of the extent to which the publishers in
Ibis abominable argument that Mr.
Combs has just put forward are beholden exclusively to the country club
set emd to ei preoccupation for keeping
their money would be lo ask a wholly
different question, and that is to whal
extent did they, for example, prefer Taft
to Eisenhower? Now lhe difference between Taft and Stevenson was a very
marked one. The differences between
Eisenhower and Stevenson were, in my
opinion, rather precious.
The very fact that the Washington
Post was pro-Eisenhower is the kind ol
ihitiL' that I'm talking about, to say
nothing of the fact lhat a lot of these
publishers, such eis Mr. Arthur (Crock,
for example, reported in September,
1952. that whereas they actually preferred Adlai Stevenson, they felt they
had to kill Taft emd the only way successfully to kill Taft would be to guarantee support for Eisenhower if they wenl
on and nominated him. The point is theit
the influential opinion molders in this
country are the editorial writers, the professors. The publicists are. by and large,
George Hamilton Combs interjected
a query as to whether Buckley weis
comparing Eisenhower with the liberal
point of view, to which Buckle) replied, "Eisenhower is a liberal, surely. "
To this Mr. Combs demurred, stating
that anybody who stomachs Dixon-
Yates, or Scott Mi I.cod. is a reactionary.
PIGEONHOLING THE PRESS
Questioned by Moderator Hardy Burt
regarding which papers might be regarded as pro-liberal and pro-conservative, Ralph de Toledano replied, "Well,
I think if we start cataloging we can
be here eill afternoon. Bul let's stetrt out
with the major papers, lln- New ) ork
Times is often called a conservative
newspaper. The New ) ork Times has nol
been conservative for ten years. Mr.
Arthur Hays Sulzberger does not fall
into the conservative class. Neither do
any of his editors. The lasl real conservative on the Neiv York Times i-
Arthur Krock. and Arthur Krock merely
writes column-, emd nol every day . . .
In Chicago vou have the Sun-Times
which is a New Deal paper, and you
have the Chicago Tribune. Those are
the major papers, yel the Chicago Tribune, while Republican, spends most of
its linic beating the brains out of the
Republican administration. So it falls
into a special categor) .
"In San Francisco you have thi
Francisco Chronicle: that's a liberal
newspaper, and it happens to be ei very
influential payier nationally. It's one of
these papers that are read. (Then) the
Louisville Courier-Journal. Another one
of the great newspapers of the I'nited
States, and by great I mean a paper
with influence, is the St. Louis Post-
Dispatch and journalistically for great
papers as the Times is. lis politics are
\ iolcnlly liberal.
'"lnu go to Milwaukee, which is a
lug city, and vou have the Milwaukee
Journal, which is violently liberal
againsl the Milwaukee Sentinel, which is
not a strong paper, and which is conservative.
"You go down into New Orleans and
you have the Picayune and some of the
oilier papers there . . . It's my business
to read hundreds of newspapers in the
course of ei week. I don't classify those
as conservative newspapers.
"In Los Aiu-'elcs the one real news-
peiper happen- to be a conservative
newspaper, lhe Los Angeles Times. But
by emd large," Mr. de Toledano con-
cluded, "lhe press of this country lakes
its tone from one newspaper and one
newspaper alone let's face it. That's the
New York Times. And the New York
Times heis given speice in its news column- and on ils editorial page consistently to liberal ceiuscs emd taken ei
strong stand against what it calls the
reactionaries within the Republican
INFLUENTIAL BECAUSE THEY'RE LIBERAL
George Hamilton Combs parried,
"Thi- i- delightful. I have never held an
argument tailor-made for me by the
opposition. There are, it is quite true.
aboul ten of these new-papers which
are of libera] persuasion and each one
of them Mr. de Toledano admits cxerls
tremendous influence. Why? Because
they arc greal papers and bcceiuse the
quality eel the' paper, the editorial lead-
ership, the intelligence which informs
ihe paper, i- commensurate with the
liberal philosophy, emd that's whv
they're greal. and that's why they're
read . . ."
lie Toledano commented theit Mr.
Combs heul. bv his admission that the
liberal peepers cxerl tremendous influence, destroyed his own argument that
there is et one-sided press.
"No, I haven't," reiterated Mr. Combs,
"I haven't because they arc still limited.
"View let'- lake lhe .\eiv Yuri; Times
which you characterize eis liberal. That
would In' a shocking designation lo some
of mv Democratic friends. Inasmuch as
the New lurk Times supp,.ileal President Eisenhower, who was the candidate
of the reactionaries withoul eun doubt,
in lhe fall elections. The New ) ork
Times heis included liberal material in
il- columns. Well, of course il has—it's
a newspaper. That's why it's a very
At this poinl William Buckley, Jr..
commented theit be didn't ihink they
we're' going lo <_ee'l el n\ w hel .■ lev Simply
saying theit those people who support
Eisenhower are ipso facto conservatives
and lhat slavish agents of lhe country
club arc a pro-greedy selfish interest set.
"And I would suggest." he said, "that
the firsl person lo take offense at the
kind ul thing Mr. Combs has seiiel would
be llie publisher of lhe \ctv ) ork Times
who. if he were scaled here, woulel insist that yes. indeed, he was a lihered
and on practicall) eill of the issues lhat
come up iheil accurately separate the
libera] from lhe conservative llu- Sew
) ork Times comes out predictively on
the liberal side. I maintain you have an
empty discussion here if you're going
to pursue il nn lhe grounds theit anybody
who supports Eisenhower is a conservative.
"Precisely lhe reason." he continued.
"thai most of Ihese people eire supporting emd have supported Eisenhower is
because thev knew thai wilh Eisenhower,
;i- Aiihiir Ktaiek hiin-elf confessed in his
columns, there would nol be anv recognizable change in lhe course of the history of the country."
"All this talk about Eisenhower being
et reactionary," inserted de Toledano,
"the two men closest to Eisenhower,
the two men who have the mosl influence
on him are Paid Hoffman emd Milton
Eisenhower. And even George ("ombs
does not . . . place them in the reactionary category."
"I would." replied Combs, "place
them slightly lo lhe right of Professor
I lodges, which I eissure vnu is not a
position of great extremism."
"Well." Toledano retorted, "anybody
left of Henry Wallace to you is a reactionary."
LIBERALS PREDOMINATE IN RADIO
Queried bv moderator Burl. Professor
Hodges stated, "If we arc speaking of
ihe press, we cannol leave mil radio emd
TV. And 1 ihink il's very importanl for
us in recognize that the impact there is
basically lihered. Commi'llleltors both on
radio and TV, as liberals, dominate."
In answer to Hardy Hurl's request
that panelists name the outstanding liberal commentators, Professor Hodges
named Edward I'. Murrow and Erie
Sevareid de Toledano added the name
of Elmer l);i\ is.
Moderator Burt read the quotation
of Mt. James Reston, Washington
Bureau chief of the New York Times:
"Washington reporters emd commentators have been consistently ahead of lhe
Democratic leadership emd politicians in
digging up the facts and criticizing the
contradictions emd mistakes of the Eisenhower administration."
"Mr. Reston stales." continued the
moderator, "'Il weis the press and not
ihe' Democrats who alerted the country
io the dangers of the administration's
Quemoy and Matsu poliev. The Democratic peirlv acquiesced in giving the
Presidenl authority to use force to defend those islands.' Now that's the end
(Continued on Page 64)
I'M TS FORI M NKWS. \ovembe