This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
According to the article, Hearst's campaign against cannabis created "an immeasurable, long-lasting negative impact on global socioeconomics". In spite of seven references I feel that this statement is somewhat inflated; at least it needs to be elucidated. Did it create the Great Depression? Did it lead to the Holocaust? Did it inspire the Second Sino-Japanese War? Weatherford ( talk) 15:23, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
The "Spanish-American Civil War" section seems to opine that the newspapers of Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst were essentially not as influencing as commonly thought in pressuring the McKinley administration to take action. I would caution against taking that particular point of view and ignoring others. The influence of Hearst & Pulitzer is very much still a contentious topic, but I would welcome increased literature presenting another point of view, arguing instead that these publishers played a vital role in ginning up support for the war. I propose Susan J. Douglas's “Presidents and the Media,” in Brian Balogh and Bruce Schulman, eds., Recasting Presidential History, Cornell University Press, 2015:
"Historians naturally disagree over the extent to which such papers and magazines could shape public opinion, particularly over how much of a role they played in the decision of the United States to declare war on Spain in 1898. But McKinley and his advisers had to pay increasing attention to campaigns like Hearst's, whose Journal began devoting more space to Cuba's rebellion against Spanish rule. The paper famously depicted three Cuban women being strip-searched by male Spanish authorities and declared that the explosion of the battleship Maine in the Havana harbor in February 1898 was "the work of an enemy." Many papers, indeed, fanned war fever until a "war psychosis" broke out. In the wake of the Maine explosion, reporters increasingly flocked to the Executive Mansion to get McKinley's response to the crisis.
"In this media environment, it was the newspapers, not the president, who were setting the agenda."
Susan J. Douglas, “Presidents and the Media,” in Brian Balogh and Bruce Schulman, eds., Recasting Presidential History, Cornell University Press, 2015, p. 148 If there is no opposition, I will shortly make those edits myself to the section. Eliaszjm ( talk) 02:24, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
According to the article, Hearst's campaign against cannabis created "an immeasurable, long-lasting negative impact on global socioeconomics". In spite of seven references I feel that this statement is somewhat inflated; at least it needs to be elucidated. Did it create the Great Depression? Did it lead to the Holocaust? Did it inspire the Second Sino-Japanese War? Weatherford ( talk) 15:23, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
The "Spanish-American Civil War" section seems to opine that the newspapers of Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst were essentially not as influencing as commonly thought in pressuring the McKinley administration to take action. I would caution against taking that particular point of view and ignoring others. The influence of Hearst & Pulitzer is very much still a contentious topic, but I would welcome increased literature presenting another point of view, arguing instead that these publishers played a vital role in ginning up support for the war. I propose Susan J. Douglas's “Presidents and the Media,” in Brian Balogh and Bruce Schulman, eds., Recasting Presidential History, Cornell University Press, 2015:
"Historians naturally disagree over the extent to which such papers and magazines could shape public opinion, particularly over how much of a role they played in the decision of the United States to declare war on Spain in 1898. But McKinley and his advisers had to pay increasing attention to campaigns like Hearst's, whose Journal began devoting more space to Cuba's rebellion against Spanish rule. The paper famously depicted three Cuban women being strip-searched by male Spanish authorities and declared that the explosion of the battleship Maine in the Havana harbor in February 1898 was "the work of an enemy." Many papers, indeed, fanned war fever until a "war psychosis" broke out. In the wake of the Maine explosion, reporters increasingly flocked to the Executive Mansion to get McKinley's response to the crisis.
"In this media environment, it was the newspapers, not the president, who were setting the agenda."
Susan J. Douglas, “Presidents and the Media,” in Brian Balogh and Bruce Schulman, eds., Recasting Presidential History, Cornell University Press, 2015, p. 148 If there is no opposition, I will shortly make those edits myself to the section. Eliaszjm ( talk) 02:24, 28 October 2019 (UTC)