Part: 1234         Session: 123         Page 565758596061626364656667686970717273747576777879808182838485868788 of 512

because of its general reputation. And a lot of them are not necessarily guided in their thinking by the Times editorial page, but they are, I think there is no question, affected in their thinking by the Times editorial page, because they do tend to take what we say editorially quite seriously. And we have innumerable evidences of this, not that if we advocate a certain course of action that action will be taken in Congress, in the state legislature, or in city hall, or by the president, or by business at large - we often talk about all these types of subjects - but we get response from the people who are the movers and thinkers in these various fields, and we know that there just isn't any doubt about it, that the people who are working and thinking and acting in these fields at least pay attention to what we say. We get a constant stream of communications, usually protests, from them when they disagree with us, but at least there's a give-and-take, and I think in this sense we have a very considerable influence, although, of course, not a controlling influence.

I was going to ask you about the give-and-take. If you could cite a few examples of things, a few things that come to mind, anecdotes, if you will, with traces of Times influence -

Yes, well, let's start with the President of the United States - and I assume this is not going to be published, at least in the near future, because I don't think it would really be proper. In the case of the last administration, the Administration of President Kennedy, we had a very considerable number of direct evidences that Mr. Kennedy read and took seriously what we said editorially. I can't say that he - and this reflects again just what I was speaking about a moment before - necessarily acted on our recommendations, but he was affected by our recommendations and I know that each time I went to see him, which