Part: 1234         Session: 123         Page 565758596061626364656667686970717273747576777879808182838485868788 of 512

affected. And, of course, this was reflected in many other instances throughout his administration, throughout the top people of his administration, whether it would be [McGeorge] Bundy or [James K.] Galbraith, or God knows who all, and we would get reflections of it. And right down through the whole political hierarchy in federal government, in state government, in city government, we find that when we make some pointed comment or criticism we almost invariably will get a reaction from the top people in this particular field who are affected, and this is, of course, the best evidence that I can cite, that what we say is at least read and seriously considered, even though the advice is not necessarily followed.

So, in answer to the question of what influence the editorial page has, I can honestly say that I know it is read by the people to whom, I guess in the first analysis, if not in the last analysis, it is really directed. We write editorials to try to get things done on what we think is in the public interest, and we know from this evidence that the people who can do the things most directly, whether congressional or administrative, at least read them. I don't know of any better evidence. We can't elect a candidate; that's been proven too many times. I don't even know to what degree we can affect the election of a candidate, but our position on these matters is taken seriously enough to at least affect the thinking of people in the position to do something about it.

This is true in private life, too, not only governmental. For example - if I may just enlarge on this point; I think it's important and it certainly goes directly to the question of the value of the editorial page - we have criticized certain federal subsidies, particularly in the textile field. We've criticized them in other fields too, but the textile issue happens to be a