitzer helped shape
both the strengths and weaknesses of "Yellow Journalism." Wrote
Creelman in his memoirs, on the period before war with Cuba:
"It may be
that a desire to sell their newspapers influenced some of the yellow
editors, just as a desire to gain votes inspired some of the political
orators. But that was not the chief motive; for if ever any agency was
thrilled by the consciousness of its moral responsibility, it was
yellow journalism in the never-to-be-forgotten months before the
outbreak of hostilities..." (See Creelman, James, On the
Great Highway, Lothrop Publishing Company, Boston, 1901, Chapter 9, p.176.)
James
Creelman: foreign correspondent
EACH CAN BE
THE CONSCIENCE OF THE
OTHER
The Monitor (CSM), like The New York Times (NYT),
stood
for
a
different kind of reform, a kind of journalistic self-purification
which rejected the excesses of "the yellows," with their often
sensational appeal to the masses, their theatrical headlines, their
emphasis on the "horrid" or kinky. The Monitor and The
Times placed a major emphasis on what they did NOT
cover, what they screened out. One aim was to preserve their
credibility: the sense that when they reported something, it could be
believed.
Both strains of journalistic expression can be found in today's
American media. The creative tension between the two helps keep
journalism vital. Each can be the "conscience" of the other.
From the beginning the CSM was elite, appealing to
the highly educated, rather than to the urban "masses," including the
literate but "uneducated" immigrants often targeted by "the yellows."
The rise of cities shaped media appetites in the years following the
Civil War.
Indeed the CSM has sometimes been viewed as an
expression of genteel upper class Protestant reformism. Even though
Eddy was sometimes ridiculed by the mainstream Protestant
establishment, she was locked in conflict with Boston's Catholic
establishment, and many of the readers of "Yellow Journalism" were
Catholic immigrants.
The Monitor's establishment followed close on
the reformism associated with (the "new" ownership of the NYT
by Adolph S. Ochs,
(1858-1935) publisher of The
Chattanooga Times. Ochs acquired controlling ownership of The
Times and installed himself as publisher in 1896. Under his leadership
the NYT
rejected the emotional sensationalism of "Yellow Journalism," expanded
its circulation, restored its crumbling finances, and elevated itself
to an icon of respectability and credibility epitomized by the slogan:
"All
the news that's fit to print."
Like the "new" New
York Times, The Monitor stood for a more
elevated discussion of public issues, seeking to supply context and
perspective. Unlike "Yellow Journalism," it tended to screen out
emotion and gripping, graphic portrayals of how "ordinary people"
lived. It was sometimes seen as a paper of "the head," not "the heart."
That is the Monitor slogan coined by Mary Baker
Eddy:
"To
injure no man, but to bless all mankind."
To Monitor
admirers this emphasis on issues rather than personalties seems high
minded. To critics it sometimes seems to mask a lack of journalistic
risk taking which is necessary to criticize, investigate, "take on"
powerful people.
One example of how an emphasis on issues rather than personalities
could be powerful journalism came in The Monitor's
coverage of "McCarthyism."
Richard L. Strout, a non-Christian Scientist who joined The
Monitor in 1921, spotlighted abuses of Wisconsin Senator
Joseph R. McCarthy in a firm but non personal manner. The
Monitor's approach set a high standard at a time many media
were intimidated and fearful of being labeled pro-Communist.
Covering McCarthyism: How the Christian
Science Monitor Handled Joseph R. McCarthy, 1950-1954 (1999) by distant relative Lawrence N.
Strout, documents the story, based in part on Richard Strout's personal
papers. Selections from this book are available online.
A 1971 oral history interview with Richard L. Strout, who also wrote a
column for years as "TRB" for the The New Republic
magazine, is available online at the Truman
Library.
OPPOSITES
WITH
THINGS
IN COMMON
The church driven
reformism of Mary Baker Eddy and the profit driven "Yellow Journalism"
of Joseph Pulitzer
ironically complemented each other, even though they
were opposites.
Like Mary Baker eddy, "Yellow Journalism" was a product of the
Victorian Age, but it sought to sell papers not by hiding shocking
reality, but by prominently displaying it for entertainment value, much
like the public hangings of Victorian times.
Both Eddy and Pulitzer were internationalists differently shaped by
similar events. Both were "outsiders" who sought the respectability of
coming "inside." Both saw journalism as a potentially uplifting force
in public discourse. Each followed a different path.
Eddy, the New Englander from rural New Hampshire. founded a very
American but emerging international religion with its roots in the faith healing experimenters of the 1860's. She hoped a newspaper
would protect her image, and promote her controversial new religion.
Her concept of uplift reflected the Victorian upper-class approach of
hiding, of covering up, of keeping out of newspapers the graphic
shocking things which might be seen to be in poor taste.
Pulitzer, the Hungarian Jewish immigrant adventurer who fought in the Civil
War, reflected the vast changes the
post
Civil War period of immigration and urbanization brought to American
life. He hoped to build mass circulation by sensationally entertaining
and by sometimes spotlighting the brazen abuses of criminals and public
officials of the time.
The "Yellow Journalism "of
Joseph Pulitzer ran
exposees of Mary Baker Eddy,
who later founded The
Monitor in part to defend herself against Pulitzer.
Ironically, the Hearst papers, in competition with Pulitzer, tended to
"defend" Mary Baker Eddy.
OUTSIDERS
SEARCHING
FOR
RESPECTABILITY
Beneath
their differences, Pulitzer and Eddy shared a deep desire for
respectability. Both started outside the mainstream -- and were
"knocking" to get in.
Eddy was often mocked as a charlatan or eccentric, and Pulitzer, once
an Hungarian immigrant youth taunted as "Joey the
Jew" in the slum streets of St.
Louis, was
sometimes seen as a crusading, yet profit seeking outsider, a "foreign"
Jewish publisher building a nationwide chain by pandering to the
sometimes "foreign masses."
Ironically The Monitor in its quest for respectable
acceptance often cites its
Pulitzer
awards, the award endowed by Pulitzer
in his
1904 will and begun after his 1911 death in 1917 in his quest for
respectability. This honor is dispensed at Columbia
University,
now a center of intellectualism for many Jewish American students and
scholars, but once a traditional bastion of respectability for
America's Protestant intellectual elite.
WHEN
NEWS
JUDGMENTS
COLLIDE
For
years The Monitor has been known for it
non-sensational, analytical style of writing which tends to emphasize
issues over personality. The Monitor in its earlier
days won strong notice for international coverage at a time when
American media often seemed "isolationist."
It developed a thoughtful, analytical tone in part because of its
rejection of emotionalism, in part because the religion became
international, and in part because much of its audience was far from
the Boston home office. Unlike other city dailies, The Monitor
could not rely upon newsboys and newsstands to circulate the morning
newspaper after one late night or rolling late deadlines allowing for
full coverage of the day's events. Late morning and early afternoon
deadlines were necessary to print and distribute the paper early enough
to get it aboard trains and ships for distant readers around the
country and overseas.
Editors asked reporters to write "standup" copy which might seem
insightful even though written "early" and read several days later. The
Monitor quickly rejected the classic "inverted
pyramid" wire
service style of "what, when, how"
for thematic leads followed by analytic coverage emphasizing "how, why
and what next."
The Monitor's copy often took on slower, more "essay" like qualities which sometimes
characterized newspaper journalism before the speed of the telegraph allowed
correspondents to file immediate
news in the concise and timely "inverted pyramid" style. Copy filed by
fast telegraph helped "the yellows" compete for sensational and
immediate overseas news -- much as satellites and cell phones help
today's cable networks "jump on" overseas wars and human rights abuses.
Ironically other American newspapers have sometimes "followed" in The
Monitor's footsteps by relying more heavily on analysis and
trends reporting. This is partly because newspapers can no longer match
the speed and immediacy of radio, television, and the internet.
Monitor news judgment tends to be the reverse of
traditional American journalism, which stresses conflict,
personalities, danger, doom, and "hype." The CSM
tends to turn news judgment on its head by downplaying emotion,
conflict, personalities, to project a more hopeful optimistic,
academic, perhaps sheltered view of the world. The Monitor
tends to see the world as "half full," rather than "half empty."
In a sense The Monitor foreshadowed some of today's
TV journalism which leaves behind the traditional news approach of
concentrating on what happened and focuses instead on "talking heads"
speculating on "what next?" One difference is that the TV approach
seeks out dire predictions to sketch the "apocalyptic," while The
Monitor's "what next" emphasis is usually, but not always,
far more soothing.
Mary Baker Eddy's CSM continues to view the world
from a lofty "place on the hill." It leaves "populist" muckraking to
others.
A calm temper and moderation were its messages to Joseph Pulitzer's New
York
World. Those are its continuing messages to the world.
WHEN
SCANDAL CAN BE NO "COMMON
DENOMINATOR"
From the beginning The Monitor experienced the
tensions inherent in targeting both a local Boston area audience and an
international readership spread around the nation and the world.
It is the ability to bridge gaps between vastly different audiences
which helps a media become truly "mass."
Like many of today's news media, The Monitor faced
the challenge of finding a "common denominator" which could transcend
different tastes and interests of vastly different audiences. Unlike
other mass media, it could not turn to sensational celebrities,
scandals, graphic entertainment, or crime coverage to bridge this gap
and build mass circulation.
From the beginning The Monitor aimed its copy at
both Christian Scientists and non-Christian Scientists. That mission
presented a tricky balancing act.
The dual goal was: first to inform and guide Christian Scientists while
protecting them from the negative excesses of secular media; and second
to elevate the respectability of Christian Science by increasing
circulation and building credibility in the non-Christian Science world.
The Christian Scientist audience was often educated, reasonably
affluent with home oriented middle brow tastes. By contrast
non-Christian Scientist readers were often extremely highly educated,
intellectuals, academics and government officials drawn to The
Monitor by its specialized overseas coverage. The religious
composition of The Monitor's audience has varied
over time, sometimes almost as even as fifty-fifty.
Monitor editors often faced the dilemma that if
they steered toward the interests of Christian Scientist readers, they
might alienate and lose non-Christian Scientists readers. Yet if they
reached out to increase circulation among non-Christian Scientists,
they might alienate the Church or readers of the Christian Science
faith.
It is this inherent structural dilemma which has helped prevent The
Monitor from going "mass." With a modest circulation often
hovering around the 100,000 and varying over time, it survived because
of the support of Christian Scientists and the subsidy of the Church.
****************************
The Monitor
is and has always been a Church newspaper, with a secular orientation.
It is thus not credible or complete or unbiased in its coverage of
issues reflecting Church views or interests.
It retains strong credibility on many other things, partly because its
news judgment tends to be cautious and balanced -- and partly because
of the traditional and well established high professionalism of its
full time staff and the many talented special correspondents or
"stringers" who contribute to it from overseas.
Its legacy of calming the tempers survives.
