What (very few) newspapers carried the news of the Wright Bros. first flight?

The centennial of the Wright flight gave us a rash of documentaries about the event. One program mentioned that despite the Wrights’ desire to keep a lid on the news of their successful first flight, word leaked out to the press thanks to a sloppy or blabby telegraph operator. Nonetheless, the story was carried in only a tiny number – 4 or 5 IIRC – newspapers. Does anyone know what those papers were?

Here’s one, the Virginia Pilot

Whoa! - check out the correction link, seems like low journalistic standards are nothing new.

The story on The Story

Wright news clippings

A famous one is the eyewitness report published in 1905 GLEANINGS FROM BEE CULTURE

The Scientific American refused to publish the same article.

Gleanings in Bee Culture, January 1, 1905

“This issue of the Medina, Ohio based beekeeping magazine has the distinction of publishing the first eyewitness account of the Wright Brothers’ historic manned flight in Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.
A. I. Root, the publisher of Gleanings in Bee Culture and a longtime friend of the flight pioneers, was permitted to write this first account and sent it off to “Scientific American.” After nearly a year of silence on the part of the magazine, Root wrote its editor, who responded that it was difficult to believe that the event had actually occurred and that even if it had, the airplane would never have any practical application. When Root showed this response to the Wright Brothers, they suggested that he go ahead and publish it in his beekeeping magazine.”

But the account is actually of a flight made at Huffman Prairie near Dayton, OH, and not at the outer banks (where A.I. Root was never present).

And note that there were 4 “historic manned” flights on Dec. 17, 1903. We tend to hear a lot about the first, but the succeeding 3 were longer, and the final one covered 852’ in 59 seconds.

I’ve always been bummed that “Gleanings in Bee Culture” has since shortened its name to just “Bee Culture”.

Has Scientific American (or any other place that refused to cover the event) ever admitted they were wrong?