The U.S. Civil War
and the press
The conflict
It was a war over slavery, the South in favor, the North
opposed.
But some historians point out that differences went beyond
this question.
The North was changing, industrializing. The South
continued to be basically agrarian.
Differences
Slavery was actually not every efficient by 1860. It was
cheaper to pay someone rather than care for a slave day and
night, for his or her entire life.
But complex issues don’t make good propaganda.
People rally around simple issue.
The media are best at presenting simple issues.
Slavery was a simple issue.
Abolitionists
The anti-slavery side could take extreme action in favor of
their cause., as hate obscured moderation.
John Brown’s attack at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, in 1859
inflamed hatred of the South against the North.
Slavery to fight over
The press helped to make slavery an issue worth fighting
over—worth actually going to war over.
Abolitionist newspapers launched the war of the press.
William Lloyd Garrison was most well known of the
abolitionist editors.
The Liberator
Garrison’s abolitionist newspaper was called The Liberator.
As newspapers were moving away from opinionated press of
one editor, Garrison’s newspaper was an anachronism.
At first, in the 1830s, his newspaper was a polemic, insulting,
violent publication interesting few people.
The Liberator
But slowly Garrison’s opinionated newspaper gained readers
and grew as a powerful force in favor of changed.
Garrison was an anti-slavery fanatic. But as fanatics can be,
he also was determined and courageous.
Such determined minorities often sway public opinion of the
majority.
Garrison’s violent, extreme views, and those of other
abolitionists, grew to interest mainstream journalism.
Abolitionist press
Garrison showed contempt for a country which would allow
slavery. His front page often included his slogan:
“The existing Constitutiion of the United States is a covenant
with death and an agreement with hell.”
Abolitionist press
People became angry. Angry people began arguing. As
abolitionists drummed their hatred of the South, sides
became polarized.
People no longer listened to each other, perhaps similar to
the situation regarding the abortion controversy in the United
States today.
Abolitionist influence
Influenced by the abolitionist press, abolitionists began to
glut Congress with anti-slavery bills. Slaveholders were held
up as beasts or sinners.
Abolitionists in the North were demanding decisive action.
The South was put on the defensive.
South press and revolt
Robert Barnwell Rhett and other
editors in the South published
newspapers advocating the extreme of
revolution—that is, secession from the
Union.
Rhett tried to counter abolitionist
rhetorical extremes by whipping up
public opinion to support secession.
Anger and extremism
If you’re being abused, perhaps you’d want to leave. And
Rhett responded to the abuse of the abolitionist press.
Rhett in the Charleston, S.C., Mercury, advocated secession,
presuming the North would not oppose it. He was wrong.
The black press
A few papers edited by blacks
existed before the Civil War.
Frederick Douglass was most
famous editor, a former slave from
Maryland who ran away and was
educated in New England.
He edited the North Star, an antislavery newspaper.
Frederick Douglass
Frederick Douglass became the most eloquent and poignant
of the abolitionists. His newspaper published throughout and
after the Civil War. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Su-4JBEIhXY
Modern warfare
Sometimes historians call the Civil War a dress rehearsal for
modern warfare.
New rifles and bullets were much more accurate than old.
So was artillery.
The press had the telegraph and modern printing methods to
make day-to-day war coverage possible.
Press mobilizes
When the war broke out in April 1861, the press mobilized to
cover the battles.
The military and governments were slow to deal with
modern press coverage of war.
Security vs. information
For army security, military commanders need to keep secrets.
But in a democracy, people should have the right to know
and criticize military actions.
How to balance these forces? That was the big question
regarding journalism during the Civil War.
Speed
Both the telegraph and the railroad made it possible for
journalists to transmit infomation quickly—perhaps
dangerous information.
The growth of mass circulation newspaper made the press
more widspread and powerful than it had been before.
Abraham Lincoln
Lincoln was president during the Civil War. Unlike many
politicians, he rather liked reporters and newspaper offices.
The Springfield (Ill.) News served as his political voice before
becoming president.
He regularly corresponded with editors.
Horace Greeley
Horace Greeley, anti-slavery
editor of the New York
Tribune, a mainstrem daily,
became one of the era’s most
influencial editors. He
annoyed Lincoln by
challenging him in 1862 to
tke action to emancipate the
slaves.
Lincoln’s response
In a personal letter to Greeley, Lincoln wrote:
“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union,
and is not either to save or destroy slavery.”
Lincoln did, however, announce his plans for emancipation
shortly after. We do not know if that was due to Greeley’s
influence.
Greeley’s editorials
Greeley, however, continued to criticize Lincoln for failing to
find peace, and by 1864, people in the North were getting fed
up with the war.
But Greeley did usually support Lincoln, a key newspaper
ally for him during the war.
Anti-north editors
Other editors in the North did not support Lincoln.
Many indulged in lies and sensationalism. Lincoln was
accused of being drunk during crucial decisions, drawing a
salary in gold instead of inflated paper money, even of
treason.
The La Crosse (Wis.) Democrat, as a typical anti-Lincoln
newspaper, said of Lincoln’s new draft:
“Lincoln has called for 500,000 more victims.”
Anti-government press
Lincoln and the government responded with tolerance.
Such tolerance was not part of subsequent American wars.
For example, in World Wars I and II, such anti-government
writing would likely lead to a shutdown of the newspaper, its
editor being tried for treason.
Yet invective from the press such as seen during the Civil
War was seldom part of American journalism since, even at
the height of the unpopular Vietnam War.
Objectivity
Of course, during the Civil War,
objectivity didn’t exist as a concept.
Censorship of political criticism in the
United States also was not a concept well
developed.
So as many journalists were heaping
scorn on Lincoln during the Civil War, it
might not be surprising someone would
take action—such as John Wilkes Booth,
who assassinated Lincoln in 1865.
Democrats
A good minority of Democrats in the North did not support
the war.
Lincoln tolerated anti-war journalism for some time. But in
1863, the “Copperheads” were declared traitors.
The North still found it difficult to determine the point at
which government criticism during wartime exceeded rights
of free expression.
Harmful comments
Lincoln seldom acted, even if the anti-government press was
clearly harming the war effort.
Lincoln hoped openness and honesty would be the best
policy. The press remained relatively free.
The military did not necessarily agree. It opted for
censorship.
Military censorship
But censorship of what? Military leaders had no precedent.
Military press control in the North came in three stages.
Military censorship
Stage One: 1861-62.
The post office immediately refused to mail anything to the
South.
Telegrams were leaking through; the government began to
censor them.
By July, the military began to consider restrictions on war
correspondents.
Military censorship
August 2, 1861: General George B. McClellen, commander
of the Army of the Potomac, called a rare press conference.
He called for journalists to censor themselves voluntarily,
transmitting no information of use to the enemy.
Voluntary censorship
Voluntary censorship didn’t work very well.
It might have, but rivalry grew between H.E. Thayer, the
government’s official censor in the state department, and
military censors.
Reporters became fed up with military/civilian squabbles,
decided they were no longer bound to follow voluntary
censorship guidelines.
Military takes over
Finally the war department took over all federal censorship.
Edward M. Stanton, war secretary, set policies that would
begin to change wartime journalism.
Stanton’s policies
Stanton clarified the restrictions: all journalists covering the
battles must submit stories before transmitting them, but only
military matters would be censored.
This began the second period of military censorship
development in the North.
The year was 1863.
Stanton’s policies
Stanton’s directives were clear. But they were haphazardly
enforced.
Third to work on a policy was another general, William
Tecumseh Sherman.
Sherman hated the press, thought information leaks could
cause the military to fail.
The press retaliated by spreading rumors that Sherman was
insane. Some of these stuck, and some average Americans
still remember these stories.
Sherman
Sherman finally arrested a
correspondent for transmitting
material clearly violating
censorship restrictions.
This led to the idea that
correspondents ought to be
checked out before allowed to
report, approved by the
commander.
The concept became what we
today know as accredited
correspondents.
Secrecy assured
The third phase of military censorship, 1864 to the war’s end
in 1865, was least chaotic, and most successful.
The press as a whole kept military secrecy.
So secret, in fact, that General Sherman could make his
entire “march to the sea” in the South in total secrecy.
The South
As the North toughened censorship, the South loosened
censorship.
Generals in the South generally were all right with war
correspondents—as long as they transmitted no opinions
regarding military events.
It was the opinions that so irritated commanders in the
North.
News services
Southern newspapers were served by a news service called
the Press Association, PA. It was the mirror of the North’s
Associated Press, AP.
The PA was generally the sole source of war news for the
South.
It made an agreement with the South’s military to print no
opinions or commentary.
This was unusual for the time! Some historians have called it
a revolution in the way war was covered.
The PA in the South
The PA had great influence at top levels of Confederate
government.
If a military commander censored too severely or held up
copy, the PA could complain, and the government would
issue warnings.
PA accuracy
The PA gave accurate accounts of the war, with careful
regard for secrecy and self-restraint.
However, while northern self-restraint improved in time, in
the South the PA care regarding its reporting somewhat
collapsed as it become obvious the South was losing.
PA reporters toward the end were accused of giving
information useful to the enemy.
Southern press
The South, unlike the North, had not
industrialized.
Of the 800 newspapers published in
the South, 80 were dailies, mostly
printed on small hand presses, with
small circulations.
The largest, Richmond, Va., Dispatch,
had only 18,000 circulation.
Southern press
Southern newspapers became desperately short of supplies.
Many were reduced to printing on the back of wallpaper.
Correspondents
In the North, correspondents freely traveled around battle
sites.
Such freedom was not tolerated in subsequent wars, until the
Vietnam War.
Northern correspondents even roamed around the South—in
subsequent wars, such behavior could lead to arrest and
execution as a spy.
Illustrations
Mathew Brady’s photography operations
extensively covered the Civil War.
But people could not see his photos
published, because the halftone method
didn’t exist—breaking photos into dots of
ink. Artists copied the photos as
engravings. They could be quite good.
This is an engraving based on an 1860
Brady photo of Lincoln.
Illustrations
Mathew Brady’s team made about 3,500 images of the war,
many of them lost to us today.
The photographing process was incredibly cumbersome, one
reason why we have no photo of Lincoln’s Gettysburg
Address.
Frederick Ives invented photoengraving (halftones) in 1877,
but due to expense it didn’t become common until the turn
of the century.
Summary lead
The summary, or inverted pyramid style lead, developed
during the Civil War, many historians believe.
Before that, the narrative lead was standard, such as:
“We are happy to pass along the facts of the last battle as told to
use by survivors. On a patrol Monday morning, troops met each
other near a small hill....”
Summary lead
Narrative (story-telling) leads were not common after the
Civil War. Why did they change?
Journalism historians used to think it was to guard against
possible cut telegraph lines—at least the main information
would get through.
Now, however, many historians credit Edwin M. Stanton,
secretary of war.
Stanton and leads
Stanton issued daily war progress communiqués from his
office.
These were writtin in crisp, no-nonsense style similar to
inverted pyramid lead.
They were usually published verbatim.
His influence may have helped to change correspondents’
approach to news writing.
Maps
Also new to press coverage during the Civil War was the use
of maps to indicate battles and operations.
These were often set across several columns, breaking the old
rule of one-column only.
The black press
Signficant, but often forgotten, in the story of journalism
during the Civil War is the black press. Slavery was the
central issue around which the war was fought.
The black press, perhaps more even than the rest, influenced
black culture. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObChnuSC8tA
Influence
Development of journalism during the U.S. Civil War
influenced later journalists in development of the inverted
pyramid lead, multicolumn stories, illustrations, coverage
and censorship during wartime.