# 1960' 1970's - clearly politically slanted news sources? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 9, 2021, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331 "2021-08-09T19:27:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2021, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/22 "2021-08-11T15:57:49Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > While the editorial section was slanted towards what passed for the Right in those days (for instance, pro-Nixon), I don’t recall the news section as being biased, except toward trashiness. OTOH, the Daily News made national news for this bit of front-page editorializing. [![](https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/200513182701-04-we-saved-new-york-once-opinion-restricted-exlarge-169.jpg) ](https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/200513182701-04-we-saved-new-york-once-opinion-restricted-exlarge-169.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2021, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/23 "2021-08-11T18:59:12Z")
Most cities has multiple papers at least until the 50s. And going further back, many openly slanted the news to a particular audience (not necessarily by politics, but often by ethnic group). People also bought multiple papers. So a Republican would buy a Republican paper and the paper that strived for objectivity. A Democrat would buy a Democratic paper and the paper that strived for objectivity. Newspapers started striving for objectivity because they’d get purchasers from both ends of the spectrum for a larger audience and circulation. Of course, orientation changes over time. When I was a kid, the _New York Post_ was a strong Democratic voice, the _Times_ leaned Republican, and the _Daily News_ leaned even more strongly Republican. There were also morning and evening papers. Evening papers died out because people would watch the local news on TV. (The _Post_ was originally an evening paper). By the 60s-70s, most newspapers had embraced the objectivity model, trying to avoid any obvious slanting of news. They reported the antiwar movement because it was a news story and kept any editorial opinion to the opinion pages. Obviously, no one was completely objective, but newspapers strove for it at least until Rupert Murdock started buying them. What happened was that news as entertainment became a major force, first on AM radio, then on cable TV. And slanted news went against the older model of objectivity making the most money – outrage fueled ratings. ---
**Author:** ![Mark\_Finn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/34f0e0/32.png) [@Mark\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mark_Finn)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2021, 11:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/24 "2021-08-12T11:34:50Z")
Not political - but in the time era: we would have the morning paper delivered - the family would read it over breakfast. My father picked up the evening paper after work - he would read it on the bus on the way home - plus it had the day’s final stock quotes, which wouldn’t have been available (except for highlights) on the evening TV (or radio) news. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2021, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/25 "2021-08-12T16:26:31Z")
I’m reading a book now about the start of the American Revolution. It is describing how most major cities of the day (Boston, Philadelphia, New York, Hartford) had numerous newspapers, and they almost always had one ‘loyalist’ paper and one ‘Whig’ or ‘Patriot’ newspaper. So depending on what side you were on, one of those papers was most assuredly ‘slanted.’ So this has been going on for centuries. ---
**Author:** ![md-2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@md-2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md-2000)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2021, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/26 "2021-08-12T18:05:50Z")
> [@Spoons](#): > > The commercial radio spectrum has always been limited–there’s a reason why our AM transistor radios went from 5.3 KHz to 11.6KHz (or whatever); and our FM radios went from 89.9 to 109.9 MHz (or whatever) My point was that due to the limited frequencies available (which had been allocated for VHF TV, AM commercial radio, and later UHF TV and FM radio) the government(s) made an effort to ensure that the limited amount of broadcast space/time was not dominated by a particular slant of propaganda. > [@Spoons](#): > > I don’t think the CRTC ever did that. Radio stations were free to set their own formats in the market where they were located. AFAIK, they most certainly did when the UofT was applying (and failed) to get a broadcast license in the mid-70’s. The CRTC’s aim was to ensure a variety of services. Trying to be a me-too top 40 was unlikely to permit a license - even then, when FM was open for at least a decade. I had an old tube TV in high school and with our house antenna pre-aimed to Buffalo we barely got more than snow from Barrie, even in the evenings. The rich houses had two of those multi-bar (YAGI?) antennas, the second one pointed to Barrie and so got better reception. And for example of addressing bias, here’s the Canadian take on “fair and balanced” from 1968: > On July 9th, the CRTC’s “Air of Death” report addresses balance requirements as outlined in the Broadcasting Act. According to the Act, the system should provide, “reasonable, balanced opportunity for the expression of differing views on matters of public concern.” The CRTC decides that every program does not have to describe all sides of an issue. However, controversial issues should be dealt with fairly and honestly within the total programming offered by the licensee. And in 1972: > The CRTC puts forth a policy proposal for FM radio on April 19, suggesting that FM should be distinct from AM. This policy effectively makes community radio a viable communications option, and paves the way for a number of “first local radio services” to open up throughout the country. At the same time, Quebec continues to pursue its own policies and begins providing special funding for community programming. Since this is not a Canadian-only thread, more aimed at the USA, I guess homework for our readers would be - what were the restrictions for content and balance in the USA, given they have the First Amendment? Presumably the same issue of responsible use of the limited spectrum would factor in. I recall that until the 70’s(?) there was a requirement in the USA to provide “equal time” for hot issues discussed? ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2021, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/27 "2021-08-12T21:26:00Z")
The “Equal Time” provision in the U.S. (which is still in effect for broadcasters) requires that if air time is given or sold to a candidate for political office, it has to be made available equally for all other candidates for that same office. It does not require that a broadcast station make any time available at all, only that it treat all candidates equally. The Fairness Doctrine (which was repealed with the growth of cable) used to be a loosely interpreted rule that broadcasters pay some attention to important issues, and at least give some representation to both sides of an issue. What was “important” was generally left to the individual broadcaster’s judgement. When I worked in broadcasting in the 70s, the rough guideline was that broadcasters devote 6% of their airtime to news, 3% to public affairs/public service (that’s really where the Fairness Doctrine applied) and 3% to other non-entertainment programming. There was a maximum of 30% commercials, leaving 60% for entertainment programming. There was no requirement that public affairs be a program. A lot of it was in the form of public service announcements for the public library, pre-recorded handouts from our elected officials and other stuff that required virtually no effort on our part. ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2021, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/28 "2021-08-12T21:44:09Z")
> [@Mark\_Finn](#): > > My father picked up the evening paper after work - he would read it on the bus on the way home - plus it had the day’s final stock quotes, which wouldn’t have been available (except for highlights) on the evening TV (or radio) news. By the late '80s and early '90s, when I started working in downtown Chicago, the city no longer had an afternoon newspaper (the last major afternoon paper, the Daily News, had folded in 1978). But, at that time, both the Tribune and the Sun-Times offered “afternoon extra” editions of their papers, which were largely sold by vendors outside of the train stations and major bus stops; those editions were the morning’s editions, which had been wrapped inside of a small section that contained the closing stock market quotes, and a few breaking news stories. My recollection is that those editions, too, went by the wayside by the late '90s. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2021, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/29 "2021-08-12T22:33:34Z")
Almost universally, papers named “Republican” or “Democrat” were founded in 19th century. And many of those date back before the modern parties existed. The _Plattsburgh Republican_ was named that in 1813. Many papers were named for party affiliations, of course. But as Chuck said, associating a 20th or 21st century newspaper with the name of a party is no more than a 50/50 bet. ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2021, 11:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/30 "2021-08-13T11:29:42Z")
> So this has been going on for centuries IIRC, the earliest we got close to newspapers in the UK was in the circulation of (highly partisan) newsletters in the Civil War period: [https://www.thehistorypress.co.uk/articles/the-english-civil-war-and-the-rise-of-journalism/](https://www.thehistorypress.co.uk/articles/the-english-civil-war-and-the-rise-of-journalism/) I note that even those early ones claimed to be impartial, but were clearly identifiable with one side or the other. Likewise, subsequent newspapers seem to have been seen as belonging to one or another point of view, even if not necessarily partisan as between the political groupings of the day: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History\_of\_British\_newspapers](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_British_newspapers) Broadcasting on the other hand started in the UK with a public service concept at its heart, and that is (supposed to be?) still dominant among at least the major terrestrial broadcasters: [https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/section-five-due-impartiality-accuracy](https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/section-five-due-impartiality-accuracy) ---
**Author:** ![5\_time\_champ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/5/278dde/32.png) [@5\_time\_champ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/5_time_champ)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2021, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/31 "2021-08-29T02:05:41Z")
Not always, the long defunct [1986] St. Louis Globe-Democrat was a morning paper, very conservative. ---
**Author:** ![BippityBoppityBoo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bippityboppityboo/32/5745_2.png) [@BippityBoppityBoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BippityBoppityBoo)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2021, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/32 "2021-08-29T02:53:38Z")
> [@5\_time\_champ](#): > > St. Louis Globe-Democrat was a morning paper, very conservative In college 1968-1972 we referred to it as the St. Louis Glib-Demogogue. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2021, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/33 "2021-08-29T07:57:09Z")
The Santa Rosa, CA. newspaper to this day is the [_Press Democrat_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Press_Democrat) > **[The Press Democrat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Press_Democrat)** > > Pages for logged out editors learn more > > The Press Democrat, with the largest circulation in California's North Bay, is a daily newspaper published in Santa Rosa, California. > The newspaper was founded in 1897 by Ernest L. Finley who merged his Evening Press and Thomas Thompson's Sonoma Democrat (originally created as a voice for the Democratic Party). > Finley also bought the Santa Rosa Republican in 1927 and merged it with the Press Democrat in 1948. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2021, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/34 "2021-09-08T16:52:18Z")
I’m reading a book now about the start of the American Revolution. It is describing how most major cities of the day (Boston, Philadelphia, New York, Hartford) had numerous newspapers, and they almost always had one loyalist paper and one Whig or ‘patriot’ newspaper. That seems in many cities to have continued to this day. ---
**Author:** ![md-2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@md-2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md-2000)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2021, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/35 "2021-09-08T18:05:36Z")
I recall reading about how several influential people were mentioned as having run their own newspaper (Ben Franklin comes to mind) and I often wonder how they managed - I assume even then a newspaper would be a fairly big, involved business, several employees, not a hobby. Typesetting a full page by hand (2, double sided) would seem to be a time-consuming job, let alone writing the content or running off several hundred copies - I imagine in those days the sheets were individually printed. Would someone even have time for anything else? And how did they pay for that? Newspapers probably cost a pretty penny, so to speak… ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2021, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331/36 "2021-09-08T21:18:11Z")
No newspapers in America were dailies until 1784. Franklin’s _Pennsylvania Gazette_ appeared twice a week. Circulation in the first half of the century maxed out at about 300, so the number of copies was limited. Franklin had worked as a printer’s assistant on his older brother’s newspaper and went to England to get more experience. By the time he took over the older _Gazette_, he was perhaps the prime printer in America. He soon won many contracts and offered a complete printing business that could produce almost anything. Think of him as a businessman running a firm rather than as a lone scribbler. A good businessman: the contracts made him well to do, if not in Washington’s class. Certainly he needed to write a tremendous volume of material to fill the papers, almanacs, and other publication, but Franklin was a workhorse who toiled long hours. He and his hired printers undoubtedly filled a press page at what would be to us amateurs blinding speed. Speed meant the fulfillment of more work and more work earned more money. He had every inventive to be fast and prolific and the experience and wit to do so. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1960-1970s-clearly-politically-slanted-news-sources/948331.md?page=1)