{
  "schema": "tga.work.v1",
  "identifier": "dresden:vol-12:address-to-the-press-club",
  "slug": "address-to-the-press-club",
  "title": "Address to the Press Club",
  "subtitle": "New Orleans, February 1, 1898.",
  "excerpt": "Address to the New Orleans Press Club on the press as the great civilizer and breaker of provincialism.",
  "year": 1898,
  "volume": 12,
  "category": "Address",
  "author": {
    "name": "Robert G. Ingersoll",
    "wikidata": "Q360326",
    "viaf": "44331023"
  },
  "isPartOf": {
    "title": "The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll",
    "edition": "Dresden Edition",
    "publisher": "C. P. Farrell",
    "year": 1900
  },
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/",
  "url": "https://thegreatagnostic.com/works/address-to-the-press-club/",
  "wordCount": 1768,
  "body": "New Orleans, February 1, 1898.\n\nLADIES AND GENTLEMEN of the New Orleans\n\nPress Club: I do not remember to have agreed or consented to make any\nremarks about the press or anything else on the present occasion, but I\nam glad of this opportunity to say a word or two. Of course, I have the\nvery greatest respect for this profession, the profession of the press,\nknowing it, as I do, to be one of the greatest civilizers of the\nworld. Above all other institutions and all other influences, it is the\ngreatest agency in breaking down the hedges of provincialism. In olden\ntimes one nation had no knowledge or understanding of another nation,\nand no insight or understanding into its life; and, indeed, various\nparts of one nation held the other parts of it somewhat in the attitude\nof hostility, because of a lack of more thorough knowledge; and,\ncuriously enough, we are prone to look upon strangers more or less in\nthe light of enemies. Indeed, enemy and stranger in the old vocabularies\nare pretty much of the same significance. A stranger was an enemy. I\nthink it is Darwin who alludes to the instinctive fear a child has of\na stranger as one of the heritages of centuries of instinctive\ncultivation, the handed-down instinct of years ago. And even now it is\na fact that we have very little sympathy with people of a different\ncountry, even people speaking the same language, having the same god\nwith a different name, or another god with the same name, recognizing\nthe same principles of right and wrong.\n\nBut the moment people began to trade with each other, the moment they\nbegan to enjoy the results of each other's industry and brain, the\nmoment that, through this medium, they began to get an insight into\neach other's life, people began to see each other as they were; and\nso commerce became the greatest of all missionaries of civilization,\nbecause, like the press, it tended to do away with provincialism.\n\nYou know there is no one else in the world so egotistic as the man who\nknows nothing. No man is more certain than the man who knows nothing.\nThe savage knows everything. The moment man begins to be civilized he\nbegins to appreciate how little he knows, how very circumscribed in its\nvery nature human knowledge is.\n\nNow, after commerce came the press. From the Moors, I believe, we\nlearned the first rudiments of that art which has civilized the world.\nWith the invention of movable type came an easy and cheap method of\npreserving the thoughts and history of one generation to another and\ntransmitting the life of one nation to another. Facts became immortal,\nand from that day to this the intelligence of the world has rapidly and\nsteadily increased.\n\nAnd now, if we are provincial, it is our own fault, and if we are\nhateful and odious and circumscribed and narrow and peevish and limited\nin the light we get from the known universe, it is our own fault.\n\nDay by day the world is growing smaller and men larger. But a few years\nago the State of New York was as large as the United States is to-day.\nIt required as much time to reach Albany from New York as it now\nrequires to reach San Francisco from the same city, and so far as the\ntransmission of thought goes the world is but a hamlet.\n\nI count as one of the great good things of the modern press—as one\nof the specific good things—that the same news, the same direction of\nthought is transmitted to many millions of people each day. So that the\nthoughts of multitudes of men are substantially tending at the same time\nalong the same direction. It tends more and more to make us citizens\nin the highest sense of the term, and that is the reason that I have so\nmuch respect for the press.\n\nOf course I know that the news and opinions are written by folks liable\nto the same percentage of error as characterizes all mankind. No one\nmakes no mistakes but the man who knows everything—no one makes no\nmistakes but the hypocrite.\n\nI must confess, however, that there are things about the press of to-day\nthat I would have changed—that I do not like.\n\nI hate to see brain the slave of the material god. I hate to see money\nown genius. So I think that every writer on every paper should be\ncompelled to sign his name to everything he writes. There are many\nreasons why he has a right to the reputation he makes. His reputation\nis his property, his capital, his stock in trade, and it is not just\nor fair or right that it should be absorbed by the corporation which\nemploys him. After giving great thoughts to the world, after millions of\npeople have read his thoughts with delight, no one knows this lonely\nman or his solitary name. If he loses the good will of his employer, he\nloses his place and with it all that his labor and time and brain have\nearned for himself as his own inalienable property, and his corporation\nor employer reaps the benefit of it.\n\nThere is another reason establishing the absolute equity of this\nproposition, a reason pointing in other directions than to the writer\nand his rights. It is no more than right to the reader that the opinion\nor the narrative should be that of Mr. Smith or Mr. Brown or Mr. So and\nSo, and not that of, say, the Picayune. That is too impersonal. It is\nno more than right that a single man should have his honor at stake for\nwhat is said, and not an impersonal something. I know that we are all\nliable to believe it if the Picayune says it, and yet, after all,\nit is the individual man who is saying it and it is in the interest of\njustice that the reader be apprised of the fact.\n\nI believe I have just a little fault to find with the tendency of\nthe modern press to go into personal affairs—into so-called private\naffairs. In saying this, I have no complaint to lodge on my own behalf,\nfor I have no private affairs. I am not so much opposed to what\nis called sensationalism, for that must exist as long as crime is\nconsidered news, and believe me, when virtue becomes news it can only be\nwhen this will have become an exceedingly bad world. At the same time I\nthink that the publication of crime may have more or less the tendency\nof increasing it.\n\nI read not long ago that if some heavy piece of furniture were dropped\nin a room in which there was a string instrument, the strings in harmony\nwith the vibrations of the air made by that noise would take up the\nsound. Now a man with a tendency to crime would pick up that criminal\nfeeling inspiring the act which he sees blazoned forth in all its detail\nin the press. In that view of the matter it seems to me better not to\ngive details of all offences.\n\nNow, as to the matter of being too personal, I think that one of the\nresults of that sort of journalism is to drive a great many capable and\nexcellent men out of public life. I heard a little story quite recently\nof a man who was being urged for the Legislature, and yet hesitated\nbecause of his fear of newspaper criticism of this character. \"I\ndon't want to run,\" said he to his wife, who urged that this was an\nopportunity to do himself and his friends honor, and that it was a sort\nof duty in him. \"I would if I were you,\" said his wife. \"Well, but there\nis no saying,\" he responded, \"what the newspapers might print about me.\"\n\"Why, your life has always been honorable,\" said she; \"they could not\nsay anything to your disparagement.\" \"But they might attack my father.\"\n\"Well, there was nothing in his career of which any one might feel\nashamed. He was as irreproachable as you.\" \"Ay, but they might attack\nyou and tell of some devilment you went into before we were married.\"\n\"Then you better not run,\" said his wife promptly. I think this fear on\nthe part of husband and wife is identical with that which keeps many a\ngreat man out of public service.\n\nNow, there is another thing which every one ought to abhor. All men and\nnewspapers are entirely too apt to criticise the motives of men. It is\na fault common to all good men—except the clergy, of course—this habit\nof attacking motives. And whenever we see a man do something which is\ngreat and praiseworthy, let us talk about the act itself and not go\ninto a speculation or an attack upon the motive which prompted the act.\nAttack what a man actually does.\n\nBut these are only small matters. The press is the most powerful of all\nagencies for the dissemination of intelligence, and as such I hail\nit always. It has nearly always been very friendly and kind to me\nand certainly I have received at the hands of the New Orleans press a\ntreatment I shall never forget.\n\nOur Sunday newspapers, to my mind, rank among the greatest institutions\nof the present day. One finds in them matter that could not be found in\nseveral hundreds of books,—beautiful thoughts, broad intelligence, a\nrange of information perfectly startling in its usefulness and perfectly\ncharming in its entertainment. Contrast, please, how we are enabled by\ntheir good offices to spend the Sabbath, with the descriptions of hell\nwith all its terrors and all the gloom characterizing the Sabbaths our\nforefathers had to spend. The Sunday newspaper is an absolute blessing\nto the American people, a picture gallery, short stories, little poems,\na symposium of brain and intelligence and refinement and—divorce\nproceedings.\n\nAs I have said, the good will and the fair treatment of the American\npress have nearly always been my lot. There have been some misguided\npeople who have said harsh things, but when I remember all the\nmisguided things I have done, I am inclined to be charitable for their\nshortcomings.\n\nI do not know that I have anything else to say, except that I wish you\nall good luck and sunshine and prosperity, and enough of it to last you\nthrough a long life.\n"
}