NEWSPAPER CONTROL IN AMERICA
By Robert Homan
From the summer 1967 issue of National Socialist World
One of the more widely recognized virtues of the American way of life has been its "official" national philosophy, as set forth in the First Amendment of the Constitution, that "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...." Throughout America's history an independent and competitive press has been regarded as essential to the effective maintenance of her republican form of government. It was the press's responsibility to provide factually the news and information necessary for the maintenance of a conscious and alert citizenry. The obvious importance of this task, and the inherent power and prestige which accompanied it, quite naturally resulted in a recognition of, and a respect for, the institution of journalism in America. American journalism's enormous capacity to organize and arouse public opinion for or against anything or anyone, and also the constitutionally guaranteed immunity from the threat of governmental restriction and suppression, elevated the press to a coveted plane of influence which was appropriately termed the "Fourth Estate."
The American press of today is a far cry from that which existed in the days of Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine. The revolutionary technological advances which the newspaper field has undergone in the last century have been profound. Today the size, material quality, and format of newspapers, as well as the ability to provide a metropolitan area containing hundreds of thousands of readers with several editions a day, would certainly amaze the Founding Fathers. Yet, despite this advance in newspaper technology, they would probably be shocked by the growing monopolistic centralization ofAmerican newspapers and disgusted by the kind of managed news which is being presented with a straight face to the American people.
It is the purpose of this article to demonstrate how an influential minority, which constitutes only 2.9% of the total U.S. population,1 has effectively achieved dominion over America's newspaper industry. Some readers will be shocked at the presented facts and figures; others will scoff—but no one can ignore them. They are as real as the Jewish people themselves.
Today, few people would deny the existence of newspaper monopolies. However, many people fail to realize the alarming proportions monopolization has reached and just who is in control of this highly influential medium. The degree of monopoly in America, considering that the country was founded upon the precepts of independent thought and free enterprise, truly staggers the imagination:
'In 94 percent of the cities in the United States that have daily newspapers, there are no locally competing newspapers.... A tendency toward concentration of ownership has been manifesting itself in the following ways: (a) the formation of newspaper chains, particularly regional in scope in more recent years, (b) the elimination of all except one daily in cities of less than 50,000 population, (c) the combination of two papers under one publisher in cities of 50,000 to 400,000, and (d) the survival of competition only in cities of more than 400,000 population.'2
Time magazine, in an article accurately titled "No Competition," stated that, although daily circulation of news- papers has increased from forty-five million to sixty million since 1945, the number of American cities with competitive dailies has shrunk by almost one-half, from 117 to 60. The article went on to say that the number of towns with newspapermonopolies has increased to 1,382.3
In a later article it was reported that:
'...Since chains not only stifle competitors but k i l l newspapers (generally by merger), their effect has been dramatic. From a high-water mark of 2,461 daily papers in 1916, the number has steadily fallen, to 1,760 today. It is still dropping. Daily newspaper competition has all but disappeared. It survives in only 60 of the country's 5,911 cities—and in two-thirds of these the competition is token, i.e., between morning and afternoonpapers.'4
Monopoly newspapers, like an insatiable fire, require more and more "links" to their chain, which assures them of more influence, narrows the number of competitors in the field, and thus allows for a greater profit by increased and exclusive patronage. Since monopolists don't like to admit their policies destroy initiative and competition, a rationale is developed. This rationale usually explains that modern-day high costs require fewer but bigger newspapers. Such newspapers, they claim, provide greater efficiency, broadened news coverage, in-depth reporting, more special columns—a regular reader's Utopia. The fact that such papers also become uniform in news coverage, i.e., in what the public is allowed to read and know about, is accepted by most newspapermen as inevitable.
In a study of the Midwestern newspaper monopolists, John and Mike Cowles (who among their other holdings own Look magazine), William Barry Furlong comments:
'...Inboth Minneapolis and Des Moines, the editors and executives stress the "competition" offered them by radio and television. But in both cities, the Cowles brothers—like monopoly publishers almost everywhere—own all or part of local radio and TV stations....High standards in journalism do not spring from any virtue inherent in a monopoly....
The truth is that not even the most scrupulous and thoughtful of publishers can overcome all of the defects of monopoly censorship. No matter how vigorous and fair he is in printing ideas antagonistic to his own, he cannot provide that intellectual climate in which ideas germinate. For he retains the triumphant weapon of modern conflict: the initiative. He has the first chance to offer ideas; the opposition is never in a position to do much but respond to them, and nothing can be more frustrating than always being on the defensive.'5
The intense consolidation of newspapers into monopolies, which has resulted in the American public being offered only biased and censored news, is an event of recent years. The formation of large newspaper chains began around the turn of the century, and was restricted more or less to the urban industrial centers of the nation, which then contained about forty percent of the country's population. This was the period when the newspaper fortunes of men like E. W. Scripps, William Randolph Hearst, Joseph Medill (grandfather of Robert McCormick), and Joseph Pulitzer—the first notable Jew in the field—were fast on the rise and gaining momentum.
Although Jewish newspaper enterprises like Pulitzer's were increasing, the bulk of America's news media still resided in Gentile hands. This native American control was first overcome by the Jewish permeation of the Gentile newspaper chains. Usually, such infiltration was accomplished in periods of instability and chaos. A classic example of this process took place in Chicago at the turn of the century. In 1900, Hearst entered two newspapers, the Chicago American and the Chicago Examiner, into the city's field of competing newspapers. The circulation managers of these two new papers were Max and Moe (Moses) Annenberg, immigrant Jews.6
The Annenberg brothers were determined to "make good" and were not averse to using strong-arm tactics and violence to achieve their ends. Hearst wanted more circulation, but there were twelve competing daily newspapers in Chicago, the most formidable of which was Robert McCormick's Tribune. The Annenberg brothers, after surveying the situation, proceeded to "convince" newsboys and newsstand owners that it was in their interest to buy more copies of the American and the Examiner than they could possibly sell. When that tactic did not produce the desired results, the Annenbergs resorted to "discouraging" newsboys and newsstand dealers from handling the papers of Hearst's competitors. The Chicago News and McCormick's Tribune became alarmed and proceeded to retaliate. Thus, the Chicago newspaper circulation war was on. Early in the conflict, McCormick enticed the Annenberg brothers away from Hearst with an offer of $20,000 a year.7 As is usual for the Jews, loyalty was only pocketbook deep.
When the Annenbergs moved over to the Tribune, they brought with them their most efficient "associates," men like "Mossy" Enright, Red Connors, Walter Stevens, and others—all of whom later became prominent in the Chicago gang wars.8 The more ruthless and cold-blooded these men were, the better the Annenbergs liked it:
'The Tribune's truck of sluggers lay in wait at strategic points for the agents of Hearst's Examiner, the new name for the morning edition of the American. When they appeared, they were greeted with fusillades of shots that brought police and ambulances to the scene....
How Annenberg comported himself on the Tribune in 1911 may be shown by a few examples.
A typical newsboy slugging was that staged by Bob Holbrook, one ofAnnenberg's men.
On August 22, 1911, Charles Gallanty, a newsboy at Chicago Avenue and Robey Street, refused to take thirty additional Tribunes, which he knew he could not sell. Bob Holbrook, one of Annenberg's men... smashed him in the face and knocked him down. When the boy rose he was knocked down again. This was repeated several times, with horrified spectators watching but deterred from interfering by Holbrook's assistants. Holbrook then tried to drag the newsboy into the alley, there to finish his work in privacy. The newsboy desperately clutched a weighing machine. He was then knocked unconscious and kicked repeatedly as he lay on the ground, blood pouring from his mouth.
On June 20, 1912, C. D. Ray, a newsboy, swore out a warrant charging that Max Annenberg had jumped from a truck and knocked him to the street, there kicking him repeatedly, in the presence of two unconcerned detectives. Annenberg was exonerated.'9
The Annenberg terror squad had perfected its methods of intimidation and head-smashing to an art. Its efficiency was reflected in the Tribune's circulation increase and the Examiner's corresponding drop in sales. By the time the circula- tion war had ended, twenty-seven newsdealers had been killed and countless more injured. This period is regarded by many observers as the beginning of organized crime and gangsterism in Chicago.10 However, it was also another instance of the fratricidal slaughter in which Aryan man has engaged since before the time ofthe Greeks. The Gentile newspapers lined up in battle formation and showed each other no mercy. Meanwhile the Jews, as throughout history, offered their services to the highest bidder, and, with a minimum of loss, secured for themselves advantages far out of proportion to their contribution. When the smoke had cleared in Chicago it became plain the only real winners were the Annenbergs. Mute testimony to their success was the elimination of four out of the twelve competing daily newspapers in Chicago between 1900 and the close of the circulation war.
From Chicago the Annenberg brothers went on to greater accomplishments. M a x Annenberg was transferred from the Tribune to the New York Daily News. Moe Annenberg founded his own news bureau, General News Bureau, and developed it into a national wire service which reported sporting news. Moe Annenberg explored and exhausted every possible avenue through which he could increase his power. In the mid-1930's he acquired two Philadelphia newspapers, the Inquirer and the News. He also kept "huge sums ofcash on hand for quick deals—some ten million dollars ready to rush in and buy should Hearst die or retire."11 Hearst's longevity outlasted Annenberg's, however, who died in the early 1940's, leaving his publishing business to his son, Walter Annenberg (who also owns TV Guide, the magazine with the second-largest circulation in America). Moe Annenberg was prevented from acquiring any further newspaper properties— although he owned many magazines—due to his abrupt appearance in the late 1930's before a Chicago federal grand jury.
Annenberg was required to reconcile his actual income with that which he had acknowledged to the federal government for income tax purposes. He was sent to a federal prison in the largest income- tax-evasion case of his time, involving some $9,500,000.12
William Randolph Hearst was perhaps one of the most contro- versial figures in the history of American journalism. As lord of his domain, Hearst was held responsible for everything that happened within his vast newspaper and magazine publishing complex. No one noticed or bothered to investigate the many Jewish advisors and top Jewish organizational executives who constantly accompanied Hearst wherever he went. Jews like Jacob Gortatowsky, Moses Koenigsberg, and Paul Block were the men that actually ran the Hearst enterprises. These Jews came to know Hearst better than he knew himself. They knew his likes and dislikes, his strengths and his weaknesses, his idiosyncrasies. In short, they knew how to placate Hearst and how to manipulate his tremendous power and influence for their own ends—the ends of organized Jewry.
Jacob Gortatowsky, known as "Gorty" by Hearst, was the top executive under Hearst. He was general manager of the Hearst newspapers from 1939 to 1955 and from 1955 until his recent death was chairman of the Hearst Corporation and president of King Features Syndicate and International News Service.13 At this writing, his former positions are still vacant. Another key Jew in the Hearst organization was Moses Koenigsberg, who was "one of his [Hearst's] most trusted lieutenants...highly-paid president of six of Hearst's news and feature services."14
Paul Block, a Jewish advertiser turned newspaper owner, created his fortune through his association with Hearst. Block was literally Hearst's shadow and had his nose in most of Hearst's business transactions:
'PaulBlock is the only publisher in America closely associated with William Randolph Hearst....
Block and Hearst have engaged in numerous news- paper deals. Time claimed (April 4, 1938) that "partly with Hearst money, Block acquired nine substantial dailies by 1931," and for many years before becoming a publisher Paul Block Associates handled Hearst advertising. In 1927 Block and Hearst invaded Pittsburgh and the result was a slaughter of the press....
In 1937 another Block-Hearst deal took place, which Editor & Publisher reported involving more than $2,500,000 with Block obtaining complete control of the Post-Gazette...
Editor & Publisher (September 18, 1937) quoted Block saying that Hearst "helped finance" his purchase of the Pittsburgh Post and Sun ten years earlier, and that "when the Pittsburgh deal was consummated Mr. Hearst retained a 'considerable amount of stock' in the Post- Gazette on which Block had an option."'15
Besides his dealings with Hearst, Paul Block had many "business connections" in New York City. It was well known that New York Mayor James J. Walker's "closest advisor was Paul Block."1 6 In 1932 Block's name came up in the New York case of Mayor Walker, and it was revealed that they had a joint stock-exchange account which the two had "shared from February, 1927, to August, 1929, and from which the Mayor cleared $246,692.76 without the investment of a cent on his own part...."17
In the late 1930's Hearst's 220 million dollar empire was threatened with total financial ruin. American Jewry had set out to destroy Hearst because of his pro-German and pro-Italian leanings. When Hearst returned to America from his European tour with an exclusive news service with the National Socialist Reich and a weekly column penned by Göring, the Jews were furious. They began to boycott the Hearst newspapers, and finally Hearst was forced to completely dissociate himself from Germany. Organized Jewry wanted no exchange of ideas between Germany and America which might create a rapport between the two countries. They succeeded in preventing such an exchange.
At the same time Hearst was reeling under the economic blows the Jews were leveling at him, he continued to finance the enterprises of his Jewish "friends." Hearst was not only being beaten to death by the Jews, but bled as well. He could not afford to finance the private newspaper chains of Jews like Paul Block and Moe Annenberg and also expect to maintain his own newspapers. Yet this is exactly what he did:
'...Paul Block and Associates is a New York advertising firm with which Hearst has long done business. This firm nominally owns Consolidated Publica- tions, Inc., which operates the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Milwaukee Sentinel, the Toledo Blade, the Newark Star-Eagle,... and the Duluth Herald....
According to Poor's Register of Directors for 1935 Paul Block is president and director of the Pittsburgh Post-Dispatch and the Milwaukee Sentinel, which Fortune asserted Hearst actually owned.' 18
The extent to which Hearst permitted the Jews to use him and his newspapers reveals a naïve side of his character. For instance, when Paul Block's Consolidated Publications defaulted on notes amounting $500,000 in 1932, it was Hearst who stepped in and pulled the Jewish chestnuts out of the fire.
Another example was Hearst's relationship with Louis B. Mayer, the Jewish motion picture mogul of Metro-Goldwin- Mayer. Mayer "went to great lengths to lure him [Hearst] into the fold....The main attraction was Hearst and his twenty-two newspapers."19'
...The top man at the studio was pudgy Louis B. Mayer, a shrewd, ruthless egotist who was not above demanding intimate favors from actresses in return for contracts. Mayer regarded Hearst with sincere although not disinterested reverence....
Mayer knew a good thing when he saw it. Maybe Fox and some of the other studios had stars he wanted, but only M.G.M. had William Randolph Hearst and Marion Davies.'20
Mayer was not the only Jew in Hollywood who got Hearst to invest in his movie company. Warner Brothers (Harry, Sam, Al, and Jack Eichelbaum) also persuaded Hearst to buy blocks of their stock.21 Hearst was fascinated by the pomp and semi-regal glamour of Hollywood. In this Jewish world of fantasy Hearst could find escape from the burdensome problems of administering a mammoth newspaper organization and all its attendant worries. After all, he could trust the reins of his fleet of publications to "Gorty" or Moses, couldn't he? A n d so the Jews enticed him further into their wonderland, and he followed them trustingly. In Citizen Hearst, W. A. Swanberg gives a revealing glimpse of the Jews' real attitude toward Hearst, and America in general:
'...Ofthe films Miss Davies had made since coming to M.G.M....only the first had made money. It was growing hard to coax exhibitors to take her films. At a Culver City sales meeting, Mayer gave one of his fiery pep talks and asked if there were any questions.
"Yes," said one of the salesmen. "I would like to ask why do we handle the pictures of Marion Davies?"
To Mayer, this was near treason....he spoke of Miss Davies' artistry, of her friendship with Hearst, and of the valuable publicity the Hearst press was giving all M.G.M. pictures....He traced Hearst's own history, from his turbulent boyhood to his ownership of the nation's greatest chain of newspapers, and became carried away by his own enthusiasm.
"This," he told the salesmen, "is what I want to impress upon you gentlemen. This is the spirit that has made America great. We live in a land of opportunity! God bless America!"'22
Although an ardent anti-communist, Hearst failed to recognize the fact that the Jews were the brains behind Marxism. Even in the early days of his newspaper career, Hearst consorted with Jews who later proved themselves to be of invaluable assistance to communism.
Around the turn of the century, Hearst was involved with the Wall Street banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., in a fifty-million- dollar deal which resulted in the wrecking of the New York Third Avenue Railroad, to the benefit of the Metropolitan Street Railway.23 Kuhn, Loeb & Co., under the management of Jacob Schiff, was the Jewish banking firm which contributed over twenty million dollars to the Jewish-inspired and run Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. But Hearst refused to believe that capitalists, albeit Jewish ones, could possibly have any sympathies for communism, much less support it.
Another American who had at his command an impressive newspaper organization was "Colonel" Robert McCormick, late owner of the Chicago Tribune. McCormick was an ultra- conservative and an individualist in every sense of the word. His anti-communism was matched only by his pro-Americanism in intensity. Like Hearst, he strongly believed Roosevelt's policies would lead America into a war. In late 1941, McCormick published the contents of some government documents which dealt with U.S. war preparations.24 The tone of the documents clearly indicated that they were designed with aggression in mind, and not defense. Revelation of the war plans in McCormick's newspapers aroused the wrath of not only the Roosevelt administration, but American Jewry as well. When Roosevelt failed in his attempt to have McCormick tried for treason, the Jews sought to destroy McCormick's newspapers and wire services, and they almost succeeded. Only McCormick's long-established reputation and his ability to attack his assailants when attack looked impossible saved him from ruin. As for the war plans, any revelation at that late a date (December 4, 1941) was destined to failure. Roosevelt's quarantine of Japan and his unreasonable demands upon her sovereignty had already determined America's entry into the war.
McCormick's dealings with the Annenbergs have already been discussed. Whether or not McCormick was aware of the Jewish nature of communism is not known. That McCormick held a rather low opinion of the Jews is illustrated in Frank C. Waldrop's biography of the Colonel, McCormick of Chicago
'This ungenerous language has been taken by some as settled evidence that McCormick was at heart fearful of Jews, repelled by their company and sneering in spirit as to their aspirations. Certainly it cannot be denied that on occasion in the presence of Americans of Jewish extraction he lacked his usual manners. In one instance he went so far as to mock the accent and forms of speech of an earlier speaker at the same luncheon table.' 25
This apparent anti-Semitism did not prevent the Colonel from selling the Washington (D.C.) Times-Herald to the Washington Post, which was owned by the Jew, Eugene Meyer. McCormick explained that he sold the paper to Meyer because Meyer was a "professional," and he didn't want to sell it to "amateurs."26 What most accounts of the 1954 transaction failed to mention was that the Times-Herald was under Jewish boycott because of its editorial support of Senator Joseph McCarthy and his investigations of communist infiltration of the U.S. government. Unable to sell local retail advertising space, the paper had shrunk to a fraction of its previous size and was losing nearly a million dollars a year at the time of its forced sale to Meyer.
Evidently McCormick thought he could handle the Jews and "keep them in their place." The Tribune's staff, with its large "minority" contingent, reflects this attitude. For example, Ivan Annenberg, the son of M a x Annenberg, owns "'substantial' stock in the Chicago Tribune-New York News company (valued at $42,000 a share)."27 Louis Rose, another Jew, became quite prominent in the Tribune hierarchy. Rose, brother-in-law of the late M a x Annenberg, received $110,000 a year as director of circulation. "He is the only executive that can stop the presses (with a buzzer that blows a siren in the press room)."28 Jews like Annenberg, Rose, and Guggenheim (who married the Colonel's niece, Alicia Patterson, and now runs the New York newspaper, Newsday), found themselves in positions of power whereby they could censor and edit anti-communist news reporting which emanated from the McCormick newspapers. Such news would report the various communist "fires" which broke out, but failed to identify the Jewish arsonists behind them. Since the Colonel's death, even the reporting of the communist fires has become increasingly poor.
One more important Gentile newspaper chain which should be mentioned here is that of John Knight, which owns seven newspapers in Ohio, Michigan, Florida, and North Carolina. Ben Maidenburg, a Jew, is executive editor and publisher of Knight's anchor paper, the Akron Beacon Journal. Maidenburg is also director of Knight Newspapers, Inc., and second only to Knight in the organization.29 Time magazine stated in 1962 that Samuel Newhouse "now owns, in whole or part, more newspapers than anyone else in the U.S...."30 Newhouse, the son of Jewish immigrants from Russia, has twenty-two newspapers in his syndicate and is constantly on the prowl for any newspapers, large or small, which he can buy up.
'...Nor does Newhouse's ascendancy end there. Scripps-Howard, Hearst, and the whole U.S. newspaper field are contracting. Newhouse is still growing.... Sam Newhouse seems to know best how to make daily newspapering pay.'31
Newhouse's knowledge of how to make newspapers pay involves such techniques as requiring advertisers to buy space in both the morning and evening editions. This works especially well when there are no other competing newspapers, as in Syracuse and New Orleans. Another method is buying up the weaker newspapers in cities where Newhouse papers are already established. This is easy to do, since the weaker papers can't hold out against a cut in the advertising rates. A l l the Newhouse paper has to do is wait.32 Also, when it comes to choosing whether they want to advertise in a Gentile-owned or a Jewish-owned one, Jewish merchants and department-store executives usually support the latter.
Every possible method is employed by Newhouse in his tireless search for more newspaper properties. He bought part ownership in the well-run and prosperous newspapers in Springfield, Massachusetts, and Denver, Colorado, by acquiring interests in estates. When Newhouse bought the family-run Portland Oregonian he was not content to own one of the city's only two newspapers; he wanted the Portland Journal as well. He then set about creating hostile feelings between the management and employees of the Journal. A strike was called, and the ensuing financial losses were more than the Gentile owners could bear. They were forced to sell to Newhouse. The employees were indignant. They realized that Newhouse had used them to gain control of the Journal and issued a statement to that effect.33
But it was a little late for protests; Newhouse and organized Jewry had what they went after.
Newhouse's other properties "include not only his newspapers but three radio stations, six TV stations and two publishing firms, a 66% interest in Conde Nast and Street & Smith. By conservative estimate, these possessions are worth $250 million today. They produce a handsome annual gross in excess of$125 million."34
The skyrocketing growth of the Newhouse newspaper monolith has alarmed many citizens and public officials. United States Senator Wayne Morse stood up on the floor of the Senate in 1960 and cried, "The American people need to be warned before it is too late about the threat which is arising as a result of the monopolistic practices of the Newhouse interests."35 The Newhouse threat is very real, and it is growing rapidly. Newhouse is constantly breaking his own records as to the amount of cash he spends purchasing newspapers. He paid forty-two million dollars for the New Orleans Times-Picayune and States-Item in 1962, and fifty million in 1967 for the Cleveland Plain Dealer—"the highest price ever recorded for a U.S. newspaper."36
Whereas Newhouse has concentrated on acquiring as many newspapers as possible, other Jewish publishers have concen- trated on making their newspapers centers of news dissemina- tion for other newspapers across the country. Two examples are the Washington Post and the New York Times. A sophisticated demeanor lends respectability to these newspapers, but fails to eradicate the ever-present news control and censorship.
Before Eugene Meyer bought the Washington Post, back in 1933, he held varied and influential positions in the government.
Meyer, the son of a Jewish family from Germany, had gone to Yale and then to Europe to study in the counting houses of his father's associates in Hamburg, Berlin, Paris, and London. In 1917, Bernard Baruch—a prominent Jew in governmental circles—brought Meyer to Washington to head a division of the War Industries Board. In 1918, Woodrow Wilson named Meyer director of the War Finance Corporation. Meyer became an important figure in the Harding and Coolidge administrations and was responsible for reorganizing the Federal Farm Loan Board.37 Meyer was the author of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation Act, and was made chairman of the R F C when the act was passed. Upon his purchase of the Washington Post, Meyer resigned as governor of the Federal Reserve Board, to which he had been appointed by Hoover in 1930.38 Through the years, Meyer acquired other properties, among which was the news magazine, Newsweek.
New York City is the journalistic and publishing capital of the nation. In this city are centered most of the major publishing houses in America. The majority of the news which American newspapers print, other than local news, emanates either from Washington, D.C. or New York. Among the few surviving news- papers in New York is the New York Post, which is owned by Dorothy Schiff. Dorothy's grandfather was the infamous Jacob Schiff, of Kuhn, Loeb & Co.
Of all the newspapers in the country, the Jewish-owned New York Times is regarded by most liberals as the ne plus ultra of complete and accurate news reporting. The Sulzbergers are the Jewish owners of the Times and are descended from the Jew who acquired the paper in the last century: Adolph Ochs. The Times is the unofficial social, fashion, entertainment, political, and cultural guide of the nation. Its Jewish influence and ideas reach into every stratum ofAmerican life. The Jewish New York Times has become "the closest thing there is to an American national newspaper. It sells in 11,464 U.S. cities and towns and in 2,578 (or 84% of all) U.S. counties."39 More than halfofthe American college presidents read the Times. In a recent survey it was found that the Times was selling 2,150 copies daily at Harvard; 1,225 at Yale; 700 at the University of Chicago; and 375 at the University of California. "The Times is equally The Newspaper of Wall Street and...Madison Avenue." In Washington, D.C., fifty copies of the Times are sent to the White House daily. Seventy-one embassies subscribe to the Times as well, including the Soviet Embassy; some copies even reach Peking.40 "The Times is the Fifth Estate, the standard against which others are judged, the chosen paper."41
The result of this reliance on the Jewish-owned and -con- trolled newspapers as to what is "newsworthy" is the replacement of Aryan values and thoughts by Jewish ones. The Jewish perspective on politics, culture, and society—on all those aspects ofhuman endeavor which contribute to civilization—is impressed upon the American intellectual community. "The superficialities ofJewishness, in short, are getting to be more and more a part of the American culture... the U.S. is growing more Jewish..."42
One can make a numerical estimate of the degree of Jewish control over the American press by referring to published circulation figures of newspapers and to trade publications which name newspaper owners and principal executives. In order to keep the work involved within reasonable bounds, and because of the relative paucity of information on very small newspapers, the survey was limited to newspapers with circulations above 150,000. There were seventy-eight of these in 1966. This is a large enough sampling to yield statistically meaningful results and should be approximately representative of American newspapers as a whole. These newspapers are listed alphabetically below, with their circulations:43
These seventy-eight newspapers, with a total circulation of 25.3 million, account for nearly half (42 percent) of the newspapers sold each day in the United States. Of them, seventeen are owned outright by Jews. One Jew, Samuel I. Newhouse, owns eight of them, namely:
Birmingham News
Cleveland Plain Dealer Denver Post
Newark Star-Ledger
New Orleans Times-Picayune New York: Long Island Press Portland Oregonian
St. Louis Globe-Democrat
These eight papers have a combined circulation of 2.1 million. If we add to them only the Annenberg, Block, Guggenheim, Meyer,4 4 Pulitzer, Schiff, and Sulzberger newspapers with circulations above 150,000, namely:
New York Newsday (Guggenheim)
New York Post (Schiff)
New York Times (Sulzberger)
Philadelphia Inquirer (Annenberg) Philadelphia News (Annenberg) Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Block)
St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Pulitzer) Toledo Blade (Block)
Washington Post (Meyer-Graham)
We have a total daily circulation of 5.5 million. Finally, when we add the Jew-dominated Hearst, McCormick, and Knight newspaper groups discussed above, this total rises to 12.6 million, or one-half of the combined circulation of the nation's major newspapers.45
It should be noted that these figures can only be regarded as a lower limit, for it has not been feasible to establish definitely the Jewishness or non-Jewishness of all the principal figures associated with the seventy-eight newspapers listed above. Only those persons established beyond any doubt as Jews have been so labeled here, and only those papers where the Jews involved are clearly able to exercise their influence over the paper's editorial policy have been counted as Jew-controlled. Thus, for example, the Washington Star, under the control of Samuel H. Kauffmann, is not included among the Jewish papers, because Kauffmann is listed in Who's Who in America as an "Episcopalian." There are numerous other suspicious cases, but without more detailed digging one can only guess that the actual percentage of American Newspaper circulation under direct Jewish control—either through outright ownership or through key executive and editorial positions—probably lies between fifty-five and sixty-five percent.
One very important aspect of effective control over newspapers which has not yet been dealt with is advertising. This area is where the real power lies for organized Jewry to make or break a newspaper:
...On the average, anywhere from two-thirds to three-fourths of the revenue of a newspaper is derived from advertising. The advertising and circulation mana- gers can, through the policies they follow, do much to determine the papers personality....In the minds of some critics, financial pressures are frequently too great, and the non-advertising content is too often shaped by the demands of this pressure.46
The essential fact to remember here is that newspapers are not paid for by their subscribers, but by their advertisers. It is advertising revenue—not the nickels or dimes paid by a newspaper's readers—that largely pays the editor's salary and yields the owner's profit.
A recent example of how a courageous and uncompromising stand for ideals by a newspaper can invite the wrath of an angry Jewry upon it is the case of the Atlanta Times. The Atlanta Times, which began publishing in the summer of 1964, was instituted as a direct challenge to the highly liberal, pro- integration, and Jewish-favored Atlanta newspapers, the Journal and the Constitution. In the opinion of many Georgians, the Journal and the Constitution were a "disgrace to all red- blooded, white Southerners."47 Thus, when the Atlanta Times appeared, the city's first new daily paper in sixty-one years, there was wide enthusiasm and support for it. The Times was a staunchly conservative paper and had as its publisher segregationist Judge James C. Davis.
Over 4,500 backers paid out more than two-and-a-half million dollars for the new paper, buying shares in the Times at $2.50 each. Essentially, the Atlanta Times was a grass-roots protest against managed and one-sided news. The Jews stifled this attempt to offer the news-starved public uncensored information by applying their time-tested technique of cutting off the financial lifeblood of a newspaper—its advertising. Despite the tremendous local support and small local advertising it attracted in its favor, the Times could not get any large advertisers. Atlanta's three largest retail stores—Sears, Roebuck & Co., Davison-Paxson Co., and Rich's Department Store—refused to sign advertising contracts with the new and promising paper. The lack of major advertising spelled the Times doom, and it was discontinued on August 31, 1965. Today, only the liberal morning Constitution and the evening Journal, both of which are owned by the Cox newspaper chain of Ohio, exist in Atlanta—quite to the satisfaction of the Jews.
In order to obtain a rough numerical estimate of the degree of indirect Jewish control over American Newspapers through advertising, a sampling of the advertising content of one newspaper was made. In line with the above example of the boycott of the Atlanta Times, a typical edition48 of the Atlanta Sunday Journal Constitution was chosen. Because of the many hundreds of smaller advertisements, only full-page ads were included in the sampling. There were fifty-five such ads in the paper chosen, paid for by twenty separate firms. Heading the list of advertisers were the three department stores mentioned above: Rich's Department Store, with twenty-two full-page ads; Davison-Paxson Co., with eight pages; and Sears, Roebuck & Co., with four pages.
Richard H. Rich (born Rosenheim), of Rich's Department Store, is a Jew.49 Davison-Paxson Co. is a subsidiary of R. H. Macy & Co., of New York, and the chairman of the board of directors of R. H. Macy & Co. is J. Isidor Straus, a Jew.50
The seventeen other advertisers were: American Tire Co. (Uniroyal, Inc.), one page; Atlantic Thrift Stores, one page; Citizen's Jewelry, one page; Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., two pages; Ford Motor Co., two pages; General Foods Corporation, one page; Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., one page; Haverty's Furniture, one page; Henderson Furniture, one page; Hush Puppies, one page; K-Mart (S. S. Kresge Co.), one page; Kraft Foods (National Diary Products Corporation), two pages; Ozite Corporation, one page; Plymouth (Chrysler Corporation), one page; Trust Co. of Georgia, one page; Western Auto, one page; and Zayre Corporation, two pages.
Of these seventeen, Citizen's Jewelry and the Zayre Corporation—at least—are Jewish. Mike and Harry Ellman are the chairman and president, respectively, of Citizen's Jewelry, and Marjorie Weinstein is the vice-president and secretary.5 1 As for the Zayre Corporation, it is a department store chain distinguished by having as its chairman, vice-chairman, and president Morris, Max, and Stanley Feldberg, respectively. Its three senior vice-presidents are Milton Levy, Burton Stern, and Sumner Feldberg.52
Thus, three large Jewish department stores and one Jewish jewelry store paid for thirty-three out of the fifty-five pages of ads—sixty percent! Again, this is only a lower limit. Both the Trust Company of Georgia and Sears, Roebuck & Co. have several Jews among their chief executive officers, for example, but neither of these advertisers has been counted here as Jewish. It should be clear from this simple illustration that no newspaper can survive in Atlanta without the support of the Jewish community. And what is true in Atlanta is true in most of the large cities of America.
In every American city, the Jewish community is highly organized and coordinated through such organizations as the Hillel Foundation, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Jewish War Veterans. When these organizations, as representatives of Jewish businessmen, merchants, and the overall Jewish community, exert their influence you can be sure the local press heeds them. "In most areas of U.S. life, Jewish representation and influence are far higher than the proportion of Jews in the total population—only about 3%:5 3 Just how this censorship and control is exerted upon what the American reads and knows is described by Harwood L. Childs in his book, Public Opinion: Nature, Formation, and Role:
'Finally,a word regarding the various ways in which the newspaper exerts its influence. It does this by screening and selecting the items to be presented, by the way these items are presented, the emphasis and treatment accorded them, the headlines and pictures used, the typography and format employed, the position in the paper, and the skill employed in the writing and pictorial representation. During World War II, the U.S. Office of War Information used these and many other devices for exploiting news for propaganda purposes. News was played up and played down, dramatized, repeated, juxtaposed, spelled out, underscored, all short of actual falsification, to enhance its influences in desired directions.
...the aims of editors and students of Journalism do not always jibe, however, with those of newspaper owners, and when profits and ideals conflict, it is usually the ideals which suffer.'54
This disproportionately powerful political and economic control of the news media by the Jews has allowed them to choose presidential candidates, swing elections, control foreign and domestic policy, and determine generally what is to be considered as acceptable in every aspect of American culture. That this tiny but cohesive alien minority has so successfully implemented policies to its own advantage—and to the disadvantage of its gullible Gentile hosts—is an indication of the unwitting abdication of sovereignty on the part of Aryan America. "Readers may grumble about the quality of their papers, as they do for example on the West Coast and in many cities across the country, but there is little they can do. It is merely a question of taking what they get or leaving it."55 Unfortunately, too many Americans take it.
The Jews, for all practical purposes, have become the aristocrats of America. National interests are subordinated to their own interests. And, as in a true aristocracy, the actions and words of these Jewish "aristocrats" are not to be questioned by the "masses" of Gentile America. The Jewish imperium is accepted as their "divine" right to rule:
'...Sociologist Marshall Sklare notes that in the anti- Semitic past the intermarrying Jew was likely to be seeking status; today it is the Gentile who may be striving upward, as the "tastes, ideas, cultural preferences and life-styles preferred by many Jews are coming to be shared by non-Jews."'5 6
A nation is only as strong as its institutions, and, as an institution, journalism in America has ceased to serve the vital interests of the American people. Indeed, all America has suffered the fate of the city of New Orleans, where, after Jewish newspaper czar Sam Newhouse bought the city's only two newspapers, he gloated, "I just bought New Orleans."5 7
1)The World Almanac and book offacts (New York, 1966), p. 332.
2)Raymond B. Nixon, "Implications of the Decreasing Numbers of Competitive Newspapers," in Wilbur Schramm (ed.), Communications in Modern Society (University of Illinois Press,
1948), p. 43.
3) "No Competition," Time, 79 (January 19, 1962), p. 67.
4) "The Newspaper Collector," Time, 80 (July 27, 1962), p. 56.
5 William Barry Furlong, "The Midwest's Nice Monopolists—John and M i k e Cowles," Harper's Magazine, 226 (June, 1963), p. 75.
6 Ferdinand Lundberg, Imperial Hearst (New York, 1936), p. 151.
7 Ibid., p. 153.
8 W. A. Swanberg, Citizen Hearst (New York, 1961), p. 271.
9 Lundberg, op. cit., pp. 154-56.
10 Swanberg, op. cit., p. 274.
11 George Seldes, Lords of the Press (New York, 1938), p. 241.
12 "The Fall ofIvan",Time, 65 (April 4, 1955), p. 50.
13 John K. Winkler, William Randolph Hearst: A New Appraisal (New York, 1955), p. 298.
14 Swanberg, op. cit., p. 405.
15Seldes, op. cit., pp. 67-68.
16 Lundberg, op. cit., p. 250.
17 Seldes, op. cit., p. 68
18 Lundberg, op. cit., p. 330.
19 Swanberg, op. cit., p. 377.
20 Ibid., p. 387.
21 Lundberg, op. cit., p. 199.
22 Swanberg, op. cit., pp. 410-11.
23 Lundberg, op. cit., p. 117.
24 Frank C. Waldrop, McCormick of Chicago (New York, 1966), p. 256.
25 Ibid., p. 42.
26 "Two Newspaper Giants," Time, 65 (April 11, 1955), p. 59.
27 "The Fall of Ivan," p. 50.
28 Edwin H. Ford & Edwin Emery, Highlights in the History of the
29 American Press (Minneapolis, 1954), p. 386.
30 Who's Who in the Midwest (Chicago, 1965-66), p. 602. "The Newspaper Collector," p. 54.
31 Ibid.
32 Ibid.
33 "He's a New K i n d of Press Lord," Business Week, 1712 (June 23, 1962), p. 78.
34 "The Newspaper Collector," p. 54.
35 Ibid., p. 55.
36 "A Cordial Welcome for Newhouse," Time, 89 (March 10, 1967), p. 47.
3 7 John E. Drewry (ed.), More Post Biographies (Athens, Georgia, 1948), p. 204.
38 Ibid., pp. 194-95.
39 Roger Kahn, "The House of Adolph Ochs," Saturday Evening Post, 238 (October 9, 1965), p. 34.
40 Ibid., p. 33.
41 Ibid., p. 36.
42 "The New American Jew," Time, 85 (June 25, 1965), p. 34.
43 Data from Reader's Digest 1966 Almanac (Boston, 1966), pp. 350-51. Specialized financial or religious papers, such as the Wall Street Journal and the Christian Science Monitor, are not included. Also not included from the listing in Reader's Digest 1966 Almanac are three New York newspapers, the Herald-Tribune, the Journal- American, and the World-Telegram & Sun, all of which ceased publication early in 1967. Morning (M) and evening (E) papers, even when published by the same company are considered as separate newspapers and are listed separately here.
4 4 Katherine Meyer Graham, the present owner of the Washington
45 The fourteen newspapers with circulations above 150,000 in these
last three groups are:
Baltimore News American (Hearst) Boston Record-American (Hearst)
Los Angeles Herald-Examiner (Hearst) San Francisco Chronicle (Hearst)
San Francisco Examiner (Hearst)
San Francisco News-Call Bulletin (Hearst) Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Hearst)
Akron Beacon-Journal (Knight)
Charlotte Observer (Knight)
Detroit Free Press (Knight) Miami-Herald(Knight)
Chicago's American (McCormick)
Chicago Tribune (McCormick)
New York Daily News (McCormick)
46 Harwood L. Childs, Public Opinion: Nature, Formation, and Role (Princeton, 1965), p. 175.
47 "Another Voice in Atlanta," Time, 81 (June 19, 1964), p. 36-38.
48 The issue ofMay 28, 1967.
49 Who's Who in Commerce and Industry, 1966-67, p. 1096.
50 Who's Who in World Jewry, 1965, p. 964.
51 Dun & Bradstreet Million Dollar Directory, 1967, p. 2 6 9 .
52 Poor's Register of Corporations, Directors and Executives, 1967, p. 1719.
53 "The New American Jew" p. 34.
54 Childs, op. cit., p. 184.
55 Ibid., p. 186.
56 "The New American Jew," p. 35.
57 "The Newspaper Collector," p. 54.