Previous | Next
565758596061626364656667686970717273747576777879808182838485868788 of 512
So, in all these various instances - this is a long answer, I'm afraid, to your question, but
this is really the heart of the whole editorial process, so obviously I'm very interested in this
particular point: the influence and the effect that given editorials have on the people we
want to influence.
Are relations pretty much the same with the current administration as before?
Oh, yes, I spoke to you about Kennedy. Now, in the previous administration,
Eisenhower's, since Ike never read the papers, there wasn't really quite this direct
relationship. Although at the lower level there were still a lot of people who did read
newspapers and, of course, one would hear comments but not as acutely. Kennedy's
Administration was very acute and he was very sensitive to our criticism. This was
reflected to our people throughout Washington - it wasn't just to me - in fact, the
Washington Bureau received these vibrations much more than I did.
The present Administration, Johnson's, is very, very sensitive to newspaper criticism
particularly, and I've already in the first three months of the Johnson Administration heard
personally from Johnson two or three times, directly, and indirectly once or twice.
However, I would say that you don't quite get the feeling that the specific editorial position
is taken so seriously or perhaps understood so acutely by the president now as by his
predecessor. Speaking as individuals, in Johnson's case now, I'm under the impression -
it's rather early to be saying this - that what he's much more concerned about is whether
or not we have a favorable or unfavorable view of him, and this was not only the attitude of
© 2006 Columbia University
Libraries | Oral History
Research Office | Rights and
Permissions | Help