I wouldn’t give the Mavens site any credibility for this particular question, because their earliest “citation” is from the late nineteenth-century, is unsourced, and contains a dubious bit of information that “XXX” was used as a prosign. We have a mid-19th century, sourced, definitive cite that states “30” was used as a prosign by at least two different standards.
It makes most sense to me that -30- was a purely arbitrary number assigned to mean EOT. But it does remain possible that “XXX” was some sort of pre-telegraphic standard for “end of story,” and when Western Union developed their 92 code, somebody realized XXX=30 and assigned EOT that number. I doubt it, but it is possible.
Also, I studied journalism at Medill, and nowhere have I ever encountered anyone who ended stories with “XXX.” It was always a circled “-30-”.
I tried e-mailing the author of that piece. Dunno if she is with this site anymore. (Although a Google search indicates this woman still is alive and out there.) I asked for a source for “This code was the sequence XXX, which, many decades before the rise of the pornographic film industry, was unlikely to occur as a part of the actual story.” It does seem plausible that this was done back then, as XXX just wouldn’t occur in a news report, and the mere sight of it would make it obvious that it wasn’t part of the story. Unlike 30, which frequently would appear in news reports. The problem is her claim “In order to signal the end of a transmission, it was necessary to have a code for the end of a transmission that was unmistakably not part of the transmission itself.” I can find no citation that telegraphers ever used XXX as a prosign. This would never have been a problem for a professional telegrapher. The 30 after being sent is followed by a pause waiting for the receiving operator to reply. The ordinary reply would be R - all received OK. The lack of an appropriate reply would make it obvious to the sender something was wrong.
If XXX ever was used by journalists, it had to be quite a long time ago. I remember an old black in white film about a newspaper titled “-30-”. However, the way this Mavens’ writer phrases things, it comes off as if she was basing this on some authoratative, unnamed source.
Are there any website bulletin boards where seasoned newspaper editors hang out? If XXX ever was used by reporters as she claims because it couldn’t possibly be confused with part of the story, the might know this and have a cite backing up that claim? Although I’d think a 30 in a circle would stand out just as well.
BTW, to the OP: You can dismiss that explanation: “The first wire (telegraphed) message ever sent to a press association (during the Civil War) was 30 words long and the number of words was included at the end of those messages so that operators would know they didn’t miss a word or two. The use of 30 just became the standard.” In this thread an authoritative cite was posted that telegraphers were using 30 as a prosign in 1859. The US Civil War didn’t start until 2 years later.
The “SK” that pulykamell mentioned is still used as the “end of conversation” code for TDD communications among deaf people. “SK,” incidentally, stands for “stop keying,” according to the TDD directory.
I’ve never seen XXX used for end-of-story. I was taught -30- (always on a line by itself). If Morse was using 30 (not XXX) almost 150 years ago, I think that kills the whole XXX part of the discussion.
Not necessarily. It does make sense that before the days of telegraphy that something was used as an end of story marker. If the last page got was accidentally lost between the editor and the typesetter, the lack of this end of story marker would be a tip off.
What is needed is someone to find a cite saying what, if anything, was being used as an end of story marker before the telegraph was around. Many sources claim that XXX was being used, and that later was changed to -30-. That XXX is the Roman numeral for 30 might be total coincidence, and whoever created these prosigns randomly choose 30 for end of message. However, nobody making the claim for XXX has ever provided a cite. I checked the Google Usenet archives, and all I found on this looks like wild guessing. Weren’t there any instructional manuals before 1844 that told reporters exactly what to put at the end of a story? Or books written by newpaper folks saying what they put at the end of stories? Heck, I’d have thought that there would still be the original story copy left of some early 1800s news stories. Such as those that were about a great tragedy, an important political event, etc. that someone saved for posterity. If XXX was ever used as an end of story marker, there ought to be some proof still around documenting it.
Well, I’ve emailed some mass communication history professors. We’ll see if we can get any response. I’m just wondering whether it was even necessary in pre-telegraph days to come up with end-of-story markers like “XXX” or not. I would have guessed a simple “END” would do, but journalism is full of strange traditions and conventions, so it is entirely possible “XXX” was used as an ending marker. Although my guess is that it never was.