Part: 1234         Session: 123         Page 120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151 of 512

editorial policy; I think that's a very good thing, and it's one that the Times has an exceedingly clean record on-we would call attention to an editorial. In a rather important piece on the dangers and hazards of smoking and the regulations that ought to be imposed on the sale or at least the advertising of cigarettes, we had an editorial which I particularly called to his attention before it ran. As a matter of fact, it hasn't yet run; it's about to. And I got a complete clearance on that. He suggested a change of perhaps one phrase, which was only in the interests of accuracy and not in any sense of modification of the policy. So here is a case where one might expect a publisher to have a fit when there is a piece really flying in the face of the tobacco industry. Here again I might say this is not the first time we have stressed the danger of smoking. We've done this a number of times. I think I mentioned in a previously recorded interview that we had trouble from our advertisers on that.

In an editorial such as that on the supersonic plane, would you, in view of its sensitivity, sit down and write the final version yourself, or would you get whoever has been writing the editorials on it to write a version on it after you have both expressed your view, and then sit down and go over it line by line?

The latter. That editorial as we ran it-and which I repeat was very satisfactory to me as we finally ran it, and also to the author of the editorial, very much so-was drafted and redrafted and worked on very heavily. But it was the work of the same man who had written the other pieces, but there wasn't a word of it that wasn't carefully gone over, of course. As a matter of fact, I can say that about any editorials. But I did not write this one