[MORE] Vol. 6 No. 1, January 1976: Writers in Prison

=== [Page 1] === Title: More magazine (1976-01) - Vol. 6 No. 1, imprisoned journalists incl. Sudjinah [archive.org] Source: Internet Archive, https://archive.org/details/sim_more_1976-01_6_1 Date retrieved: 2026-10-19 OCR text (_djvu.txt) Chris Welles On The Springsteen Hype NNY ows Peter Schrag: NBC Ducks A Tough Case | Writers In Prison | Andrew Kopkind On Sagging Columnists ana @332 ou ax 901s” IW n June +9, 1953, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were electrocuted for - passing the “secret” of the atomic bomb to Soviet agents. Were they really guilty or merely victims of Cold War hysteria? Millions ‘ei At neric: LTRS | pFchWom olerenn many abe remaarcnl question over the last 22 years. Finally, a reluctant government is being forced to release thousands of eloxerebnntcy pi ecmenranmree)eare: reopen the case. * PRYING OUT THE TRUTH by Amanda Harris VOL. 6, NO. 1 JANUARY 1976 Richard Pollak Editor ClaudiaCohen Associate Editor J. Anthony Lukas Senior Editor Robert L. Livingston Publisher CherLewis Advertising Malcolm Frouman = Art Director Contributing Editors: Ann Marie Cunningham, David Halberstam, Judith Adler Hennessee, Brit Hume, Bob Kuttner, Karli E. Meyer, Marty Norman, Terry Pristin, Joseph Roddy, David M. Rubin, Peter Schrag, Richard Schickel, Chris Welles. William Woodward 3rd Co-founder CONTENTS Prying Out the Truth by Amanda Harris Astonishing new evidence is coming to light in the 22-year-old Rosenberg case—thanks in large measure to thousands of documents recently sprung from government files by the Freedom of Information Act. Page 6 Born To Get ‘Itchy Excited’ by Chris Welles Page 10 om s 2 How did rock star Bruce Springsteen make it onto the covers of Time and Newsweek in the same week? Record company hype, of course. Not so, says the author, who traces the making of Bruce Springsteen by worshipful rock critics. Viadimir Herzog (1937-1974) by Alan Ternes.,., When the security police took Brazilian journalist Herzog in for interrogation, he told his wife not to worry. The next day he was dead—a ‘‘suicide,’’ according to the Army; murdered, according to friends. Page 15 When The Sword Is Mightier Than The Pen by Barbara Sproul Viadimir Herzog is only one of hundreds of writers around the world who are victims of repressive regimes. The author, a member of Amnesty International, lists some of the others and describes how to help. Page 16 Faces Frozen With A Permanent Hard Nose by Andrew Kopkind With only a few exceptions, the all-purpose political columnists are likely to tell you far too much about nothing you need to know—and very little about important political developments outside the epicenter of power. Page 20 AND MORE Page 2 Helibox Page 3 The Big Apple Letters Rosebuds Page 4 Page 24 Fine Tuning: The Powers That Be by Peter Schrag Don Widener hasn't worked in network television since he produced a controversial documentary on nuclear power for KNBC in Los Angeles in 1971. Was he blacklisted? Page 26 Furthermore: Death Watch Page 28 by Michael Wood The coverage of Generalissimo Franco and Karen Quinlan suggests that death is in the air as never before, and that evasions and euphemisms are suddenly out. Cover photograph: Wide World and Jay Harper [MORE] is published by Rosebud Associates. Inc. Subscription rates 1 year. $12.00: 2 years. $21.00: 3 years, $30.00. All subscription correspondence: [MORE], P.O. Box 955, Farmingdale, New York 11735. All editorial, advertising and other correspondence. [MORE], 750 Third Avenue, New York, New York 10017. Copyright 1975 by Rosebud Associates. Inc.. 750 Third Avenue. New York. NY 10017 Telephone (212) 867-9797. Nothing in this publication may be reproduced in any manner, either in whole or in.part, without specific written permission of the publisher. Al! rights reserved. “{|MORE]” is a registered trademark. Postmaster: If undelivered, please send form 3579 to |MORE]. PO Box 955. Farmingdale New York-11735.SECOND CLASS POSTAGE PAID AT N.Y., N.Y. and at additional mailing offices 2 {MORE].. LETTERS Future Conditional Explain: (1) Why did you put Paul Glazier’s unsupported overkill of Alexander Cockburn’s “‘The Future Lies Ahead”’ [October—1975] at the lead (top left, no less) of Letters [November—1975]? (What is freely asserted may be freely denied—ancient principle of logic. I think it goes quid facile dicitur, facile negatur in Latin... anyway the principle is ancient and has been respected.) (2) Every time I see a headline now I am reminded of Cockburn’s §article—and saddened to see how right he is. What’s irrelevant about his article? I'll freely (faciliter) predict his article will be seen as a ‘‘watershed”’ of insight and aptness into an as-yet not widely recognized media phenomenon. Where am I wrong to think so? (3) Already he saved me from reading articles in the November [MORE]: one about magzines that ‘‘will tell” and the other about how some editors ‘would respond to a hypothetical....” Oh, Cockburn, thou are too right, the past and present tenses of reportage are being replaced by efforts to gain tension, even if by phony means. It’s time for him—or Tom Wolfe—to do a round-up on the three stereotypes of modern journalism: the Reader's Digest question-lead (Can You Sue Your Fetus?); the personalizing style (When Maisie got up and prepared her coffee, her mind kept asking her: “Shall I, Will I, Can I sue my fetus?’’); and Cockburn’s insight or the editor future-conditional (Tension mounts as fetus-suit debate rages). —Frederick C. Dyer Chevy Chase, Md. Dapper Speech Regarding J.F. O’Connor, “The Washington Pest’? [November 1975]: If O’Connor’s search for the bizarre in English usage extended beyond The Washington Post, he'd have time to write only one Playboy party joke each month. Example from the Associated Press, Nov. 9: Dressed in a dapper suit and exuberant smile, Humphrey’s $25-aperson speech at a local school just off the university campus was enough to pull Vermont Democrats out of debt for the first time in years. Perhaps the writer was taking a deft punch at politicians who are little other than a speech, a suit and a smile. Perhaps Humphrey’s campaign manager sought to cut costs by presenting a clothed and grinning manuscript rather than a human speaker. Or perhaps I’m right, and the thing doesn't make sense. —Pat Crawford News Production Editor The Financial Weekly Richmond, Va. The Poor Although I agree with Michael Harrington that Susan Sheehan's ‘Profile’ of a welfare mother in The New Yorker was encouraging in its coverage of poverty. [*‘Meanwhile, in the Other America’’—November 1975], I disagree with his comment that there was not ‘a single word of editorializing’” in the article. I felt the reader’s view was involuntarily slanted by Sheehan’s use, whether consciously or unconsciously, of certain words and phrases, even a framework of values, to describe Mrs. Santana and her children, who are “‘alarmed’’ by green vegetables, whose dinner usually consists of “some part of a pig’’—which sounds unappetizing until you realize that dinner for many other people usually consists of “‘some part of a cow.’’ Mrs. Santana is even accused pf not putting her time ‘‘to better advantage’’ when she is standing in line for something by reading or sewing. That sounds more like a value judgment to me than the voice of an objective reporter. We are told Mrs. Santana has never owned a car or an air conditioner (why those two items?), never subscribed to a magazine and has never been to the Empire State Building or Radio City Music Hall. Are we thus to infer that Mrs. Santana is culturally deprived? By whose standards? I felt Mrs. Santana was being compared (with New Yorker readers?) and criticized for not being as aware, as industrious and as thrifty as other people. Sheehan says if she knew as much about home economics as the people who draw up the welfare budgets, she could spend less on food (and not have to cheat on welfare?), instead of shopping unwisely where large, economy sizes are not sold. Two points here: Harrington himself says the welfare budgets make cheating a matter of survival; and a Department of Consumer Affairs commissioner recently said that some foods are unfairly priced differently per pound, depending on the size container they are in, and that buying two smaller-sized units can actually be cheaper than buying one large size. Harrington notes with approval that this is the first time The New Yorker Corrections We were so intent on checking whether Procter & Gamble was linked by an ‘‘and” or an ampersand that we efficiently managed to misspell Procter throughout “The Great Toilet Paper War" last month. For the record, William Procter joined with James Gamble in 1837 in “the art and trade of manufacturing soap and candles,” each putting up half the original capital of $7,192.23... Also for the record, we committed a few other spelling errors elsewhere in last month's issue: Ottawa in the Hellbox, Sara Jane Moore in Fine Tuning and William S. Rubens in Letters... We also reported in the Hellbox that the statutory minimum per copyright violation is $5,000. The minimum is $250; the maximum is $5,000. has used an anonymous person as the subject of a Profile article. But I think by not individualizing Mrs. Santana (the impersonal title and the drawing | featuring several mothers on a street instead of the usual portrait sketch) the article risks generalizing her history into a stereotype, not unlike the soap | operas she watches so often. We are told she shops “the way | Puerto Ricans have shopped for generations—meal by meal and sometimes item by item.”” My grandmother, who | was Irish, shopped the same way, sending her grandchildren to the corner | grocery sometimes two and three times | a day for whatever she was cooking that night, and whatever she forgot the first time. And my husband's mother, who is | Puerto Rican, shops once a week in a supermarket. Shopping patterns seem | to be more a consequence of location and habit than a mark of one’s nationality. But taking the article one step fur- | ther, why not say that Mrs. Santana’s | having many children, and her living | with different men, like her mother and | her daughter, is the way Puerto Ricans have lived for generations? Harrington points out that “serial monogamy” is common in all poverty cultures in America; “‘it is not Hispanic or black in origin.” How many readers realized that? Harrington brings to his reading of the article a deep understanding of the culture of poverty, its outward signs and its deep-rooted causes in society. Sheehan brought an apparent unfamiliarity with both Puerto Rican and poverty cultures. Rather than a “camera eye” view of a welfare family, the article's assumptions and value judgments lead to generalizations and stereotypes instead of a better understanding of poverty. —Mary Ellen Figueroa Brooklyn, N.Y. In his article in the November issue [““Meanwhile in the Other America...”’], Michael Harrington used the words “‘poor’”’ and “‘poverty’’ 51 times. Perhaps he feels that repetition gives credibility. People who advance false theories often repeat themselves. It is the old technique of the big lie. If you repeat it enough, people will begin to believe it. From Mr. Harrington’s article one would get the impression that poverty is spiraling upward. This is not true. According to the Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1975 edition, table 631, the percentage of poor persons in the United States has declined from 22.4 per cent in 1959 to 11.9 per cent in 1972. These poor people, as defined by the government, are poor only relative to the rest of us. Compared to the average citizen of the world they are very rich indeed. True poverty, of the Indian or Chinese type, is very rare in the United States. The $4,200 per year that the government defines as poverty for a family of four can be put into perspective by noting that it is adequate to supply a nutritionally complete diet to at least 20 persons at prices prevailing in supermarkets. Of course this diet would consist of grains and beans and little else. It would be approximately what the wellfed Asian eats. I once spent an afternoon watching | the {continued on page 29) ROSEBUDS Bo sesuvs to the Newsweek group. General Editor Merrill Sheils and others, who produced for the Dec. 8 issue a solid, unsettling cover story on decline in American’ English composition skills called “‘Why Johnny Can't Write.’ This should be a question | of interest to all print journalists who | don’t want to be caught napping when their medium goes the way of cobble- | Stones, Latin, real Dixieland jazz or blank verse. When hardly anyone can write readably, hardly anyone will feel the need (except vaguely) for even good writing. And the latest studies by the National Assessment of Educational Progress, reports Newsweek. show that “the majority of Americans of all ages tend to use only the simplest sentence structure and the most elementary vocabulary when they write. Among teenagers, writing performance appears to be deteriorating at the most alarming rate of all.... The essays of 13- and 17year-olds are far more awkward, incoherent and disorganized than the efforts of those tested in 1969.” Perhaps it is television's insidiously easy access that leaches writing aptitude out of the nation’s young. At any rate, graduate schools of law and journalism are finding that their students can't write well enough to show that they have studied. Graduate schools of education (leaning as they evidently do to prose like “The behaviors can be taught or encouraged to happen spontaneously in a content context’’) may not have noticed. Businesses are finding that they have to train college graduates to write well enough for commerce. And there is a school of thought among even intelligible educators that the writing of standard English is no longer a necessary skill. “The important thing,” college English teacher Elisabeth Mc- Pherson told Newsweek, “is that people find themselves through their own language."’ But, says Newsweek, ‘there have to be some fixed rules, however tedious, if the codes of human communication are to remain decipherable. If the written language is placed at the mercy of every new colloquialism and if every fresh dialect demands and gets equal sway, then we will soon find ourselves back in Babel.” Sheils, the story’s chief writer, says the idea for it “‘came from several directions at once. Last January or February we began to see the National Assessment of Educational Progress reports. And we'd been seeing stories from around the country about parents’ groups demanding that their local schools teach the Three Rs. Meanwhile [Newsweek Editor] Ed Kosner had been getting all sorts of incomprehensible letters from young people purporting to be interested in journalism. And professors of journalism on courtesy visits to the magazine have been complaining about their students’ writing. We put all our bureaus on the story. It’s been reported literally for nine months.”’ The largest reporting contributions were from Tony Fuller in Chicago, Mary Alice Kellogg in San Francisco and Frederick V. Boyd in New York. The Second R Obviously response to the story or to the problem is not going to take the form of a clear consensus. America has always bordered on Babel, and the language is the richer for it. It may even be the richer for radio talk shows. But what kind of language is it that isn't maintained at a fairly high formal level in print? You can't even have television news—you can't even have television commercials—without effective writing. Well, you could, at that. Good vulgar coherent American English writing might die. There is a lot more of what passes for it piling up now than anybody much ever reads. Plays and speeches could be _ improvisatory (Nelson Rockefeller is said to be dyslexic), memos could be taped, mass newspapers and magazines could be more and more pictorial, mail could boil down to postcards and junk, literature could be (has been before) oral. Much of the Newsweek story's effectiveness is visual facsimiles of rotten student writing. a photo of teacher McPherson in a multiracial context, a great photo of language expert Mario Pei smiling in a rumpled way, sitting in a rumpled way in a rumpled armchair, with the large-type caption, ‘Pei: ‘Jf you will scoff at language study... how, save in terms of language, will you scoff?" That photograph, affectionate as it is, may scoff a bit at Pei. Honorable as his work is, Pei is perhaps a bit too secure in it. Television and other developments are changing people’s minds, and you can’t expand an attention span from the outside. Writing is going to have to reach out—as good writing to some extent always has—to engage the mind’s eye and ear. How many journalist writers today have voices? How many even quote people as if they had voices? Journalists had better take to heart the recent work of William Gaddis, George V. Higgins, Studs Terkel, the Foxfire kids, Theodore Rosengarten: good expository written work, almost ali of it talk. God knows American publications Tony Rollo— Newsweek Newsweek General Editor Merrill Sheils: ‘‘There have to be some fixed rules."’ would read better with skillful infusions of dialect. The Pittsburgh Press has a black reporter named Alfonso X. Donaldson who has written rare lively street-talk journalism for New Times and the Sunday New York Times travel section. I once read the Press for a full year without ever seeing any evidence of Donaldson's gifts. (In fact the Press turned down his travel piece on Haiti before the Times took it.) Newsweek reporter Boyd, who is young and black, says he defended black dialect in intramural argument during the preparation of the “Johnny” story. ‘As of now,” he says, “‘I still believe everybody has a right to his own language."’ But, Boyd grew up middleclass, with an English-teacher mother, and went to a private prep school and Harvard. “I will not argue with the notion,”’ he concedes, ‘‘that the ability to write is at least the ability to organize, and that in every adolescent’s life there comes a time when he needs to organize his thoughts so that someone not familiar with his processes of thought can understand.’ Standard writing-English still has precious uses. “The difference between riffing and shucking,”’ Albert Murray has written, “is knowing the goddamn fundamentals." Teachers complain today, says Sheils, “‘that kids’ essays read like transcripts.” That, as anyone who has looked at the Watergate tapes realizes, won't do. You can’t adapt talk or visual images to the page without much better literary craftsmanship than kids of any dialect (everyone speaks some dialect) seem to be learning. Sheils says she learned to write in part from a highschool English teacher named Miss Elizabeth Bennet: “She said nothing that wasn’t absolutely to the point. She would say, ‘I can see what you’re getting at, but you must get it to the point where it’s understandable.’ ’’ Elizabeth Bennet, it will be recalled by some, is the heroine of Pride and Prejudice, the one who keeps cutting through the crap. —ROY BLOUNT, JR. [MORE]3 You Are There? MADRID NOV 21 (AP)—THE BODY OF SPANISH DICTATOR FRANCISCO FRANCO HAS BEEN LYING IN STATE: | HIS FACE | RAVAGED BY A FIVE-WEEK FIGHT | IN AN OPEN COFFIN, AGAINST DEATH. MADRID NOV 21, REUTERS—TENS OF THOUSANDS OF SPANIARDS | LINED UP FOR UP TO 10 HOURS TO- DAY FOR A LAST LOOK AT THE MAN WHO HAD RULED THEM WITH | AN IRON HAND FOR 36 YEARS. THE BODY OF GENERAL FRAN. | CISCO FRANCO APPEARED DIMINU- | HIS RESPLENDENT CAP. | TIVE IN TAIN-GENERAL’S UNIFORM, HIS HANDS HIDDEN UNDER A COCKED HAT PLACED ON FACE SERENE. THE SKILL OF THE EMBALMERS HAD REMOVED ALL TRACE OF THE | MONTH-LONG AGONY OF HIS | DEATH, WHICH OCCURED YESTER- | DAY. Joan Little, Inc. On the heels of Patty Hearst and Hurricane Carter comes Joan Little, a | criminal case turned political cause turned profitable cottage industry. Little, a young black woman, claimed that she stabbed an elderly white jailer, Clarence Alligood, during a | struggle in her Beaufort County, N.C.. jail cell as he forced her—at the point of an ice pick—to engage in oral sex. Last August, after five weeks of testimony, a jury took less than 90 minutes to find her not guilty. Since then Little and three of her seven defense attorneys have been hitting the lecture circuit, singly and in the case has spawned a veritable communications conglomerate. There are at least five books now in the works, | version | by Fred Harwell, a Washington, D.C.. | attorney originally from North Caro- | lina. for Alfred Knopf: a Bantam | including: the “authorized” paperback by James Reston, Jr.. who wrote a lengthy. pre-trial account for The New York Times Sunday Magazine and then covered the trial for Newsday and TVN network: another | version by Thomas Noyes, late of The | Washington Star. who covered the | trial for the Atlantic Monthly, to be | published in book form by Little- | Brown; accounts by both Little herself | and at least one of her defense at- | torneys, now in the final stages of negotiation with separate publishers. This list excludes such the case as Black Rage. a 221-page pornographic paperback by = an equally fictional ‘Butch Holmes,” in which—according to the cover—'‘Bigotry and racism trap a young black woman in a savage web of rape and murder!!!" There is a 45 rpm recording of “The Ballad of Joan Little.” written and performed by Washington, D.C.. folksinger Bernice Reagan. and Jo Anne!!!, a play by Ed Bullins slated for Off Broadway this season, with half the royalties going to Little. The biggest news came on Dec. 5. when Universal Pictures and Ike Jones. who produced The River Niger. HIS CHEST, HIS | frankly | exploitational ‘‘fictional” versions of Joan Little (left) and actress Cicely Tyson, signed an agreement for a full-length | Hollywood film, tentatively titled The Joan Little Story. A studio spokesman said the movie would be in the “highly dramatic genre of In the Heat of the Night. and hoped to acquire the services of Lonnie Elder 3rd and Ciceley Tyson, the screenwriter and star, respectively, of Sounder. Estimates of the split between the filmmakers and Little and chief defense attorney Jerry Paul, who did the nego- | tiating. range from $5,000 to $50,000 up front. plus five per cent of the | gross. combination, at up to $2,000 per ap- | pearance, plus expenses. In addition, There seems to be virtually no limit to it all. Sitting in his office in the | Beaufort County jail, SO feet from where the killing took place. Sheriff Red Davis has one thing on his mind when the subject of Joan Little is | brought up: “I just want to play myself in the movie. that’s all.” he says. “After all the aggravation this case has given me. I want some of the | | green.” | while the traditional announcement | “half the time sails right over people's WCAU-FM in Philadelphia. a rock | Name That Tune station now phasing out its “alloldies’’ format, has taken to playing one of the classic oldies to a new tune. The beat belongs to rock. The lyrics belong to the FCC: **This is a test. For the next 60 seconds, this station will conduct a test of the Emergency Broadcasting System.” The musical | spot incorporates all the required ele- | ments of the official announcement and test with the best efforts of what | its producers say is a six-member | vocal group and a 20-piece orchestra. WCAU-FM and about 1,000 other stations received the spot free of charge from T.M. Productions of Dallas, a firm that specializes in creating station identification jingles. Jim West. senior vice-president of T.M.. says that the surprise gift to his clients cost his firm over $5,000 in production and distribution costs. Although he says he doesn't know how many stations are using the spot. he noted that a disc jockey in San Francisco ‘‘just came unhinged over it.” Although the FCC is considerably | less enthusiastic, it is powerless to stop the musical announcements. “It’s not necessarily in violation of the rules, but the FCC frowns on it,” reports Donald S. Aines, executive secretary of the national industry advisory committee to the FCC. The FCC only requires that each television and radio station run the test once a week in accordance with specific procedure—a reading of the official text, suspension of normal signal and broadcast of 1,000 hz. tone that activates a special receiver at another station in preparation for an ‘‘actual emergency."’ Since the musical announcements conform to this routine, the FCC can raise no legal objections. “‘It’s not considered in good taste and we don't condone | it,’ Aines said. He claimed musical | the | embellishment ‘‘detracts from seriousness” of the announcement. done in very good taste with very good talent."’ West argues that the musical version makes listeners take notice, heads because they've heard it so often. The whole government is op- | pressed with not enough sense of | | humor.” —MICHAEL SILVER Sad Sacks The University of Michigan football team’s scrimmage before the big game with Ohio State is top secret stuff. Closed to the press, of course. This year, UPI's Detroit photo editor Dan Dimitruk assigned photo stringer Andy Sacks to go to the practice field and get a picture of the team. Sacks was turned away at the gate. He phoned Dimitruk, who, he said, instructed him “‘to go climb a tree if necessary, but to get a picture.” At Dimitruk’s suggestion, Sacks made the acquaintance of two tenants of an apartment overlooking the field, gained entry to their third-floor apartment and began shooting pictures from the balcony. He was soon spotted by a Michigan assistant coach, who, along with two colleagues, headed for the apartment. Sacks. who saw them coming. im- | mediately bolted the door, exchanged | the roll of film in his camera for a fresh one and called the police. The three coaches reached the building, two on the landing below and one straddling the outside balcony from the terrace next door. They asked | Sacks to come down to the field with his camera and film and discuss the matter with head coach Bo Schem- | bechler. Sacks refused, fearing the | confiscation of his film, whereupon | one of the coaches shouted out to the | field, ‘No Bo, he won't talk to you.” According to Sacks, ‘At this point ten coaches formed a column behind | Schembechler and walked in line to- | wards the apartment.’’ Upon his arrival Schembechler manded the film. The police then arrived and entered the apartment. Schembechler called Dimitruk, demanding immediate surrender of the film or else he would never talk to UPI again. The police radioed for six more officers, four of whom entered the apartment. They charged Sacks with trespassing, and rushed him out of the area. They also took his camera with what they believed to be a roll of film taken of the practice. The camera was returned to Sacks later that day, the blank roll of film to be held until half time of the big game. Over the next few days, the county prosecutor considered charging Sacks with violating the state’s secret trade act—a law designed to protect theft of model design in the auto industry. Sacks considered a lawsuit against the University. Both parties eventually signed an agreereportedly dewena Coach Bo Schembechler mm ment not to press charges. UPI meanwhile decided not to print Sacks’s pictures. “They were mediocre anyway.” said William Lyon, vice president of news pictures, “‘and they could be more-trouble than they were worth.” The Wolverines went down to a heartbreaking 21 to 14 defeat at the hands of the Buckeyes. —PAUL SHAPIRO 4 [MORE] A-Sharp Miner Clifford Merchant was a full-time shuttle car operator at an Enterprise. W.Va.. mine of Consolidation Coal Co., the nation’s second largest coal company. And, he told his co-workers. he was also an award-winning concert pianist. Word of Merchant's keyboard wizardry filtered through the Consol hierarchy until it reached the Morgantown, W.Va., office of Herk Hamm, director of publications. During an interview with Hamm, Merchant revealed that: he had won $75,000 in piano competitions; he had degrees in composition and music from Juilliard and a doctorate of literary science from Northwestern: he spoke five languages; his hands were insured tor $125,000. Hamm had some doubts. He called Northwestern. Lincoln Center and Pittsburgh's Heinz Hall. but got no information on Merchant. Instead. Merchant's mother verified the claims, and, thus satisfied, Consol night his hands guide a powerful mine shuttle car several hundred feet under the earth..."” Merchant was also described as ‘one of the nation’s premier pianists’’ whom the other miners refer | to ‘simply as a genius.””* Said Hamm: “We thought it was a good story for the industry. Here’s a guy with all these qualifications who wants to work in a mine.” Both major wire services picked ur the item. UPI’s story varied little from the release; AP interviewed Merchant and added fresh quotes. Clips of these | Stories came in from as far away as Great Britain. The Pittsburgh Post- Gazette disclosed the juicy details that Merchant wore a $13,000 diamond ring and drove a Cadillac. A few days later, Hamm started receiving calls. Northwestern. voluble now, said it had no doctorate program in literary science and had never heard of Merchant. Lincoln Center and Heinz Hall had similar messages. Beseiged. Hamm called Merchant's mother who, he said, admitted the claims were false. She said she had gone along with the story because her | article, son had had “psychological problems” and she hadn't wanted to hurt | him. Informed of the hoax by Consol, AP | | ran a corrective story. UPI, also noti- | fied, let its story stand. “It’s the first time I’ve been had in seven years of re- | porting.” says Hamm. “It was so un- | believable a story it was believable.” Merchant remains on his job at the mine. The company is reportedly unhappy with him but can find no clause | in the union contract to justify dismissal. —EVAN PATTAK Fowl Play? On Halloween, readers of Washington Star were treated to a front-page story about two prostitutes who had allegedly turned tricks for | | one of America’s leading defense contractors. Headlined A STAG PARTY FOR PENTAGON OFFICIALS, the | article by Peter Gruenstein of Capitol | Hill News Service charged that the | Martin prepared and sent out a release. “By | the day the hands of Clifford J. Mer-. | chant caress the keyboard of a baby | grand piano,” the release said. ‘By | Marietta Corporation had financed the weekend shindig—one prostitute was said to have been “‘paid $3,000 in cash for her weekend's work | representa- | tive’"—at a goose-hunting lodge on | by a Martin Marietta Maryland's Eastern Shore in January 1968. ‘About one-third of the 40 to 50 guests at the affair—a _ bachelor's party for a top Air Force official about to be married—were Defense Department personnel,’’ wrote Gruenstein. No geese were reported killed. Martin Marietta Vice President Roy Calvin, according to Gruenstein’s denied the report. saying, ***We don't find any record that any Martin employees were present or involved in the arrangement. My im- | pression was it [the party] was at least | | two years after we had any connection with the lodge.” In May 1965 President Lyndon B. | | Johnson issued Executive Order 11222 | barring government employees from accepting “‘any gift, gratuity, favor. | entertainment, loan or any other thing of monetary value” from firms doing business with the Department of Defense. In a January 1975 memorandum, Deputy Secretary of Defense William P. Clements reaffirmed that policy in no uncertain terms: ‘There will be absolutely no relationship with Clifford Merchant, coal miner and pianist extraordinary. The initials Ph.D. are inscribed on his miner's helmet. The | Standard Oil heiress Page Lee Hufty, whose journalistic background consists of appearing in the gossip columns after a much publicized affair with Ted Kennedy, is parlaying her political “‘experience™ into a choice job as a radio commentator. Hufty, who attends a lot of Washington parties and does a little painting on the side. has made an audition tape for WAVA, Washington's all-news radio station. News director Jim Limbach | says Hufty approached the station about doing political commentaries, and although there was to me.” All-News Chic Page Lee Hufty: politics are fun no job opening. the station is apparently eager to make one for her. Pat Hamilton, WAVA’s director of women and president of ‘American Women in Radio and TV, has volunteered to supply voice coaching. “If it was up to me, she'd be required to demonstrate her ability to articulate thoughts, just like everyone else,” someone just because of their name.” But it’s not up to Limbach. In fact, as Hufty tells it, station owner Arthur Arundel first approached her about a job, and “the decision is up As for her qualifications, Hufty admits to having no prior journalistic experience, but “I've always liked politics.” says Limbach. “I wouldn't hire —KRIS NICHOLSON | defense contractors which violates or appears to violate the provisions” of the executive order. So, that 1968 stag party would clearly have been off limits to Pentagon people. Within a few hours after the Oct. 31 story broke, attorneys from the Washington superlawyer firm of Arnold and Porter, representing Martin Marietta, sought to get the Star or Gruenstein to issue a retraction. Both refused. On Nov. 4, the corporation filed a $15million libel suit in federal district court against Gruenstein, Capitol Hill News Service and the Srar. Gruenstein’s attorney, William Dobrovir, subsequently submitted to the court a counterclaim asking for compensatory and punitive damages of $11 million. Although depositions are now being taken “under seal,” they would become part of the public record if the case goes to trial. Gruenstein’s Oct. 31 article was only one in a continuing series detailing unethical or illegal practices by a number of defense contractors. He got onto these stories initially, not through a tip from a whistle-blower, but by diligently searching through reams of publicly available reports. Gruenstein’s articles about contractorleased hunting lodges and corporate aircraft used to entertain politicians and government employees received prominent coverage and were apparently a factor in triggering a departmental investigation. In fact, at an Oct. 20 press conference, then- Secretary of Defense James R. Schlesinger voiced a suspicion that these news reports were just “the tip of the iceberg.” Defending himself against Martin Marietta’s charge of libel could result in Gruenstein’s being ordered to reveal his sources, under threat of being found in contempt of court. In a chilling precedent, Carey v. Hume, the judge ordered defendant Brit Hume to reveal the unnamed source of a story he had written for Jack Anderson. Such a drastic step was called for, the | judge reasoned, because: 1) the plaintiff had no other way to disprove the allegedly libelous charge in Hume's story and 2) the knowledge attributed to the source went to the heart of the matter. The judge’s order was upheld by the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court declined, 6-3, to review the case. (Fortunately for Hume, his source came forward voluntarily to testify.) For the defendants, a loss could also be catastrophic financially. Gruenstein is of modest means; Capitol Hill News Service operates on an annual budget of $130,000 but expects a deficit at year’s end of $25,000 (to be made up by a grant from Ralph Nader's Public Citizen, Inc.); the precarious financial condition of the Star is well known [*‘Death In The Afternoon?’’—December 1975]. A court decision on- whether Gruenstein’s story was libelous remains far in the future. But the immediate impact of filing such a libel suit during an ongoing investigation is to divert reporters from their journalistic targets and tie them down with litigation. When asked how the case has affected his work, Gruenstein replied: “The case has been going on now for several weeks. In fact, I just spent the last two and a half days testifying, and in January I’m going to have to spend several more days giving depositions. I’ve actually been spending more time on the case lately than I have been working for Capitol Hill News Service.” —PETER J. OGNIBENE [MORE]5 lide Worl Wide World 6 [MORE] BY AMANDA HARRIS By the government's own estimate, federal agencies have amassed close to half a million pages of documents on the case of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. Since the couple went to the electric chair in 1953 in an atmosphere of Cold War hysteria, thousands of people have questioned whether the Rosenbergs, along with Morton Sobell, had indeed passed the ‘secret’ of the atomic bomb to Soviet agents. And in the last decade, speculation on the substance of the charges against the trio has intensified, largely due to three influential books. /nvitation to an Inquest by Walter and Miriam Schneir, first published in 1965, offered a thorough reexamination of the trial record and evidence. The Book of Daniel by E.L. Doctorow presented a powerful but fictionalized version of the story. And, most recently, We Are Your Sons, the autobiography of Robert and Michael Meeropol, the Rosenberg sons (who use the name of their adoptive parents), testified to the human legacy of the case. Until last month, however, no one had succeeded in breaking the government's hold on the mass of documents, the first step in any serious effort to reopen the case. Three years ago, Emily Alman, who with her husband, Dave, had run the National Committee to Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case, had tried to gather the pieces of the puzzle. Alman, now head of the sociology department at Douglass College in New Jersey, requested the files under the Freedom of Information Act. “‘I started off writing to a number of agencies,”’ she recalled recently. “The Justice Department demanded $16 an hour in search fees. I split the cost with Allen Weinstein [a Smith College history professor] and wound up paying between $1,500 and $2,000 for information that was 99 per cent useless. Mostly newspaper clippings. It was a rip-off situation.” Weinstein, who is writing a book on America during the Cold War, was the second person to request the Rosenberg files. He made his bid under a July 1973 decree by former Attorney General EIliot Richardson ordering the release to historical researchers of law enforcement files on completed investigations more than 15 years old. Despite assurances from FBI Director Clarence Kelley and four successive Attorneys General that the information would be released, Weinstein was also unable to wrench the documents from the government’s grip. “The key element here was the FBI’s footdragging,’’ Weinstein said. ‘“‘While they’re insisting they’re trying to get the information out. they're delaying.” Most all pretense of cooperation vanished, however, after public television’s NPACT broadcast Alvin Goldstein's chilling documentary, **The Unquiet Death of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg,”’ on Feb. 23, 1974. A damning 90-minute reappraisal of the case, the program was produced without benefit of the files, despite Goldstein's sevenmonth run-around with the FBI. He had even narrowed his request to what he considered to be three key documents in the case—interrogation reports on David and Ethel Greenglass before David Greenglass’s arrest. Ethel Rosenberg’s brother, Greenglass had confessed to passing information on the atomic bomb to Soviet agents while working as a machinist at Los Alamos in the mid-1940s. He turned government witness and served 10 years of a 15-year prison sentence. His wife, Ruth, was named as a co-conspirator but not indicted. GoldAstein’s request was denied on the grounds disclosure would violate the privacy of the Greenglasses, who, as government informers, had been given a new identity. In his own investigation, however, Goldstein had already located the couple. He had received an anonymous tip on their whereabouts after placing an ad in The New York Times. Using public records, Goldstein tracked down the couple and arrived at their home with a film crew. They refused to be interviewed. Goldstein is now convinced that Amanda Harris is a reporter with Newsday, the Long Island daily. Recent disclosures about the Rosenberg case dramatically underscore the value of the Freedom of Information Act—yet journalists continue to show only marginal interest in the law. the FBI's refusal to release the documents came under pressure from the Greenglasses themselves. Goldstein had also learned of the death of Harry Gold, David Greenglass’s contact with the Soviets who had provided what the prosecution had described as “‘the necessary link’’ to the Rosenbergs. Goldstein dispatched the information to The New York Times, which ran a much-belated obituary. The fourth and final bid for access to the Rosenberg files came from the Meeropols. On Feb. 20, 1975, the day after amendments te the FOIA went into effect, the Rosenberg sons filed formal FOI requests with 18 government agencies. The requests brought broken promises, vacillation and, from one agency, the U.S. attorney’s office in New Mexico, notice that all files on the case had been destroyed in 1969. On July 14, the Meeropols sued in the U.S. District Court to obtain the files and to enjoin the government from further destruction of documents. Weinstein and Goldstein have each filed separate FOIA suits for the documents they wanted. Alman did not go to court because she is working on the Meeropol case through the Constitutional Litigation Clinic at Rutgers University Law School. U.S. District Court Judge June L. Green issued the injunction in the Meeropol case and ordered the agencies to prepare itemized inventories of documents by Oct. 1. She further ordered full disclosure by Nov. 15. The Energy Research and Development Administration (formerly the Atomic Energy Commission), the Criminal Division of the Justice Department and the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan met their court-imposed deadlines with relative grace, but the FBI and the CIA, repositories of the bulk of the dociments, were obdurate. Their inventories were vague and incomplete, with thousands of documents withheld because of **Secret’’ and ‘‘Top Secret” classifications. The two agencies requested and were denied six- to eightmonth postponements. Finally, the day the files were to be released, the FBI notified Marshall Perlin, attorney for the Meeropols, there would be a $23,451.80 charge for search fees and copying costs for 28,438 pages. The CIA demanded $14,155.30 for 953 pages. Perlin and Michael Meeropel denounced the tees as “‘ransom”’ at a press conference in New York City Nov. 21. The National Committee to Reopen the Rosenberg Case mounted demonstrations and petition drives in 40 cities. In the meantime, the government began leaking damaging stories from the still unopened files. The most widely printed was a report that the late FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover, along with other law enforcement officials, had allegedly favored reducing Ethel Rosenberg’s sentence to 30 years in prison. Another leak concerned a confession Julius Rosenberg was supposed to have made to a cellmate at the Federal House of Detention in New York City between mid-1950 and mid-1951, a story that subsequently-released documents showed was so suspect that even government prosecutors didn’t. believe it. Finally, on Dec. 1, the FBI and the CIA, citing public interest in the case, agreed to waive $34,518 in search fees, although they stuck by the 10 cents-per-page copying costs. (The Meeropols are refusing to pay those charges. too.) Two days later, the documents were delivered to Perlin and the arduous sifting process began. A total of about 60,000 pages was released. only a fraction of the government's Rosenberg file. Although the disclosure is a victory, it’s clearly a partial one, since the Meeropols and their supporters insist that every page must be released before the case against the Rosenbergs can be properly evaluated. Even the preliminary check of the documents, however, has disclosed some startling facts. Seven months before the trial, for instance. Harry Gold told an assistant U.S. attorney that his password to Greenglass was, ‘I brought greetings from Ben in Brooklyn.’’ When he took the stand at the trial, Gold said the password was, “I came from Julius.”” In similar pre-trial interrogation records, Greenglass denied that his sister was present when he allegedly passed a description of the atomic bomb to Julius Rosenberg. On the stand, Greenglass testified Ethel had been present and had typed the information. Wl rc: the amended Freedom of Information Act, the Meeropols would never have achieved even the partial success they have so far. Signed by President Johnson on July 4, 1966, the FOIA was a victory for California Rep. John E. Moss, whose Foreign Operations and Government Information Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations had spent 11 years fighting for passage. Soon after the law went into effect a year later, it was clear officials were flouting it. Moss’s subcommittee held two sets of hearings on the legislation in 1971 and 1972. John Seigenthaler, editor of the Nashville Tennessean, testified, for example, that his paper had filed an FOI suit against the Department of Housing and Urban Development to obtain a copy of a Farmers Home Administration appraisal. The court had ordered the document released. HUD turned over a completely illegible copy. Among the general problems cited by the subcommittee were: bureaucratic delays in responding to requests; excessive charges for services; high legal fees to force compliance; officials’ cavalier disregard for the public’s right to information and relative disinterest in the law by the press. Seventeen amendments were proposed to improve the law. Moss took up arms again in the House and Sen. Edward Kennedy, chairman of the Administrative Practice and Procedure Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, led the fight in the Senate. On Aug. 20, 1974, after 11 days in office, President Ford announced his support of Freedom of Information. Two months later, he vetoed the amended bill, citing threats to military and intelligence secrets and law enforcement files. On Nov. 20 and 21, 1974, however, Congress overrode the veto, voting 371-31 in the House and 65-27 in the Senate. The stiffer law went into effect on Feb. 19, 1975. The changes were extensive, but there are three key improvements. First, the law allows in camera judicial inspection of documents which the government seeks to withhold. Second, an agency must pay court costs of people who sue for information and win. The third change. and the one most important to reporters, according to Jack Landau of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, deals with time restrictions. Under the amendments, an agency has 10 working days to respond to a formal FOI request and 20 days to respond to an appeal. An additiona! provision says federal employees who arbitrarily or capriciously withhold documents can be subject to penalties from the Civil Service Commission. There are no trustworthy statistics on reporters’ use of FOI, but the press is hardly moving with gusto into government files. Most requests have been coming from individuals seeking their own files from the FBI, CIA and IRS, by historians and scholars seeking background, and by lawyers.* Only a handful of journalists bothered with the original law, among them NBC Washington reporter Carl Stern—who spent almost two years prying files on Counterintelligence actions against the New Left out of the FBI—and reporters at the Tennessean and Philadelphia Inquirer |*‘Nibbling at the Bureaucracy’’—October 1973]. Thomas M. Susman, chief counsel of the Senate Administrative Practice and Procedure Subcommittee. has been sitting up on the Hill watching the law for six years. He reports that the number of press requests has risen since the amendments, but the volume is still minimal. Some of this apparent apathy stems from ignorance of the law and how to use it. Shortly after the amendments went into effect. Morton Halperin’s Center for National Security Studies scheduled a free FOI session for journalists. Halperin put notices of the meeting on the AP and UPI daybooks and sent 60 invitations to Washington reporters. Only three showed up—and each was writing a story about the law. Since then, fortunately, press organizations have begun promoting the law. The Reporters Committee has not only followed the law in its regular newsletter, but has also issued two separate brochures on the FOIA [see box]. John Flanagan, executive editor of the St. Paul Dispatch and Pioneer Press and former chairman of the FOI committee of the Associated Press Managing Editors Association, has_ traveled around the country briefing journalists on the law. Last September, Howard Simons, managing editor of The Washington Post, invited Post attorney Joseph Califano to brief about 150 Posr reporters on the law. Simons also promised that ready-to-go form letters would be available in the newsroom for reporters to fill in and mail to the agency of their choice. But by mid-December, however, the forms had not appeared—in part. no doubt, because of the tense strike situation [Violence In The Morning’’—December 1975]. Even reporters who understand the law appear in no hurry to use it. The deadline problem is obvious, but there are other explanations. The cynical theory is that some reporters, especially Washington correspondents, don’t want to jeopardize their cozy relationship with officials by demanding and, perhaps, suing for documents. It has been widely reported, for example, that NBC did not back Stern's COINTELPRO suit because the network wanted to avoid a direct adversary relationship with the government. Stern turned to Ronald Plesser, then an attorney with Ralph Nader’s Freedom of Information Clearinghouse. A more practical explanation is that Washington reporters, especially those in small bureaus of outof-town papers, are too busy these days following the seamy stories of government malfeasance at the House and Senate intelligence hearings. ‘‘My personal view is that the pace here is so heavy now that even to sit down and write a letter would take too much time,” said Bill Eaton of the Chicago Daily News. “Amazing, startling stuff is coming out. Whoever would have thought we'd find out all of this about the CIA, FBI and IRS?” An enterprising reporter, however, long ago might have requested some of these astonishing memos and reports which have been smoldering in government file cabinets for years. Instead of taking stenographic notes at a public hearing, someone might even have scooped the government. Bere have, of course, been hundreds of FOI requests from the press. Like the general *More often than not attorneys do not identify their clients. making it impossible to trace where the information is going and for what purposes. In some cases. the FOIA is used as a discovery tool for pending litigation. But in most cases. lawyers are fronting for corporations seeking to uncover trade secrets or confidential information about their competitors, such as might be on file at, say. the Securities and Exchange Commission. Wide Worid [MORE]7 Wide World Rosenberg sons Michael (left) and Robert Meeropol at Western New England College where they both teach. public, reporters showed an early interest in obtaining their own files. Three Washington bureau chiefs—Dick Dudman of the St. Louis Post Dispatch, David Kraslow of Cox Newspapers and Jack Nelson of The Los Angeles Times—have all obtained part of their FBI dossiers. As they had expected, each had been investigated by J. Edgar Hoover’s operatives after writing articles critical of the bureau. When Nelson wrote to the FBI, on Times stationery, asking to see his file, the bureau replied that he had not provided enough information. ‘Just look under ‘N’ for Nelson and ‘J’ for Jack,” he suggested. In what is believed to be the first FOI suit filed by a broadcasting station, National Public Radio filed suit against the Justice Department last Sept. 29. Reporter Barbara Newman is seeking documents on the death of Karen Silkwood, a laboratory technician at Kerr-McGee’s Nuclear Facility in Oklahoma. Silkwood, who had been poisoned before her death, was killed in a car accident on her way to meet David Burnham of The New York Times, who was investigating charges of health and safety violations at the plutonium factory. Newman’s suit coincides with efforts by Silkwood’s parents and the National Organization for Women to reopen the case. Last March, after Jack Anderson broke the story of the Glomar Explorer and several news organizations admitted they had held their reports on the Howard Hughes-financed spy operation, Hank Phillippi of Rolling Stone's Washington How To Use The Amended FO! Act Two pamphlets on How to Use the New 1974 FOI Act have been prepared by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. They include sample form letters for formal requests and appeals, general advice on how to use the law, names and phone numbers of FOI officials at key government agencies, and summaries of pending FOI law suits. The pamphlets are available from the Reporters Committee’s Legal Defense and Research Service, Room 1112, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006, (202) 872-1620. The first two pamphlets are free; each additional one is 10 cents.... Another helpful booklet on the law is the Attorney General's Memorandum on the 1974 Amendments to the Freedom of Information Act. Ninety cents from the Government Printing Office. A.H. EIR LRETNTIREI IY: ATS EE TENT: 8 [MORE] bureau filed what she thought would be a routine FOI request. She asked for all files relating to then- CIA director William Colby’s efforts to suppress the story. Far from routine, her requests brought not only a denial, but a refusal to admit whether such evidence exists. “Any records that might exist,"” wrote CIA FOI coordinator Robert S. Young, ‘‘which reveals any CIA connection with or interest in the activities of the Glomar Explorer and indeed any data that might reveal the existence of any such records that you have requested would be duly classified.” The CIA continued to refuse to disclose the Colby records even after the government admitted in Los Angeles court proceedings last August the the Glomar was government property used for a secret, classified project and therefore tax exempt. So secret was Colby’s gag-the-press mission that the agency moved in court to argue their refusal to disclose not only in camera, but ex parte—excluding Philippi’s attorney, Mark Lynch, who succeeded Plesser at the FOI Clearinghouse. Ten reporters who cover the Justice Department have filed a joint request for background files on the COINTELPRO program = [‘‘Furthermore’’—December 1975]. Although former Attorney General William Saxbe and the FBI have agreed to release all the documents, only two batches have been delivered. The first covered efforts to disrupt the Ku Klux Klan, John Birch Society and other “‘white hate’ groups. *‘The disclosure was designed to make the bureau look good,” said Orr Kelly. a reporter for The Washington Star. “Everybody dislikes those groups.’ The second installment, delivered Dec. 5, outlined ‘Operation Hoodwink,”’ a futile, two-year effort to pit the Mafia against the Communist Party in the hope they would destroy one another. The project, which ran from 1966 to 1968, was apparently shelved after both organizations studiously ignored FBI officials. Jack Taylor, an investigative reporter for The Daily Oklahoman, has been the most aggressive user of the law, filling more than 675 FOIA requests since 1969. Taylor's biggest project was obtaining the Peers report, the Army’s investigation into the My Lai massacre. Taylor and Plesser spent five years fighting for the 14,000-page document, with Taylor writing 60 stories and mailing 787 letters in his struggle. The Army also refused to release the report to Wisconsin Rep. Les Aspin and retired Lte. Gen. William R. Peers himself. Taylor and the Army drove each other crazy, but military brass wouldn't hand over the document until after the FOI amendments, although Seymour Hersh had had the report all along, and had revealed its devastating findings in The New Yorker in 1972. Recently Taylor requested the FBI files on Anthony (“Fat Tony’’) Salerno and other reputed Mafia figures. The bureau argued that disclosure would invade their privacy, but agreed to release the information if Taylor would submit personal, notarized letters from Salerno and the others giving Taylor permission to see their files. It is still too early to assess the impact of the 1974 Privacy Act on FOI. This legislation, which went into effect Sept. 27, was sponsored by Reps. Edward Koch (D.-N.Y.) and Barry Goldwater, Jr. (R.-Calif.) in the House, and Senators Sam Ervin (D.-N.C.), Charles Percy (R.-IIl.), Edmund Muskie (D.-Me.), Birch Bayh (D.-ind.), Barry Goldwater, Sr. (R.-Ariz.), Edward Kennedy (D.-Mass.), and Charles Mathias (R.-Md.) in the Senate. Designed to protect individuals from the misuse of federal records, the legislation established a seven-member Privacy Protection Commission to safeguard the right to privacy. Plesser is the commission's general counsel. An early court decision, handed down Nov. 11 in U.S. District Court, Nashville, has indicated, however, that the Justice Department is attempting to abide by its stated policy of ‘“*maximum disclosure.”’ Judge Frank Gray, Jr. ordered the release of personal information—age, address, general background—on persons charged with federal crimes to the Nashville press. While Justice may be attempting to abide by the spirit of the FOIA, the FBI remains steadfast. Until recently a sign on the wall in the bureau’s FOI office read, ‘“‘When in doubt, cross it out.” H...e:<: unenthusiastic many bureaucrats are about turning over files to a probing public, disuse of the FOIA is primarily a press problem. ‘‘I think a lot of it has to do with the very nature of reporting,’’ said the FOI Clearinghouse’s Lynch, whose office has handled about 30 FOI cases. “In the macho world of investigative reporting, sources are the measure of a reporter’s worth. If someone has to resort to the law to get information, somehow that’s a comment on his sources.”” This ‘‘deep throat’ syndrome of clandestine meetings and government-toppling disclosure has become the press corps’ image. “I’ve often wondered,”’ said Bob Maynard, editorial writer and former ombudsman at The Washington Post, “if some of the honcho reporters don’t feel that getting information under the FOI is the ‘sissy’ way. Meeting someone in a dimly-lit bar who slips you a secret document, that’s sexy.” The FOIA may not be *‘sexy’’—the ultimate media test—but, then, neither was the dogged mining of all those altogether accessible documents by I.F. Stone. Wading through the record is always time-consuming, usually tedious and often fruitless. But not always, as the Rosenberg case testifies. To date, it constitutes the most sustained assault on government secrecy under the FOIA, and it is worth noting that it was mounted by their sons, two college professors and only one journalist. e Back Issues A limited supply of back issues of [MORE] is available to our readers. All but November, 1971 and October, 1972 can be acquired at the following prices: 1971-1972 (vol. I-Il) 1973 (vol. Ill) 1974 (vol. IV) 2.00 each 1975 (Vol. V) 1.25 each Please indicate the issues you need, enclosing payment with your order, and send to [MORE], 750 Third Avenue, New York, New York 10017. Att: Back Issues. $3.00 each 3.00 each 13 New Episodes start January 4on PBS Host: Alistair Cooke Three 1975 Emmy awards: “best dramatic series” “best actress’ ‘best director’ Mobil 10 [MORE] Bruce Springsteen has ridden to superstardom on a swiftly swelling erescendo of selfreinforcing clamor orchestrated by ‘turned-on’ critics heralding the salvation of rock and roll. Born To Get ‘ltchy Excited’ BY CHRIS WELLES Rock and roll musicians do not often get their pictures in Business Week. But when Bruce Springsteen made it last month, it seemed eminently logical, if not inevitable. A scruffy, hirsute composer-singer from Asbury Park, New Jersey, until recently unknown except to a small band of worshippers, Springsteen over the past few months has received even more publicity than Jackie Onassis: two major articles in The New York Times and simultaneous cover stories in Time and Newsweek (Oct. 27). New Times, among others, was also planning a cover but backed away when Time and Newsweek came out. Still in the works are a 5,000word profile in Playboy and a quickie paperback biography. Why Bruce Springsteen? Even his detractors admit he is a highly talented rock artist. But many highly talented rock artists never obtain anything more than a few approving lines in Rolling Stone and are ignored completely by the “‘straight’’ press. Springsteen has sold over a million record albums and his most recent, “Born to Run,” made it to Number 1 on the Record World charts. But numerous other rock artists, such as Elton John and Chicago, regularly sell many more albums and ate much more popular with rock fans. Many have suggested that the attention accorded Springsteen ranks as perhaps the decade’s supreme realization of the process known in the music business as “hype,” wherein the engines of record company publicity stimulate sufficient noise to produce that elusive quality known as stardom. Admiringly citing the ‘carefully coordinated, sixmonth campaign’’ of Columbia Records, Business Week entitled its story on Springsteen ‘‘the merchandising of a superstar.”” Chicago Sun-Times columnist Bob Greene called the two newsmagazine covers ‘‘a staggering triumph for the public relations men of Columbia Records.” The Springsteen hype, however, was really not of Columbia’s creation. Columbia, says Jon Landau, a rock writer and friend of Springsteen who co-produced his latest album, ‘deserves credit for moving in a big way when they decided to move. But they were really followers, reactors.’”’ Indeed, when Time and Newsweek called within a few days of one another to announce they were planning cover stories, Columbia’s hype engineers were astounded, almost incredulous. Nor was the hype the creation, as others have suggested, of Mike Appel, Springsteen’s brash and abrasive manager. Even when Springsteen was unknown, Appel, modeling himself after the legendary Colonel Parker, Elvis Presley’s manager, pulled the increasingly familiar celebrity ploy of withholding Springsteen from the press and granting interviews only when the resulting story was awarded the cover. Yet due to what many Writers regard as his roughshod treatment of the press—when WNEW-FM in New York refused to play Springsteen’s second abum, Appel enraged the station’s disc jockeys by suggesting in a nasty letter that it took bribes to play certain records—it se. would seem that Appel detracted from. Spring- B® Steen’s press coverage more than he contributed to Sandy Huffaker Credit—or blame, depending on one’s enthusiasm for rock—for the Springsteen phenomenon really belongs to that group which complains most about hype: the rock critics, whose effusive heralding of Springsteen as the new rock messiah ranged far beyond the most innovative puffery of Columbia Records. Springsteen, says Maureen Orth, who wrote Newsweek’s cover story, “is the first rock star [in whose creation] the rock press played a significant part.”’ In a recent Boston Phoenix interview, Jerry Wexler, one of the best known and most respected rock music producers, Chris Welles, a contributing editor of [MORE] is the author most recently of The Last Days of the Club (Dutton), a book about the decline of the New York Stock Exchange. remarked about Springsteen: “Now this to me is one of the most incredible unison jobs of concerted action by the rock press. They did it. It was a lemming-like action on the part of the rock press. Now I'm not saying it was unjustified—I think it's great. For them to move in concert like that—I've never seen it before.” The rock press’s ability to propel Bruce Springsteen into stardom is dramatic testimony to the evolution of rock and roll from the expression of protest by an underground counterculture to just another facet of our pop culture. It is a $3-billiona-year business dominated by the same Establishment that counterculturists have always thought they were undermining. When Bruce Springsteen sings The highways jammed with broken heros On a last chance power drive Evervbody’'s out on the run tonight But there's no place left to hide the profits slide down to the bottom line of the same company that deals in college textbooks, Steinway pianos, Walter Cronkite. and Cher— CBS. i. the early days of rock and roll, a rock artist such as Bob Dylan could obtain cult stardom within the rock world without the straight press or the general public ever being aware of his existence. Indeed. the general public’s ignorance was often a vital ingredient in the artist's popularity, for it protected him from being co-opted and corrupted. But as the rock press, led by Rolling Stone and Crawdaddy, has become firmly established and commercially successful, it has become susceptible to the same trend-obsessed inclinations that preoccupy the straight press—even to the extent of running stories on such well-worn circulation stimulants as the Kennedy assassinations, Chappaquiddick and Patty Hearst. Like a baseball farm team, the rock press now has begun to serve as an efficient supplier of counterculture trends and stars for the straight press’s consumption. If they gather sufficient momentum, the trends and stars. whose substance may consist of little more than “lemming-like’’ media enthusiasm, can make the increasingly short jump from the rock to the straight press and ascend the media hierarchy with often alarming speed. Bruce Springsteen has ridden to superstardom on a swiftly swelling crescendo of self-reinforeing clamor deriving more from the psychological needs of those who operate the media than the desires and interests of those to whom the media is directed. He is a product of an accelerating age of fad hyperconsumption in which, as New York Daily News writer Steven Gains observed. “praise precedes the fact. winners are named before the contest begins, and careers are bloated out of proportion and ruined before they get started." The media seems to be promising that, as Andy Warhol prophesized, “‘everyone. will be a star for 15 minutes.”’ That the Springsteen stardom is the first important instant media event to have emerged from the rock press is, in many ways, not surprising: for as a group, the rock critics are peculiarly suited to the process of 15-minut> fame. “Dear Soho Weekly readers.” rock critic Kenneth Tucker wrote after dashing back to his typewriter following a recent (but pre-7ime and - Newsweek cover) Bruce Springsteen show, “I have just come from the best rock & roll performance I've ever seen in my long, decadent life.” **Sorry about the raving.”’ he said beginning the next paragraph. “It is now the morning after and I still agree with all of the above.” Unlike most other criticism, rock criticism eschews careful detachment and the _ sober, measured weighing of pluses and minuses. Like the rock fan, the rock critic is continually seeking the turn-on, and when he thinks he has found it, something he can really get “‘into,”” he waxes passionate [‘‘How to Become a Rock Critic in 7 Easy Lessons”’—May 1975]. **Rock criticism is visceral and exciting because rock music is visceral and exciting.” says John Rockwell, the 33-year-old rock critic for The New York Times, who until last Jon Landau: *‘I saw rock and roll future and its name is Bruce Springsteen." spring reviewed classical music and ballet. “Sure, there’s an extraordinary amount of self-indulgence. hysteria, stupidity, and exaggeration. It deals in extremes. But. Jesus, it’s fun and lively. It’s infused with a passion that's lacking in other criticism. It's really passion incarnate, the archtypical romantic art form.” Writing about rock, Rockwell allows, has “loosened up my prose.” ‘Rock criticism is more heartfelt because it is more a part of your life.”’ says Peter Knobler, editor of Crawdaddy. **You can get swept up in rock in a very special way.”” When Knobler saw Springsteen at Kenny's Castaways in New York in December 1972, he was, he recalls, ‘completely overwhelmed. There had never been anything like it. Each of his songs was more incredible than the last. It had an intensity like nothing you'd ever seen. It was the most extraordinary experience in rock and roll I'd ever seen."’ Thus moved, Knobler wrote the first of the rock press’s many fervent paeans to Springsteen. Many things had turned Knobler on, and would turn on his successors. As a rock artist, Springsteen looks more backward than forward and is much more a derivative melange of styles, philosophies, harmonies and rhythms that recall Dylan, Presley, Brando, and James Dean and other alienated adolescents than an innovative voice of the future. Yet his rebel-without-a-cause image is so forcefully and dramatically fashioned and his performances so intensely kinetic that the resulting galvanization moves many rock critics to burst into print without carefully analyzing just what it is that lies behind all that electricity. Consider Knobler’s confusion in his Crawdaddy article: Bruce Springsteen's songs offer that wonderfully bewiidering problem of how to keep up. Words tumble over one another, phrases mysteriously feel right and then disappear. There was no way. sitting there without warning in the middle of the wash, that I could even begin to define what the man’s power was. This was an entirely new perspective offered. like nothing I'd ever heard before. There was no given, no center I knew all those spokes were connected to. I was once again on my own with new eyes, and it was exhilarating! Finally. Knobler was forced to conclude: “I was itchy excited.” Knobler was itchy excited, as well, by the prospect of Springsteen as rock and roll’s savior: As rock has become increasingly commercialized, formula-ridden and repetitive in order to make it more palatable to a much larger audience, it has lost much of the raw freshness and surprise of its earlier days. Rock critics, many of whom are veterans of those years and in their late 20’s and early 30's, have been desperately looking for something to grab them in the way they remembered being grabbed when they were in college. Lurking in the back of their minds is the awful fear that, like Dixieland, rock, which they believe lies at the core of their souls, has exhausted its creative potential and is doomed to perish or forever repeat itself. “Two months ago I| was living under a sorry delusion,”” Knobler began the Crawdaddy piece. “Jaded, sick to deat’ of imitations and nostalgia and circular tanger.s, | figured rock and roll had priced itself out of its own salvation.” That concern pervaded other Springsteen paeans to come. “There was a vacuum in the world of rock and roll.” David McGee began a Springsteen piece in Record World. *‘The new decade had its moments but it hadn't produced an artist whose music at once echoed with history and harkened to the future; whose vision was uncompromising and of a magnificent scope; and in whose very being could be found all the greatness of the legends.” The final, and perhaps most important. turn-on for Knobler was that he, Peter Knobler, was the first to stumble on Springsteen. Though most rock critics are embarrassed to admit being motivated by such a crass urge, “there is a real status,”’ says Maureen Orth of Newsweek, “‘to who is into whom first. They all want to be discoverers.” Knobler candidly admits that “I had the scoop on the artist of the decade and I wanted to be first out there.” In its competition with Rolling Stone, which has a much larger circulation, Crawdaddy is continually attempting to upstage its rival. Running the first Springsteen story, says Knobler, *‘reflected well on our magazine. It helped establish us as a magazine with incredible foresight. It showed that we knew what was going on and we knew it first.” Knobler, though, has not received as much praise for his discovery as he thinks he should—which “‘pisses me off. We got half a line in Newsweek and nothing in Time.’ Credit instead has been widely accorded to Jon Landau. As record review editor for Rolling Stone until he left to coproduce Springsteen's “Born To Run” album, Landau is regarded by many as perhaps the most influential rock critic, and his discovery of Springsteen, a year after Knobler’s article, had immense impact within the rock press. = voyage of discovery, as recorded in a now famous May 1974 article*in Boston’s The Real Paper, is instructive. “‘It's four in the morning and raining,”’ he began. “I'm 27 today, feeling old, listening to my records, and remembering that things were different a decade ago.’ A decade ago, “I consumed sound as if it were the staff of life.” As an aspiring musician, “writing was just another extension of an all-encompassing obsession.”’ Having become a critic. “I listen to music with a certain measure of detachment... But in my own moments of greatest need, I never give up the search for sounds that can answer every impulse, consume all emotion, cleanse and purify.” But now, Landau went on, “‘there is someone I can write of the way I used to write."’ He had just been to the Harvard Square theater and had emerged cleansed and purified. I saw rock and roll future and its name is Bruce Springsteen. And on a night when I needed to feel young, he made me feel I was hearing music for the very first time. When his two-hour set ended, I could only think, can anyone really be this good; can anyone say this much to me; can rock 'n’ roll still speak with this kind of power and glory? And then I felt the sores on my thighs where I had been pounding my hands in time for the entire concert and I knew the answer was yes. The timing of Landau’s declaration was crucial to Springsteen’s surge, for in early 1974 Columbia Records, which had signed him up in 1972, was considering dropping him. Despite de rigeur hype from Columbia that he was the “new Dylan”’ (one of dozens of ‘‘new Dylans’’ who appear and disappear every year), Springsteen’s first album had sunk without a trace and his second seemed destined to follow it. Landau’s review, though, alerted Columbia to Springsteen's potential and caused the company to make its principal contribution to the Springsteen hype. Aware of the growing influence of the rock press, Springsteen loyalists at Columbia convinced the compzny to do something regarded as routine in the movie business but never before used with such thrust in the [MORE] 11 oo oe ) Bruce Springsteen record business: spend $50,000 publicizing Landau’s quote about Springsteen as the future of rock and roll. Despite the rock press’s avowed suspicion of hype, Landau’s pronouncement had a kind of band: «gon effect and other rock writers scrambled to climb aboard. In an article in the Soho Weekly News headlined, YOU DON'T KNOW HIM —BUT YOU WILL, Paul Williams repeated Landau’s quote and predicted that ‘the new age is upon us.” ‘The smart money is betting there'll be a new star in rock ‘n’ roll heaven when ‘Born to Run’ is released,”’ wrote Paul Nelson in The Village Voice last summer. The album, said David Fandray in Exit, a now defunct Cleveland counterculture magazine, ‘could well mark the emergence of Bruce Springsteen as the first genuine American recording sensation of the '70s.”" ‘No matter what ‘Born to Run’ sounds like.” said Peter -Herbst in the Boston Phoenix, ‘Bruce Springsteen is in all probability going to be rock’s next superstar.” Believing that Springsteen's burgeoning stardom proved that rock and roll was alive and well and thus could boost the entire record business, the trade press took up the cry. “Bruce Springsteen,”’ said Cashbox, ‘may very well be the most brilliant American songwriter/performer of the 70's.” “‘The rock dream exists in 1975 with Springsteen as its most eloquent spokesman,” said Record World. ‘He is the agent through whom the music continually defines itself. The images in his songs reach out and touch us down to our cores.” A vital part of the Springsteen boom was FM radio. While AM radio generally sticks to established artists in order to attract the broad mass of music listeners, FM cattrs to rock connoisseurs and looks for new trends and faces. Since FM DJ's tend to be frustrated rock critics and to display many of the same psychological inclinations, they turned on to Springsteen during 1974 and early 1975 along with the rock press. In cities where Springsteen had made personal appearances, such as Houston, Cleveland, and Philadelphia, the DJ's eagerly played his records, thus significantly expanding the Springsteen cult. If the hip FM DJ's were turned on by Springsteen, many listeners concluded, he must be the thing to be into. Springsteen now made the crucial jump to the Establishment press. The first major convert was Robert Hilburn of The Los Angeles Times. From the beginning, Springsteen had been mainly an East Coast phenomenon—so much so that Rolling Stone, which is edited in San Francisco and has a xenophobic skepticism of Eastern trends, was among the few rock magazines to keep the Springsteen phenomenon in a rational perspective. The conversion of Hilburn, one of the Coast's most respected rock critics despite his Establishment atfiliation, was very important in making Spring- 12 [MORE] TIME Rock’s New Sensation Steen’s stardom national. Springsteen, Hilburn wrote last September, “has come along just at the right time—a time when rock is so badly in need of fresh imagination and energy—to give some life back to the music." He is, Hilburn announced. “the purest glimpse of the passion and power of rock ‘n’ roll in nearly a decade.” T.. most significant convert, though, was John Rockwell of The New York Times, who last August awarded Springsteen unprecedented space on the Times's ‘‘second front.” the first page of the second section that, says Rockwell, ‘is the big play for soft news in the paper.” In a piece pegged to Springsteen's appearance last August at the Bottom Line in Greenwich Village. and headlined THE ROCKY ROAD TO ROCK STARDOM. Rockwell unburdened himself of perhaps the most unabashed succession of superlatives ever to emerge from a Times critic. Springsteen's shows, he said, “will rank among the great rock experiences of those lucky enough to get in. Mr. Springsteen has it all—he is a great lyricist and song writer, he is a wonderful singer, guitarist and piano player, he has one of the best rock and roll bands anybody has ever heard, and he is as charismatic a stage figure as rock has produced.” Rockwell admits that “90 per cent of the critics I respect love Springsteen's stuff.” that “there is no question that you are influenced by what everyone else does” and that the press buildup of Springsteen ‘fed upon itself."’. But he claims his motivation to eulogize Springsteen and convince his editors to allocate second-front space was that “I thought he was good.’ But a friend of Rockwell says that ever since taking over the rock post at the Times, he has been as eager as any rock critic to be a discoverer and quite aware of the impact of the Times as an organ of discovery. Asked about his Springsteen piece, Rockwell says that “to be a critic necessitates enthusiasm for things one likes. You say, Gee. this is good and you want to share it. I think Bruce Springsteen is wonderful and terrific, so | want others to think so too. Perhaps it is just a reaffirmation of your own ideas. But it is fun feeling a lot of enthusiasm and being turned on, and getting other people turned on also.” Inevitably, by last October, the almost unrelieved exaltation produced the first of the major Macdonaldizers, as Times critic John Leonard calls the inflation deflators. Again in the 7imes—the lead story in the Sunday Arts and Leisure Section—critic Henry Edwards contended that Springsteen’s “raw dynamics, for all the fun they provide. simply cannot disguise the fact that tor the most part Springsteen's lyrics are an effusive jumble, his melodies either second hand or undistinguished and his performance tedious.” The rock critics, ~ Edwards claimed. had been fatally afflicted with nostalgia for Springsteen's conjuration of “‘one of rock ‘n’ roll’s most sentimentalized. romanticized and still-popular stereotypes: the outlaw teen.” Others not so afflicted. Edwards concluded. ‘may be forgiven if. after the first 10 minutes of hearing Springsteen sing. they find the hoopla tiresome and the performer vacuous.” All the elements were now in place. The rock critics had annointed a new messiah, appropriately from the East Coast. to the accompaniment of cheers by the trade press and the FM disc jockeys. The New York Times. whose notice New York media heavies require as proof something is happening, had delivered its imprimatur. And now the backlash had set in, thus adding the vital note of controversy. Had they been more acute observers. the hype engineers at Columbia Records would not have been surprised when 7ime and Newsweek revealed their cover plans. Indeed. the hypists should have been sitting by the phone waiting tor the calls. Newsweek called first—ten days betore the two covers hit the stands on Oct. 20. The magazine had done an earlier story in September on Springsteen as a musician. But what now had struck senior editor Lynn Young, who suggested the cover. was the phenomenal amount of press coverage. Having listened to his albums and concluded that “he’s good but not that good.” she decided Springsteen must be an enormously successful hype. **We decided to do an inside story on how the rock industry creates a star,”’ she says. Because neither Young nor Maureen Orth had ever seen Springsteen perform. they obtained tickets from Columbia to attend a Springsteen concert Saturday night, Oct. 11. Among those in the audience was a friend of Time statf writer Joan Downs, a longtime Springsteen fan who had written a short profile on him in 7ime in April 1974. A few weeks earlier, after continually promoting Springsteen to the magazine's editors with the help of Time movie critic Jay Cocks, also a Springsteen fan. Downs had received tentative permission to work up a cover on the grounds that, as she put it to the editors, “Springsteen is the most important person in rock since Dylan.”’ But no real work had been done on the project. Now, after hearing about Newsweek's plans, “I was absolutely livid. We were the first ones on him and I would have been furious if they had come out ahead of us. I called Jay Monday morning and said whatever we do we have to push this story through.” “It's kind of an emotional thing,” says Cocks. when asked why he decided to help push. “You get a little jealous. You feel that since you did him first it’s kind of a proprietary thing and you don't want to get beaten.’ Cocks helped convince managing editor Henry Grunwald on the idea of a crash cover effort. Helpful in the convincing, says Cocks, were the “groundswell” of acclaim and especially The New York Times pieces: ‘They brought him to the attention of the people up here ard in a sense legitimized him.” Despite the legitimization, not everyone at Time agreed with Grunwald’s decision. A sizeable number, in fact, were, as one puts it, ‘‘embarrassed."* As many of the dissidents saw it, Grunwald was abandoning the tradition of the Time cover as the Time Inc. editorial process's most august, solemn and assiduously weighed statement. Using it in an impulsive attempt to get a piece of an ephemeral and insubstantial fad seemed demeaning. The reason for Grunwald’s decision, they felt. was Time's competition with Newsweek. ‘There is a certain feeling on Madison Avenue that Newsweek, with its new group of young editors. is the more with-it of the two magazines. and Henry desperately wants to counteract that."’ Another editor adds, “I think Henry was worried Newsweek was about to declare Springsteen the rock phenomenon of the 70's and he didn't want to be left behind.” Editors at both 7ime and Newsweek, though. did not like the prospect of simultaneous covers, Which they learned early in that last week was a likelihood. “It looked like just what our one thing convince you Lite Beer is less filling. Your second one. We can tell you Lite Beer from Miller is less filling than { our regular beer. | We can tell you it has one-third less calories. And we can tell you it tastes great. | | 2-02. average analysis: Carbohydrates. 2.8 grams 0.0 grams* *Same as our regular beer. But reading about Lite Beer isn't enough. Youve got to drink one. In fact, two. The first will convince you about the taste. The second will do the rest. Lite’ Beer from Miller. Everything you always wanted in a beer. And less. ©1974 The Miller Brewing Co Milwaukee, Wis readers are always accusing us of,” says Lynn Young of Newsweek, “the Eastern intellectual establishment all thinking the same way, even to the point of colluding.” Yet neither magazine wanted to suffer the ignominy of surrendering Springsteen to the other. The magazines’ frantic cover efforts understandably put a great deal of strain on Columbia. The PR department was rather unsure of the propriety of accommodating the two publications. And Springsteen himself was clearly equivocal about all the attention and confused about how to react. On Tuesday, for instance, Maureen Orth went down to Springsteen's home in Asbury Park for a long, intense interview and then drove back to New York with him, arriving about 11 p.m. When Columbia publicists explained to their star that Time reporter Jim Willwerth was waiting to meet him and that both Time and Newsweek had photographers and studios standing by for cover portraits, Springsteen, exhausted and drained by the interview with Orth, slammed his fist into a wall and refused to cooperate any further. ‘‘The hype gets in the way,” he had told Orth earlier. ‘People have gone nuts. It's weird.’’ Eventually, however, Springsteen agreed to be interviewed by Willwerth, and after midnight the two drove back down to Asbury Park and talked until seven in the morning. The attitude of the two publications toward their competition was sharply divergent. Though Time was late in getting its cover going and was reacting to Newsweek, “they acted as if they were the only kid on the block,”’ says one individual directly involved in the two stories. “It seemed they didn’t even care that Newsweek existed. Newsweek, though, had total uptightness about Time.’ To help protect Newsweek's head start, Maureen Orth, for instance, continually complained to Columbia and Springsteen people about the amount of time Time was spending with Springsteen. She was especially upset to learn about Springsteen's return trip to New Jersey with Willwerth, which produced some of the same Springsteen quotes in the Time story that Orth’s interview had produced for her story. ‘“‘He poured his heart out to me all the way to New York and then poured his heart out all the way back down to New Jersey with him,” she says, a little sarcastically. Despite the two-way heart-pouring, the two cover stories came out surprisingly disparate. Newsweek's cover, entitled “Making of a Rock Star,’ focused on the hype, most of the credit for which it gave to Columbia. It asked, but did not really answer, the question of whether Springsteen ‘will be the biggest superstar or the biggest hype of the 70s." Time’s cover, which was written by Jay Cocks and headlined ‘‘Rock’s New Sensation,”’ was an almost unrelieved accolade to Springsteen, similar to, though much better written than, earlier efforts by the rock critics. Springsteen, Cocks wrote, “represents a regeneration, a renewal of rock. He has gone back to the sources, rediscovered the wild excitement rock has lost over the past few years... Springsteen has taken rock forward by taking it back, keeping it young.” “Newsweek at least questioned the hype,”’ says one of the Time staff members who is critical of the magazine’s cover. “‘Time got taken in by it.” “‘The story,” Jim Willwerth said, “is the man, not the hype. We believe in our story, and in Springsteen.” Neither of the two covers sold particularly well on the newsstands. Springsteen articles continued to appear, but their frequency tapered off. And though 30 million Time and Newsweek readers presumably were now aware of Bruce Springsteen, sales of his latest album increased only marginally. Number 7 on the Record World charts on Nov. 1, a week after the cover stories had reached subscribers, the album had dropped to 43 by Dec. 8. In a Record World report on Nov. 15 of FM airplay, the latest album was reported receiving “heavy action’’ on only four of the 14 major FM stations surveyed. The single release of ‘Born to Run,” the sales and AM radio play of which is a broader gauge of his popularity and acceptance by the mass rock audience, peaked at 22 on Nov. 1 and has now fallen off the charts. (Chart rankings reflect both sales and radio play.) While Springsteen’s latest album has sold just over 800,000 copies in four months, MCA received orders for a million copies of Elton John’s latest album, ‘Rock of the Westies,” until recently Number 1, even before it was released. Having been featured on the covers of two of the most powerful organs, in the nation, Springsteen’s future as a continued object of passion by the rock press or by FM disc jockeys seems in doubt. “I love him but I'm sick of him and I don’t want to hear about him,”’ says DJ Dick Neer of WNEW-FM in New York. Neer has stopped playing Springsteen’s albums every night now. ‘“We’ve been getting calls from a lot of people who say they’re tired of hearing Springsteen,” he says. “‘I guess him making it kind of bothers me,” he adds. “It’s no longer an inside thing, just me and a few friends. It’s hip to be into an artist from the beginning, and it was nice when I was practically the only one playing him. But when everyone starts playing him, it kind of quells your enthusiasm. I guess it’s kind of an ego thing. It’s not anything special any longer to like Bruce Springsteen.” @ ‘“The funniest thing about journalists With every cop from Scotland Yard aching to clap the cuffs on Ronald Biggs, it was a newspaper, the lively and aggressive Daily Express that finally found him, and enraged its competition by the Scoop of the Century: the story of Biggs’ dramatic arrest in Bio de Janeiro. This was too much for the brutally competitive newspaper world of London's Fleet Street. Rival reporters started asking questions. How did the Express happen to be in just the right place when Biggs was arrested by Detective Chief Superintendent Jack Slipper? How did the Yard know where to find the celebrated fugitive? And who was Colin MacKenzie, the unknown reporter whose byline was planted below each shrieking Express headline? Could it possibly be that the Daily 4, Express had violated the unwritten code and set a trusting and needy Biggs up for the spectacular arrest? Had the Press been the informant?Had the Yard taken its orders from the Express? since SCOOP _phitip Knightley, author of The First Casualty \ Anthony Delano, a veteran Fleet Street reporter, answers all the questions in this exhilarating, inside account of the nuttiest caper since The Great Train Robbery itself. “The best and funniest book about Fleet Street since Michael Frayn.”’ —New Statesman ‘A Billy Wilder-style comedy of muddle, mistrust and misplaced zeal."’ —New York Times ‘There can be nothing like a Fleet Street pack in full cry on foreign assignment."’ —More ‘Good, racy story of a newsbeat stretching from London to Rio.” —Publishers Weekly t Quadrangle/The New York Times Book Co. Dept. 862, 10,East 53 St., N.Y., N.Y. 10022 Enclosed please find check or money order in the amount of $____for. copies of Slip-Up at $8.95 each. If I find the book unsuitable for any reason, I may return this order within 10 days and my money will be refunded in full. Add $.60 for postage and handling. Name: Address: City: St.: Zip: Signature:: N.Y. & Ill. residents add applicable sales tax. At Leading Bookstores Or Mail This Coupon ‘14 [MORE] Special Holiday Gift Offer Our SPECIAL GIFT OFFER is $10 for your first gift (that's $2 off our regular annual price), andan EXTRA SPECIAL RATE OF $8 (3 off) for each additional gift order A gift card personally inscribed with your name will go to each new subscriber To order one or more subscriptions at this special holiday rate, simply fill out and return this card To sum up: Order [MORE] now for only $10 per year for the first subscription, and $8 for each additional. Cash or charge as you prefer. But please order before the end of the year to take advantage of these special rates Oh, and by the way, we wish you [MORE] for the New Year MORE P.O. Box 955 Farmingdale N.Y. 11735 Please enter a subscription for the person(s) named below, at the special holiday rate of $10 for one year for the first, and $8 per year for each additional subscription Name a en: ee __ ss Name Address 7 - = Address City __ i ’ City State Zip Myname _, (] Please enter a subscription for.me Address —;.. enclosed. Or we'll bill you, if you prefer. Initial here __.____ Additional foreign postage add $2.00 for each one year subscription 1S1A00 alar FIRST CLASS Permit No. 46906 New York, NY BUSINESS REPLY MAIL Stamp necessary if mailed in United States Box 955 Farmingdale, N.Y. 11735 Vladimir Herzog is only one of hundreds of victims of repressive governments around the world. The scope of the problem is set down on the following two pages. Viadimir Herzog (1937-1975) BY ALAN TERNES At the Jewish cemetery outside Sao Paulo, while security police nervously watched the large, sullen crowd, a colleague moved up close to one of the journalists who had been arrested and questioned at the same time as Vladimir Herzog. ‘‘How are you?” he asked in a low voice. The journalist, temporarily released from imprisonment to attend the funeral, looked down at his hands, swollen from police torture. He shrugged and said quietly, “*At least I am alive.” The death of Vladimir Herzog, 38-year-old Brazilian journalist, on Oct. 28 in the headquarters of the Department of Internal Operations of the Second Army in Sao Paulo remains a mystery. But enough information has leaked out of censorshrouded Brazil—in letters, personal reports, telephone conversations and clippings from regional newspapers—to support these conclusions: © Herzog did not commit suicide, as official army statements insist. Overzealous army interrogators probably killed him by accident; © Herzog’s arrest and torture were part of a wave of repression waged by hardline militarists in the Sao Paulo region of Brazil; ¢ Like Herzog, a number of those arrested in the current repression were Jews; © The victim and the many other journalists arrested and questioned were little more than pawns in a political power struggle under way in Brazil. In recent years, the fabric of Brazil's military-backed presidential regime has been weakened and torn. Internally, the economic boom of the past decade has softened. Externally, the unrest in neighboring Argentina and, particularly, the amazingly fast revolution in Portugal have troubled Brazil’s leaders, especially the right-wing militarists. This has led to a struggle within the government and powerful armed forces. President Ernesto Geisel, who has been in office since March 1974, has worked cautiously to lift some of the repression, including press censorship, that has characterized the regime since 1964. The military hardliners have opposed this liberalization, particularly since the Portuguese revolution. The words liberalization and opposed are perhaps too strong. The Geisel regime certainly would not be considered liberal by most standards, and the hardliners would not directly oppose the powerful president. Instead they attacked a strong supporter and personal friend of the president, Governor Alan Ternes is the editor of Natural History magazine. He wrote this article in collaboation with a Brazilian citizen living in New York. He was preparing the evening news broadcast when the Brazilian police came to take him away. The next day he was dead— a suicide, according to the army; murdered, according to his friends. Paulo Egydio Martins of Sao Paulo. How does all this fit into the tragedy of Vladimir Herzog? It is a long road of coincidences, from his birth in Yugoslavia in 1937, his emigration with his parents to Brazil in the early forties, to an advanced degree and career as a journalist. At the University of Sao Paulo, where he studied philosophy, Herzog was an independent political man, not affiliated with any party. He started his journalistic career in 1959, working for the respected conservative newspaper O Estado de Sao Paulo as a reporter and editor. At the University he met Clarice Chaves, whom he married in 1964, a few weeks before the Brazilian military, in a coup d’etat, took absolute control of, the political power in Brazil. Clarice, a sociologist, built a career in market research with major international firms. In 1965, Vlado, as Herzog was called by almost everybody, got an overseas assignment with the BBC in London. Their two children, Ivo, 9 and Andre, 7, were born in England. When Herzog returned to Brazil in 1968, he became an editor on Visao, one of the liveliest magazines in the country. The weekly was, despite - censorship, one of the more liberal publications in the country. It is no coincidence that a number of journalists arrested around the time of Herzog’s death had been on the staff of Visao with him. With both husband and wife in well-paying professional positions, the Herzog family prospered in Brazil’s boom economy. They bought a farm in the country. When Herzog stayed with some friends during a vacation in New York City last spring, he talked a lot about his farm and about the fruit trees he had planted there. Almost every weekend he went to the farm with Clarice and the children. At Visao, Herzog became cultural editor. He was able to assign and edit the types of articles he most enjoyed. And much of what he did was relatively free of censorship. There were many exceptions, however. Once, one of his writers reviewed a book on the women’s movement, and an angry censor wanted to know why Visao was sponsoring free love. On another occasion, Herzog put together a series on perhaps his greatest concern: the impact of conformity on Brazilian culture. Highly critical of the country’s ‘‘cultural emptiness,” the series argued that When the 1964 [military government] came to power, they couldn't sit passively and watch the ‘Mobilization of important sectors of intellectuals and artists going to the opposition... The government then organized a series of laws and official ideological formulations to efficiently control the spiritual life of the country... More than 100 plays and 30 movies were forbidden by the censors..- 61 popular songs cannot be played and a large number of books have been forbidden. This would have been an almost untouchable subject, but Herzog handled it adroitly. Visao interviewed the censors, who then were thus somewhat disarmed. The effect of the series, however, was quite damning to the state and exceedingly popular among intellectuals and students—facts the military leaders hardly overlooked. About a year ago, Visao changed owners. The new owner seemed less concerned with producing a good magazine than he was about glorifying himself and his conservative causes. The result was disastrous for the editorial staff. Many left, including Herzog, who became head of the news department of TV Cultura, the local public television station in Sao Paulo. Despite Herzog’s politics, his appointment was cleared by the federal political police and the National Information Service, a required procedure for any management position in the media or on the faculty of a university. It was a great opportunity for Herzog, who had maintained a strong interest in films and television since his days at the BBC. Upon moving into his new job, he also started to teach at the School of Communications of the University of Sao Paulo. But he was about to get caught up in the political winds that were sweeping Sao Paulo last summer. In Brazil, the censors are primarily concerned with influences on public opinion. Television, the media of the masses, gets the most attention. The army officers who direct the censors seem to be paranoid about television. They impose severe restrictions on TV news broadcasts. So when Herzog became head of the news department of TV (Continued on page 19) sIMQRE)15 IS MIGHTIER THAN THE PEN BY BARBARA C. SPROUL Of the hundreds of thousands of people throughout the world who are denied basic human rights, journalists are particularly singled out. Independent or dissenting voices must be stifled when power and justice are held to be synonymous, and those who reveal the existence of repression and censorship are considered most dangerou:. The most powerful people remaining when opposition political parties have been disbanded are the journalists. Under repressive regimes of all political stripes they are censored, exiled, arrested, and sometimes tortured and killed. Several international human rights organizations work in different ways on behalf of these journalists and in support of their right, as guaranteed in Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “‘to seek, receive and impart information through any media” as an integral part of the right of freedom of expression. All of these organizations are non-governmental and nonpolitical and most have representative status with the U.N. and other international bodies. AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL, with a staff of seventy researchers at its London headquarters, investigates all kinds of human rights violations. It “adopts” individual prisoners of conscience, people who have been imprisoned in violation of the Universal Declaration, and sends information on each case to one of its 1,600 adoption groups in 32 countries. Members of these adoption groups pressure the jailer country through publicity, letter and telegram campaigns, and visits to embassies. Al also sends investigative and negotiating missions abroad, observes trials, makes representations to the UN and other international bodies, and publishes reports on human rights violations. (U.S. office: 200 West 72nd Street, New York. Executive Director: David Hawk.) THE COMMITTEE OF INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM TO PUBLISH was recently formed by several major American publishers to work primarily with the U.S. State Department and Congress and also with foreign governments and publishers to improve conditions of writers. On Nov. 18, Robert Bernstein, president of Random House and chairman of this committee, along with Arthur Miller, Harrison Salisbury, Joseph Okpaku, Rose Styron and the committee's counsel, Alan Schwartz, testified on the freedom to write and publish before Senator Jackson’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. (Office: One Park Avenue, New York. Executive assistant: Patricia McLaughlin. ) THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS was founded in the early ‘SOs to promote the understanding and observance of human rights and the rule of law throughout the world. The ICJ analyses legal systems in various countries and attempts to alter domestic laws that controvene international human rights legislation. Individual cases are taken up by the ICJ when they are typical of the misuse of law and in these situations the ICJ sends investigative missions, attends trials and pressures the jailer government for release. (U.S. office: 777 U.N. Plaza, New York. U.N. representative: Joanne Dolan.) THE INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR THE RIGHTS OF MAN, tounded in 1940 by Roger Baldwin to promote the observance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, has affiliates in 32 countries and a part-time staff of 50 legal interns in New York who research individual cases. The League works mainly by lobbying at the U.N., but also intercedes directly with governments on occasion. (U.S. office: 777 U.N. Plaza, New York. Executive Director: Roberta Cohen.) THE INTERNATIONAL PEN CLUB, an organization exclusively tor writers, works in the human rights area by trying to improve the situation of persecuted writers through diplomatic negotiations behind the scenes. PEN keeps extensive lists of writers imprisoned and otherwise denied their right of expression. (U.S. office: 156 Fifth Avenue, New York. Executive Secretary: Kirsten Michalski.) The best journal in this field is the quarterly INDEX on Censorship, produced in London and distributed here by Random House. INDEX draws attention to the plight of authors and journalists by printing their censored works and producing articles on various human rights violations. (21 Russell Street. Covent Garden. London WC2B S HP. Editor: Michael Scammell.). The effectiveness of these organizations is certain, although difficult to measure precisely; governments rarely admit the power of international pressure when ‘restoring human rights. Indicative, however, is the fact that 13,000 of Amnesty International’s adopted prisoners of conscience have been released over the past 14 years. Conditions have improved for countless others and still more have retained their rights because governments fear international condemnation. On the page opposite is a partial Amnesty International list of journalists currently imprisoned, many without charge or trial, around the world. WHEN THE SWORD Barbara C. Sproul is a member of the executive committee of Amnesty International and teaches comparative religion at Hunter College in New York City. aan ii, My LEM pr ® Wy rd co pe; BW. pi ome Liy abe ‘ ace New bh as NF SS RT aE LNG LOH, B Martim Aviilez Shan news Octo! Publ. Pena towa! Bino ing ¢ chars Babi Obse years “pos Habi Azada Spec Sive ¢ Issan appe impr’ patio Glad and | Radi reste Alan Pabl lero, with tion. years Erne Arre “acti sente in Gi Carl Arre “cou 20 ye Rom duct just abou All char legec priot 196§ mad with atter befo ings erall Com polit cout Alwi gres: couy Sale Ton Tim Oct. tlem Rivs Bar seve Hel Aris dail Hel: Arn Tin Suk Hel Jak BANGLADESH Shamsul Alam, editor of weekly Bengali newspaper Navabug. Arrested about October 1973. Charged under Press and Publicity Ordinance of the Bangladesh Penal Code with ‘“‘creating disaffection towards the government." Binoy Bhushan Chatterjee, journalist working on newspaper in Khulna. Detained on charge of ‘subversive activities.” Babul Rabbani, sub-editor Bangladesh Observer. Has been held for one-and-a-halt years without trial, allegedly on charges of “possession of unauthorized arms."’ Habibur Rahman, Senior sub-editor daily Azad. Detained for over two years under Special Powers Act. Charged with “‘subversive activities.” BRAZIL Issami Nakamura Okano, journalist. Disappeared April 14, 1974 in Sao Paulo. Was imprisoned once before in 1971 for participation in student movements. CHILE Gladys Diaz Armijo, political commentator and journalist, President of the Union of Radio Journalists until Sept. 11, 1973. Arrested March 13, 1975. Detained in Tres Alamos, Santiago. Allegedly tortured. CUBA Pablo Ricardo Valerio Castellanos Caballero, journalist. Arrested 1962. Charged with “crimes against the integrity of the nation.”” Tried Oct. 17, 1962, sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment. Ernesto Adolfo Rivero Caro, journalist. Arrested May 23, 1961. Charged with “activities against the government,” sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment. Held in Guanajay. Carlos Rodriguez Betancourt, journalist. Arrested March 1961. Charged with being a “counter revolutionary’’ and sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment. GUATEMALA Romeo Anton Sanchez, journalist, abducted Dec. 8, 1972, fate unknown. He is just one of hundreds of “missing persons” about whom very little is known. INDONESIA All these prisoners are detained without charge or trial because of their real or alleged support for the Communist Party prior to its proscription after the October 1965 coup attempt. The broad allegation made against those journalists associated with the newspapers banned after the coup attempt, or with the Antara news agency before it was purged, is that, by their writings and commentaries, which were generally pro-Sukarno, or pro the Indonesian Communist Party, they helped to create a political climate which would favour the coup attempt. Alwi, journalist with Warta Bakti, a progressive evening paper banned after the coup attempt. Arrested mid-1969. Held at Salemba Men's Prison in Jakarta. Tom Anwar, deputy chief editor of Bintang Timur, a banned Jakarta daily. Arrested Oct. 1965. Held on the Buru Island *‘Resettlement’’ camp. Rivai Apin, editor of literary journal Zaman Baru, poet whose publications include several anthologies. Arrested Oct. 1965. Held at Buru “Resettlement” camp. Arispranoto, staff member of Communist daily Harian Rakjat. Arrested Oct. 1965. Held on Buru Island ‘‘Resettlement’’ Camp. Armunanto, former editor of Bintang Timur, Minister of Mining in the last Sukarno cabinet. Arrested March 1966. Held at Nirbaya Detention Camp near Jakarta. Juliarso, foreign news editor of Communist Party daily Hawrian Rakjat. Arrested 1967 or early 1908. Held at Buru Island ‘‘Resettlement” camp. Jubar Ayub, literary critic and features writer who was elected to central board of LEKRA, the left-wing cultural workers’ association, in 1959. Arrested 1968. Held at Salemba Men’s Prison in Jakarta. Karim D.P., editor in chief of leftwing evening daily Warta Bakti and chairman of the Indonesian Journalists Association in 1965. Arrested Oct. 1965. Held in Salemba Men's Prison in Jakarta Naibaho, editor of Indonesian Communist Party daily Hurian Rakjat. Arrested Oct. 1965. Held in Salemba Men's Prison in Jakarta. Njoman S. Pendit, literary commentator and translator; published new translation and commentaries on the Bhagavad Gita; also a regular feature writer for the English language daily, /ndonesian Observer. Arrested Aug. 1969. Held in Salemba Men's Prison in Jakarta. Hasjim Rachman, managing director ot Bintang Timur; active member of Indonesian Journalists’ Association (PWI); member of leftwing cultural association LEKRA. Arrested Oct. 1965. Held at Buru. Island “Resettlement” camp. Djoni Hendra Sitompul, journalist for several newspapers before joining the staff of Warta Bakti, editor of the paper's weekly journal, Partjawarna, secretary of Jakarta branch of Indonesian Association ot Journalists (PWI). Arrested Aug. 1969. Held at Salemba Men's Prison, Jakarta. Sudjinah, writer and regular contributor of short stories to Communist Party daily Harian Rakjat, worked on editorial staff of Api Kartini, the journal of the pro-Communist women’s organization Gerwani. Arrested late 1966. Held in Bukit Duri Women’s Prison, Jakarta. She was tortured and maltreated at Kalong Interrogation Center, Gunung Sahari, Jakarta. Suprijo, journalist, chief economics correspondent for Antara national news agency. His wife was member of parliament for Communist Party. Held at Salemba Men's Prison, Jakarta. A.S. Surjo, formerly a journalist with Gelora Indonesia, a strongly pro-Sukarno paper. Studied in Yugoslavia, but arrested shortly after his return to Indonesia in 1967. Held in Salemba Prison or on Buru Island. Suroto, founder and editor in chief of the Antara news agency. Arrested Oct. 1965, released in mid-1966 but in face of press criticism of his release and virulent attacks, he returned to his former detention camp and requested protection. Held in Salemba Men's Prison, Jakarta. He was beaten and ill-treated during his interrogation. Walujo, head of domestic news section of Antara national news agency, official of Indonesian Journalists’ Association. Arrested Oct. 1965. Held at Salemba Men's Prison. Jakarta. Beaten and maltreated during first months of detention. SINGAPORE Lee Eu Seng, publisher: managing director of newspaper Nanyang Siang Pau. Arrested Jan. 28, 1973, apparently in exchange for two staff journalists released after signing statements which laid responsibility for offending articles upon him. No trial. Twoyear renewable detention order. Detained in Moon Crescent Center, Changi Prison. Said Zahari, poet and former president of Malaysian National Union of Journalists, editor of Utusan Melayu. Opposed 1963 union with Malaysia and wrote anti-Federation articles. Arrested Feb. 2, 1963 (Security ‘Operation Cold Store’’). Detained without trial in Moon Crescent Center, Changi Prison. TAIWAN Chang Hua-ming, writer and journalist who when arrested in 1966, was preparing to publish a book on China. Tried the same year on charges of “propaganda against the government.’ Sentenced to eight vears’ imprisonment. Held in Taitung Prison. Kuo Yi-tung, better known under pen-name Po Yang, writer and former editor of a Taipei newspaper. Has published 30 novels and a collection of essays. Arrested March 1969 and charged with having attended a Communist spy school in 1949. Sentenced July 1969 to 12 years’ imprisonment. Held in the Military Garrison Command, Taipei. Li Chung-sun, editor in chief of Chung Yung Jth Pau (Central Daily News) and chairman of the executive council of the Great China Evening News. Arrested 1970, charged with “subversive activities and cultural espion age. Sentenced on unknown imprisonment. Held at Command, Taipei date to lite Military Garrison T'ung Ch’ang, assistant and literary editor ot Hsin Shen Jih Pao (New Life Daily News) Arrested May 1970 charged under Punish ment of Rebellion Statute. Held at Military Garrison Command. Taipei. Sentence pre sumed heavy. Yu Chi, joint editor Chung Hua Jih Pao (China Daily News). Arrested Nov. 1970 on charge of subversive activities and cultural espionage tor the Communist Party. Sentenced 1971 to five years’ imprisonment Held at Military Garrison Command, Taipei. Otini Kambona, editor of newspaper Ulimwengu (The World). tormer member of Parliament. First arrested Dec. 1967 after editorial in paper called upon government to use law courts instead of powers under Preventive Detention Act. Released Feb 1972 after detention without trial. Re arrested June 1972. Held without trial in Butimba Prison. Mwanza. Brother Mattiva also detained in Tanzania. Another brother. former Minister of External Aftairs Oscar Kambona. who is an opponent of President Julius Nverere. is now in voluntary exile and is believed to be reason Otini and Mattiva tor detention of Victor Namunera, freelance journalist, born in) Mozambique in 1948. Arrested in Kampala. Uganda, in 1967 and then trans ferred to Tanzania. Presently held without trial in Keko Remand Prison, Dar es Salaam, under the provisions of the Preven tive Detention Act. TURKEY Dundar Erenler, editor of Kivilcim (The Spark). Arrested probably April 1974 because of leftwing views expressed in Kivilctm, and call tor the establishment of a “proletarian party."’ Charged with “propagating communism and forming an illegal organization."* Tried July-September 1974 and sentenced to 36 years’ imprisonment. 13'2 years’ extle and 100 TL fine. Detained in Toptasi Prison, Uskudar, Istanbul. Demir Kucukaydin, publisher of Arvilcim (The Spark). Arrested probably April 1974 because of leftwing views expressed in Arviland call for the establishment of a “proletarian party.”’ Charged with “propagating communism and torming an illegal organization.”’ Tried July-September 1974 and sentenced to 36 years imprisonment. 13'2 vears’ exile and 100 TL fine. Detained in Toptasi Prison, Uskudar, Istanbul. Sviatoslav losipovich Karavansky, poet. translator, journalist. Arrested in 1944, sentenced to 25 years, of which he served 16. Re-arrested 1965 on the grounds that he had not served his full sentence. Tried 1970, sentenced to five years, in addition to the remainder of his 25-year sentence, for anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda. Now in Mordovian labor camp. His wife, Nina Karavanskaya. is also imprisoned. cim, Mykhaylo Hryhorovych Osadchy, poet. journalist and literary critic. Sentenced in 1966 to two years in labor camp for “‘anti- Soviet agitation and propaganda nation alism' ‘(referring to a thesis he had written) and “participation in a consptiracy.”” After release he was unable to find a job but con tinued to write poetry. In 1969 completed novel Bilmo (The Cataract) based on his ex periences during his arrest. In Jan. 1972 he was re-arrested tor agitation and propaganda.” “anti-Soviet Ivan Svitlychny, prominent Ukrainian literary critic. In prison Sept. 1965 to April 1960 for being author of several samizdat docu ments. Re-arrested Jan. 1972, charged with “the dissemination of samizdat and anti Soview agitation and propaganda.” Tried April 1973, vears’ im prisonment and five vears’ exile sentenced to seven Vyacheslav Chornovil, Ukrainian journalist Tried Nov. 1967 tor writing detailed ac count (Known in the West as Chornovil Papers) of the 1965-66 trials of leading Ukrainian intellectuals. On release in 1969, he was forced to earn his living as a railway man. Re-arrested Jan. 1972 on suspicion ot “nationalist activities” ities against the Feb. 1973. sentenced to prisonment and five vears’ exile and “hostile actis socialist system.” Tried seven vears’ im Viadimir Raketsky, Ukrainian journalist. Arrested March 1972, tried July 1972. Sen tenced to five years’ strict regime labor camp on charge of “anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda.” Prior to arrest he worked as staff correspondent) on Molodaya Gvardiva. YUGOSLAVIA Dr. Sime Djodan, protessor of economic law at Zagreb University, author of several books and over 50 articles, one of main contributors to the weekly journal Matica Hrvatska, the Croatian cultural organization critical of regime. Arrested Jan. 11, 1972 on charge of “‘counter-revolutionary attacks against the state and social system of Yugoslavia.’ Tried Feb y 97%, sentenced to six years’ rigorous imprison ment, plus banned trom writing and appearing in public media further four years. Place of detention not known. Vlado Gotovac, editor in chief of Croatian weekly Hrvatski Tyednik, writer of about a dozen books of poetry and literary criticism. Arrested Jan. 11, 1972 on charge of “encouraging Croatian nationalism and counter-revolutionary acts against the state’’"—direct outcome of his outspoken advocacy of greater autonomy for Croatia. ried Sept. 29 to Oct. 26, 1972, sentenced to four years’ imprisonment followed by ban on public appearances for four years. Detained in Stara Gradiska prison camp. Jozo Ivicevic-Bakulic, editor of Croatian literary weekly Hrvatski Tyednik. Arrested Jan. 11, 1972 for nationalist tendencies. Charged with “conspiring to overthrow Yugoslavia’s social and political system.” Tried Oct. 9, 1972, sentenced to five years’ imprisonment followed by ban on public appearances tor four years. Detained in Lepoglava. Mihajlo Mihajlov, writer. Arrested Oct. 1974 tor publishing articles abroad which were hostile to the socialist system of Yugoslavia. Charged with “hostile propaganda.” Tried Feb. 28, 1975 and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. Detained in Novi Sad Has been arrested and imprisoned on two previous occasions. Dr. Marko Veselica, born Jan. 9, 1936, member of administrative board of Matica Hrvatska, contributor to Hrvatski Tyednik, co-author of The Political Economy of Yugoslavia, professor of political economics at Zagreb University. Arrested Jan. 11, 1972 for nationalist tendencies. Charged with “conspiring to overthrow Yugoslavia’s social and political system.’’ Tried Oct. 9, 1972, sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. Place of detention not known. PENTHOUSE WHUPS PLAYBOY NEWSSTANDS. GUARANTEED | RAIEBASE | GOES UP, UP, UP TO 4,250,000. This is a big moment for us. We ve been working toward outselling PLAYBOY at the more profitable, all-important newsstand level for a long time. And now we ve done it. Beginning with our April, 1975 issue. At the same time we're selling so fast that while others are lowering their rate base we re going to increase ours from 4,000,000 to 4,250,000, effective April 1976— with rate protection until the September issue, making PENTHOUSE unquestionably the most efficient advertising buy of any male-oriented magazine. Things look great for PENTHOUSE. Our total circulation continues to rise while PLAYBOY, TIME, NEWSWEEK, SPORTS ILLUSTRATED and ESQUIRE decline! Just take a look at current ABC information and its easy to understand why we feel the way we do. Good. Real Good. PENTHOUSE » | ‘U hs and Canada **Modesty p nts further © repetition ep word “UP (Continued from page 15) Cultura, he suddenly gained the intense interest of the censors and generals, even though the station was operated by the state government. Given the political struggle between the somewhat liberal state governor and the military hardliners of the Second Army in Sao Paulo, Herzog’s position was especially vulnerable. The commanding general of the Second Army, Eduardo d’Avila Mello, began to see communist networks infiltrating the trade unions, the military police, the political parties, the university and the press. Eventually—inevitably—Vladimir Herzog was added to the army security agents’ list. When the security police came to TV Cultura on Friday, Oct. 27, to arrest him, Herzog was working on the evening news program. The head of the station made a deal with the police, who went away with the promise that Herzog would turn himself in the following morning. According to Clarice, Herzog was not worried that night. He slept soundly, got up with an alarm clock, had a cup of coffee, looked at their two sleeping children, kissed his wife and told her that there was nothing to worry about and he would be back soon. He went with a colleague to the army headquarters at 8 a.m. The companion was dismissed, and Herzog taken in for questioning. As one Brazilian journalist who has been arrested describes it, ‘torture is commonly used in interrogation of security prisoners. The techniques are brutal: beatings, electrical shock, mutilation. Perhaps the worst part, especially for the uninitiated, is the humiliation, as you stand naked before your sadistic tormentors, as you scream uncontrollably. [Herzog had never been interrogated before.] Sooner or later almost any prisoner gives the security agents what they want: names. First you mention the names of men in exile, since you know the agents cannot reach them. Ultimately you give the names of your colleagues, your friends, anyone whose name will end the intolerable torture.” (On Dec. 6, Reuters reported from Rio de Janeiro that political prisoners in Brazil, in a document smuggled out of jail, had accused security forces of torturing to death at least SS fellow prisoners since 1969.) For the outside world, the next word about Herzog was a Second Army communique telling of his death by suicide between 3 and 4 p.m. Saturday. From inside, however, another story trickled out. Herzog was apparently tortured and questioned for some hours about an affiliation with the Communist party. He denied any connection. Then. he was put in a room with three of his “accusers,” according to the army. These were three other journalists who had undergone severe questioning and who reportedly had named Herzog as a Communist party member. The army report says that Herzog agreed to write a confession and that he was left alone in a cell. “‘About 4 p.m., when he was looked for in the room where he had been left, he was found dead, strangled, having used for that purpose a piece of cloth. The sheet containing his statement was found torn in pieces...,”’ the army said. Inconsistencies in the army statement cast doubt on the official story. An army photograph showed Herzog’s body hanging by a cloth belt from a window bar. Herzog did not wear a cloth belt and would not have been able to get one under normal prison procedures; moreover, he was 5 feet 8 inches tall while the window was only 5 feet from the floor of the cell. A rabbi who saw the body at the hospital before it was delivered to the family in a sealed coffin said he saw no sign of suicide by hanging. One possibility, according to reports emanating from Brazil, is that security agents may have stuffed cotton into the victim’s mouth when he started screaming and caused him to suffocate. While the family mourned at the hospital, police guarded the coffin. Clarice Herzog pressed for another autopsy. Request denied. When she pressed further, someone at the hospital flashed a security police badge and said she would be arrested if she continued to make trouble. Jewish leaders had Herzog buried in the holy ground of the cemetery, from which suicides are normally excluded. And Cardinal Paulo Evaristo Arns said he believed Herzog had been killed in the army headquarters. The response to Herzog’s death by fellow journalists, by 30,000 students and faculty at the University of Sao Paulo and by other irate Brazilians surprised the government. The National Federation of Journalists decreed official mourning, the Journalists’ Union of Sao Paulo named its auditorium after Herzog and several newspapers devoted editorials and full pages to the issues of Herzog’s human rights. Typical was O Estado de Sao Paulo, which angrily reminded its readers that “The mechanisms of law cannot confuse detention with kidnapping, nor inflict terror on those arrested or destroy their dignity.” For five days after Herzog’s death, the censors kept hands off. But they were back in business soon thereafter. An ecumenical memorial service attended by 8,000 persons was held at the Cathedral of Sao Paulo by major leaders of the Jewish, Catholic and Protestant religions. On that afternoon the police blocked all major roads leading to the Cathedral, creating the biggest traffic jam ever in the city. About 500 plainclothesmen were assigned to the Cathedral as part of “Operation Gutenberg,” which was designed to prevent “public disturbances.”’ The ceremony was touching and peaceful. The army responded cautiously. It released several prisoners to attend the funeral. It began to issue daily bulletins on -the number of prisoners and their health. Torturing declined. One journalist called in for questioning was allowed to return home at night and come back to army headquarters on the next day to continue questioning. In the U.S., The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times and The Washington Post ran several stories on Herzog’s death, followed by a letter in The New York Review of Books and an article in Newsweek. Many in Brazil consider this show of concern crucial for the survival of a free press in Brazil. The government is extremely sensitive to external criticism and aware that a poor civil rights image could hurt its foreign aid chances. Ten journalists were arrested along with Vladimir Herzog. He is now dead and several of the others remain in prison even now—on the vaguest of political charges. No one seems sure just what will happen next. “It will get worse,’’ predicted one Brazilian journalist in New York. He had planned to return to his country, but friends there warned that he would be arrested if he did. e (At a time when the need for a free voice has never been greater, WBAI is being slowly strangled) IF WBAI GOES, WHAT WILLYOU HAVE LEFT? Look around you. How many sources of information do you have that are totally free of television, newspapers and magazines have to take into account at one time or IT TAKES TIME AND MONEY TO PRODUCE PROGRAMS LIKE ( THESE. WE'RE RUNNING OUT interference? All commercial. radio. OF no graceful way to put it, other than to say that we need your help nou: This is what has to be done. BOTH. If you are already a subscriber to THE READING EXPERIMENT John Giormo talks about the wide WBAL. please renew your subscription another the philosophies of their advertisers. And Public Television of late has turned into Public Relations Television for the country’s major corations. Just about everything you ear, see. or read goes through a filter. So in reality, about the only free speech in New York comes out of your mouth. And from WBAI. UNABRIDGED. UNCENSORED AND UNBOUGHT. WBAI differs from other stations in that it has no commercials. It’s paid for by the people who listen to it. A lot of people send in a little bit. so no one contributor has enough influence to tell us what we can or cannot do. This simple concept accounts for the fact that WBAI doesn’t sound like any other radio station in town. At WBA], people actually say what they think. There’s no sponsor to yank our chains or programs. no mass audience we have to appeal to, and no pressure to get ratings. It is our unique financial structure that allows us to do programs like the ones listed here. It is also Sur unique financial structure that is about to do us in. FREE SPEECH IS EXPENSIVE. It costs about $575,000 a year to run WBAI. But like most organizations in the arts. we rarely break even. Last year we lost $24,667. The year before we lost $43,008. We would have lost more if wed paid our staff decent wages. The problem is. inflation has taken its toll on our listeners and on WBAL as well. For example. our Con Edison bill is up 300% since 1969. At this point. WBAI has an accumulated deficit of $210.329. And the truth is, we simply can’t go on like this much longer. Unless we add 5.000 new subscribers to our rolls by January 31st. WBAL as we know it wil conse to exist. Our staff of 29 will have to be cut in half. The programs these people would have produced will have to be replaced by recorded music. And WBAI. for all practical py - poses. will have disappeared into thin air. vanety of poetry: being written by his contemporanes: Lenore Kandel. Aram Sarovan. Gary Snyder. Ted Berrigan. Jack Spicer and Allen Ginsberg read their own works. THE CUNY-IN-CRISIS TEACH-IN: — include Elizabeth Holzman, Herman Badillio. Seymour Posner. Robert Wagner. Jr. Jack Newtield. Dave Marash. Michael Harrington and others. Live from Hunter College AN EVENING WITH TENNESSEL WILLIAMS: Mr. Williams discusses the development of his sive as a lavwrght and the radical change ot Ms UTUMIG PeMmpeclive JAZZ SAMPLER: A Iree-associative. historically-inclined two hours of recorded jazz. with Bill Barras SATURDAY NIGHT SPECIAL: Eo 1 Doctorow discusses the use of history and romance in his novel Ragiime. POLITICAL FCONOMY: N TEN-WEEK COURSE: Economia concepts and jargon translated inte everyday English by radical economists David Gordon and William Tabb BILL HOWLE’S MAGGOTS “Happy Birthday Mr. Purcell” 4 speck! program in honor of composer Henry Purcell. who. if not for an unumely death. would have been 311 sears old this year. A DELICATE BALANCE: Marian McPartland shares music and reminiseeses with fellow musickin. Dave Brubeck. GOING CRAZY. THE POLITICS OF MADNESS: Is madness a bio-chemical. genetic. behavioral of seckil problem? A look into the current theories on “madness.” THE FREE MUSIC STORE: The La Salle Quartet performs and discusses the music of Arnold Schonberg before a live audience in WBATS Studio C. MAJOR CONTEMPORARY WRITERS: This month a five-part series on Jerzy Kosinski. THE NEWS: The most thorough and intelligent news coverage in town. if Not the country. Winner of practically ever major award in FM broadexsting. YOU CAN TURN IT AROUND. During the week. 162.000 people listen to WBAI. Yet only 14.850 people subscribe to it. We know that all 162.000 of vou are sick and tired of hearing us ask for money. But there's now. And give one to a friend. your mother. vour lover. vour dog or canary. If youve listened to WBAI but for some reason haven't subscribed. join us now. If there was ever a time to come across, iUS Now. If you've never heard of WBAI but you like the idea of free speech. we invite you to tune to 99.5 FM. If you like what you hear. subscribe. Or we'll send vou a sample program guide. the Folio, if youll mark the appropriate box in the coupon below (subscribers automatically get the Folio). People. at this point its up to you. You can turn it around. You can save the only unabridged. uncensored and unbought radio station in town. It costs 8 a day to subscribe to WBAI. Thats nothing. especially when vou consider what the cost will be if the only free voice in New York fades out WBAI 99.5 FM Listener-sponsored Pacitica Radio. IWANT 1O HELEP WBALSURVINE HERTS MY INN-DEDUCTIBEL “CONTRIBUTION [ } Enclosed is. a contabutien of S Regular subscription S30 » Non-allluent — m SIN . Sestuming member Sol per sear ot JSS per month J Priend of Pree Radio S120 per sear or Lo SHO per month LJ Larger contribution LJ Please send a simple Jolie Send this coupon to: WAAL PO. Boy 45 Church Street Station. New York. NV. 10249 Make sour check pasable te Pacitica WBAL Orif you wish te use sour Bank Amencarnd oF Master Charge. complete below (SIS or more) Bank Amencund = Card expiration date Master Charge = Card expiration date Nuthoned signature of card holder telephone number Name Address City State /p 1 oxou wish to send gilt subsonptiens. te WBAL please attach & Int of names and dhinowses. including zip cates [MORE] 19 O Og ° 4 mal a ~ ATs, Sie ony OPT IEE 7 BY ANDREW KOPKIND On a clear day you can look out over the American press and see the landscape cluttered with political columns, like broken pillars in the ruins of an ancient forum. Unattached and disordered, they seem to support nothing, form no design, carry no weight. That bleak scene has been familiar enough to every newspaper reader; but now the clutter is advancing as columns spread from ed to op-ed to once-clean news pages, and before more space is invaded it’s worth wondering whether the opinions expressed merit the mess. For some months I've been wandering with more concentration than usual through the selected works of some of America’s best-loved columnists, and the experience has had a chilling effect on both insight and amusement. There's little to learn there about the development of new political patterns, about the varieties of social and cultural life, about the innovations and _ insurgencies that are reordering national consciousness. What appears instead is a restatement of conventional opinions on some of the week’s headlines. No nuance of Reagan’s rise, Moynihan’s moralizing, the Zionism vote, the dead!ocked Democrats or Ford's personnel reassignments (invariably ennobled as a ‘‘massacre’’) escapes the deadly wisdom of the daily political columnists. Evans and Novak tell me that Senator Jackson is ‘“‘no longer masquerading as just another liberal.” James Wechsler warns himself not to be ‘‘too easily tempted to seek simplistic explanations,”’ and then discovers that the ‘‘toplevel shifts decreed by Ford reflected his perception that the presidential team was in deepening trouble.”” Joseph Kraft advises that ‘the Sunday massacre advertised disarray in a way that makes Ford easier meat for his political foes." Clayton Fritchey cannily surmises that ‘‘the split between Daniel P. Moynihan and Secretary of State Kissinger has been patched up, but probably not for long.’ David Broder finds that *‘the tug to the left from the liberal activists [of the Democratic Party] carries a real risk of the repetition of the experience of 1972."’ George Will reports that “Israelis have been fighting Arabs, off and on, for 30 years, and there is a long history of cultural antagonism before that.’ Carl Rowan thinks that Hubert Humphrey will get the Democratic presidential Andrew Kopkind is on the staff of WBCN and The Real Paper in Boston. 20 [MORE] The cult of ‘pragmatism’ drags political writers into dead center, where their numbing epiphanies set the narrow parameters of national debate — ignoring the enormous changes now occurring deep in American life. nomination and confesses that he'd “‘love to see the Democrats go for character, intellect, enthusiasm, decency and all the other things that Humphrey stands for just one more time.” Perhaps there is an arcane alchemy shared by syndicated columnists that allows them to turn epiphenomena into historic events, trivial comments into imporiant truths and cliches into memorable phrases. However it may be done, the process is unfailing. With only a few exceptions—Anderson, von Hoffman, Wills—the all-purpose political columnists are apt to tell you far too much about nothing you need to know. Consider these classic examples by two serious journalists, both paragons of right thinking in the capital. Joseph Kraft speaks first: In an interview with me shortly before his announcement [of his 1°76 candidacy], the President expressed the view that he held a decisive edge over all possible competitors. He surveyed the country region by region, and found the outlook pleasing.... With a littlh—but not much—coaxing, Ford went on to evaluate his strengths and weaknesses region by region. He said he anticipated trouble in the Northeast. ‘Not so much in Vermont and New Hampshire and Maine. But in Massachusetts and Rhode Island and Connecticut.’’ Subsequently, Ford said one of the pluses was the new Secretary of the Interior, former Gov. Stanley Hathaway of Wyoming.... Ford told me that, contrary to reports circulated here and elsewhere, he was going to stick with his present cabinet.... Barring a bad break in the economy... igs) analysis seems wholly right to me. [July 14, 1973 At once the skeletal lines of the method come clear. Kraft uses the ““GOV 101" or **Problems of Democracy” approach as the basic structural element of his ideology. That means that what happens in Washington is supremely important in politics. And what happens to “the President” is most important of all. Trends, whims and opinions in the provinces—whether in Vermont or Rhode Island—matter only insofar as they affect the hierarchy of federal officialdom. ei It’s difficult and perhaps inadvisable to draw too many conclusions from one column or implications from one paragraph, but a general survey of the Kraft oeuvre supplies all the consequential corollaries of centrist political doctrine. The man is a walking prospectus for the Kennedy Institute of Politics. For example, power always seems to be concentrated at the top, and it flows down from Washington to state capitals to city halls. “Leadership” then becomes the critical factor in facilitating the flow. If there is a political crisis in the nation or a state it results from the absence of a popular and‘ powerful leader. Kraft is hardly the only leadership cultist: writing about John Durkin’s campaign for the disputed New Hampshire U.S. Senate seat, Mary McGrory decided that “he is the one people have been waiting for,” but nowhere in that column does she present a serious analysis of New Hampshire's political economy, its social structure or history, to indicate what real needs or interests were expressed in the Durkin campaign. A cub reporter at Le Monde would know that there’s more to politics in New Hampshire than the superficialities hurled quadrennially from that state by visiting columnists. Rarely in these columns did I find a suggestion of a ‘bottom up” analysis of power, an indication that deep social and economic divisions have created political paralysis in America, and that the apparent weakness of men at the top may be a symptom of the crisis, not a cause of it. Politics is personalized in the President, his advisers and a few other colorful or visible politicians. Columnists know one or two things about provincial politicians—that Massachusetts’ Governor Dukakis rides the subway to work or that California’s Governor Brown doesn’t live in the executive mansion. But that’s enough for David Broder, for instance, to magnify Dukakis’s style into political power and to declare how much “‘profit” he is reaping from his “‘anti-big government theme.” An alternative perspective—that the politics that matter most happen far away from high officials in Washington—hardly ever finds its way into Washington columns. In fact. John Durkin was never a candidate on a white horse in New Hampshire, was awaited by no one except the old line Democratic Party hacks. and betokens the same paralytic problems of politics as most other polliticians do these days. And Dukakis squeezed his pennysworth of profit from the “‘anti-big government theme’ long before his election campaign ended, after which he became the most unpopular governor in the memory of anyone still alive in Massachusetts. But it will take years for those simple realities to infiltrate the assumptions of Washington-based writers. Along with such standard assumptions about politics goes an exaggeration of the Washington columnist as a featured player on the political stage. To be fair to the rest of the columnar corps. Joseph Kraft lays it on thicker than most of the members. But his mastery of the machinery of self-inflation is worth a slightly more detailed inspection. Look back at the quoted paragraph from his column: “In an interview with me,” he begins. inverting the order of subject and object expected for such a contact: Jerry comes to Joe. He continues: “with a littl—but not much—coaxing;” the Washington columnist here expresses tact at the same time that he trumpets his command of the action. Then comes the release of confidential information: “Ford told me. contrary to reports...."’ No matter that the inside dope is hilariously wrong in this account. Little secrets are the stuff that Washington careers are made on. and there's no such thing as bad dope. Finally, **Ford’s analysis seems wholly right to me:"’ gratuitous approval is wrapped in an assertion of the writer's superior judgment. Of course Kraft is a trussed turkey perfect for dissection. But the sophomore seminar theories of government and politics he bandies about also turn up in the typewriters of more modest members of the club. For example, The Washington Post's esteemed David Broder: Three weeks ago... the House took up [the Reuss] bill to require the 200 largest banks in the country to report on their credit policies—the purposes for which they are making loans... [But] the House. skeptical of the need for such reports. promptly rejected the bill by 22 votes... Helping the unemployed must have top priority for realistic liberals, given the conservatism of American public opinion today... The kind of realism reflected in the vote on the Reuss proposal is a step in that direction. July 17, 1975 Broder rings a beguiling variation on the themes stated by Kraft—but he’s speaking at the same seminar. “‘Public opinion” is introduced as a low rumbling noise—off the center stage of political activity in Washington. Visible institutions of government are the critical sources of power; politics is inextricably linked to government. “The conservatism of American public opinion” appears in the Broder text as a selfevident fact. unexamined and unquestioned. How and where Broder discovered it goes unreported. All the important opinion research studies I've seen in the past few years make the opposite point—that with only one exceptional issue (race), Americans are moving to the Left. But perhaps Broder heard about the new conservatism from the same members of the House who invoke it to justify their opposition to liberal legislation. like House majority leader “Tip” O'Neill. B.: “Hi, Tip. what’s new?” O.: “Oh, nothing much Dave. Say, have you realized that American public opinion is profoundly conservative?” B.: “No, I guess I hadn't.” O.: ‘Well it is. Dave. and I’m skeptical of the need for such reports as would be required in Reuss’s bank lending bill. Think I'll vote against Only a columnist with blind faith in the righteousness of the House of Representatives could have ignored the possibility that the interests of ‘the 200 largest banks in the country”: and not Se R S WH “The [Joseph] Kraft oeuvre supplies all the consequential corollaries of centrist political doctrine. The man is a walking prospectus for the Kennedy Institute of Politics. simply a healthy skepticism infecting the cloak room were responsible for the defeat of that bill. Broder’s unconcern for the political power of the banks and his overconcern for the role of Congress are biases characteristic of most serious’ Washington columnists. Forgetting for a moment the right-wing cranks (there are no syndicated left-wing cranks) and the gossipers, the opinion-makers of the political mainstream seem scared to death of any notion that is not drenched with “realism.”’ ‘“‘moderation.” soft-core liberalism and pragmatic opportunism. They are forever reiterating the “‘lesson’’ of the Goldwater and McGovern campaigns: non-pragmatic conservatism and non-realistic liberalism bring certain defeat in elections. Extremism—defined as ideological integrity—is a cardinal political vice. Electoral success is taken to be the primary objective of politics; winning is assumed to be the only measure of value. The rest is ‘‘rhetoric’’— another code word, like ‘idealistic’ and *‘ineffective’’—for the wrong way to go about politics. Even electoral candidates who are not successful in conventional terms are ignored. In an unusual sentence of introspection, Broder himself noticed not long ago that ‘‘we [Washington columnists] tend to discount candidates who come from outside our world... those who have ‘failed’ in the Washington arena.” Such introspection rarely puts a damaging dent in Broder’s seamless reportage, however. For instance, he consistently finds Fred Harris ‘‘unelectable’’—a moral as well as analytical judgment. Harris ‘‘failed’’ to run for reelection to the Senate in 1972; he “‘failed”’ to finish out his campaign for the Democratic presidential candidacy the same year. He even tailed to find a proper job since then, being forced to run again just to stay off relief. No matter that his campaign appearances this time around, though grossly underreported, meet with remarkable enthusiasm from that old profoundly conservative American public. The new issues that Harris is developing—an end to economic privilege and new programs of public ownership of industry—are hardly mentioned. Broder dismisses the liberal Democrats for “taking positions of doubtful utility in the general election,”’ such as amnesty for war resisters and the rights of homosexuals. Columnists do not take serious issues seriously: that’s rhetoric. What counts is electability: that’s success. Most Washington political reporters have had their faces frozen with a permanent hard nose. It is a defensive visage, thought to present the most favorable image in a town where it is far worse to be ingenuous than to be wrong. Those who are not comfortable in the cynical stance have the devil's own time integrating their optimism with the required toughness of temperament. Marv McGrory at least tries to be hardnosed and soft-hearted at the same time. She takes do-good liberals and Catholic reformers under her wing while clawing at reactionaries and radicals. What's more. she is consistently the most charming Stylist on any op-ed page. But her romantic realism has more than a little in common with Evans-and- Novak's leaden pragmatism, or Broder’s ponderous success ethic. Take her assessment of Frank Church, the latest number in a series of monthly McGrory heroes that stretches back to the Kennedys and includes such disparate characters as Eugene McCarthy. Jerry Brown, Paul Rodino, John Durkin, W. Arthur Garrity and Sam Brown. “If the country is ready to face the facts about itself. Church could become our next President."” MeGrory wrote giddily after the Senate Intelligence Subcommittee report was published. Church's genius, she continued. lies in exposing ugly truths about America in a “sober and decorous way.” Indeed. only sober and decorous reformers need apply for the McGrory stamp of approval. Her columns are filled with loving lines in praise of young Harvard lawyers who defend Negro rights. or—in the old days—short-haired anti-war protesters who would never put brick to window pane. Rowdier radicals are considered ineffective or counterproductive or immature. Their sin was that they could not be successful in Washington's terms—not that they were incorrect or even wrong. It is not easy for a syndicated columnist to buck the intellectual traditions of the profession, however muddled they.make the world. The popularity of personal journalism depends in part on the accessibility of the journalist's opinions to the newspaper-reading public. Like commercial television programming, commercial daily journalism must not deviate from accepted definitions of what is entertaining, valuable or comfortable. Columnists who stretch those definitions cannot expect to receive all the perks and rewards their fellows get: the private interviews, the social invitations, the junkets, the wide syndication, the status and, finally, the salaries. Some mavericks, like Nicholas von Hoffman, keep afloat in the syndicated world by using quirky opinions and an off-the-wall style to dazzle the arbiters of taste and tradition. Von Hoffman would never use “sober and decorous” except in the most pejorative sense; but he sacrifices a certain credibility of the mainstream in order to get this sensibility across. At the end, he’s lumped with Buckley and Kilpatrick as one more irrelevant raconteur. Jack Anderson & Co. are also valuable, but again they use a gimmick or two to throw the predators of convention off the trail. Anderson stuns with his punchy, ‘“‘muckraking”’ style, which suggests sinister scandal even when there’s nothing much to report. Then, he makes regular obeisances to establishment idols, such as the defense establishment or the intelligence community, to keep his contacts and a certain credibility with the heavies in Washington. In the shooting gallery of Anderson’s muckraking, every sitting duck is a target of opportunity, whether it’s a good duck or a bad one. There are other exceptions to the rules laid down by Kraft, Fritchey, Evans-and-Novak, Broder, Bartlett and the rest: Garry Wills and Tom Wicker leap instantly to mind. But they do not fit into the general category, either; they have no firm Washington base, they are found for the most part in elitist outlets, and they have fallback positions (the Times, book contracts) for R & R that keep them out of constant contact with the everyday newspaper public. The mediocre majority of the columnists’ club stays as close as possible to available halftruths. Not many of them stray far enough from Washington to find the other half even if it were plainly visible in the countryside. They hear about the ‘‘mood of the country” and the state of public opinion from self-serving sources within a mile’s radius of Georgetown’'s epicenter. But stick-in-the- [{MORE]21 mudism is only part of the problem. Even on their trips back to the political hot spots, Washington columnists rarely know what to look for other than confirmation of the opinions expressed in their last pieces. The other part of the columnists’ problem is the endemic aversion to the politics of power and the blindness to possibilities of change. A recent column by George Will, for instance, speculated on Rockefeller’s role as vice president before he announced that he would not run again on Ford's ticket. Will said that “Ford is becoming tricky,”’ and interpreted the affair as an example of personal infighting in the White House. But what forces are supporting Rockefeller—and why? What contest of Yankees and Cowboys, or whatever great political and corporate interests can be named, was shaping up over Rockefeller’s place in the Administration? What role does liberal Republican ideology have in the constellation of powers now stalemated in Washington? Surely more than Rocky’s ego, large as that may be, is at stake. None of that finds its way into the columns. Washington journalists tend to convey a Static view of America; what is this week is what will be indefinitely. But only a little grubbing around in the hinterland ought to convince more perceptive writers that enormous changes are occurring deep in’ American life. Last summer the Hart pollsters conducted a survey which indicated that large numbers of Americans (from a sizeable minority to an overwhelming majority) believe that capitalism and democracy are on the decline, that oil companies should be nationalized, that workers should own and run factories, that big business is harmful to the economy and that more recessions are on the way. The surface complacency of the “cool seventies’”’ seems not to extend much farther than the columnists’ fancies. The Hart poll confirms other studies by University of Michigan researchers that show a steady Left shift of political consciousness in America since the fifties. Another series of polls conducted by the Patrick Cadell group in Cambridge supports the notion that radical changes are widespread just beneath the topsoil of society, invalidating much of the social science wisdom of the last decades. The Hart poll was taken for the Peoples Bicentennial Commission, the group that is staging alternative celebrations and publishing counterpropaganda to the official Bicentennial material. The findings were distributed to every media outlet the PBC could remember, but very few columnists and political reporters bothered with them. Mary McGrory was one and, typically, she romanticized the results in a lyrical evocation of the New American age dawning. She also failed to notice disquieting flaws in the conclusions the PBC drew from the Hart results: that the public anger and alienation showing up in the poll was not necessarily translatable into progressive political programs. But at least she was aware that these critical changes were taking place far from the pubs and palaces of the capital. There is objective evidence of serious change taking place beyond the samplings of political consciousness. Unseen by most Washington reporters, popular insurgencies are in progress at the “bottom” of the political pyramid drawn by conventional theorists. Refugees and remnants of the movements of the sixties are infiltrating mayor's offices and city councils in places like Austin, Tex., Madison, Wis., Santa Barbara and Davis, Calif. The Chicano political organization, La Raza Unida, now controls the government of Crystal City, Tex. and its surrounding county. The statewide low-income citizens reform organization in Arkansas—ACORN—has already become the strongest independent political force in that state. winning economic victories from private utilities and state and local authorities. Last year. it won a virtual majority in the local legislature of the county that includes Little Rock. In Chicago, the Citizens Action Program has cut into the power of banks to discriminate by ‘‘redlining’’—retfusing credit—in the city’s ghettos. Activist reformers are winning seats in con- 22 [MORE] The Washington Post [David] Broder’s unconcern for the political power of the banks and his overconcern for the role of Congress are biases characteristic of most ‘serious’ Washington columnists." servative state legislatures; Perry Bullard in Michigan is gathering support for his bill to establish a state insurance company. State-owned insurance is also a possibility in Massachusetts, where Elaine Noble, who campaigned in one election as a lesbian feminist, continues to keep issues of sexual opposition politically active. Proposals for public banking institutions are advancing in Massachusetts, New York, California and Colorado, where former antiwar moratorium director Sam Brown is the state treasurer. Public campaigns for Life Line programs—low utility rates for the elderly and the poor—are erupting in two dozen states, and a Life Line initiative just won a place on the next Massachusetts ballot. In the past few years, community development corporations—businesses run by popular committees in neighborhoods and rural regions—have been set up in many states. For example, the Fryeburg Area CDC owns what used to be the privately held Northland shoe factory. Workers have taken over ownership of an asbestos factory in Vermont, a machinery manufacturing plant in Connellsville, Pa., a knitting mill in Saratoga Springs, N.Y.. and several plywood factories in the Pacific Northwest. All of that is happening completely outside the corridors of executive and legislative power in Washington. In the past year there have been several gatherings of the new insurgents and organizers—in Madison, Wis., last June and around the country in the fall and winter. National pundits were not interested. One 7imes reporter, John Kifner, came to the regional meeting on “‘public policy alternatives’ in Ambherst, Mass., in October; his brief report was buried somewhere in the belly of his beast a few days later. The Madison “alternatives.” the Harris campaign, and the Hart and Cadell polls are only a few examples of what the Washington columnists miss. As they say in Pyongyang, it is no accident that they are ignored. Even to find out about outsider politicians or insurgent organizations would necessitate building new contacts, delving into difficult issues and making choices that the political and journalistic clubmen in Washington consider risky or invalid. wo immediate antidote to the closed system of column-writing is available, although help is on the way. It is not likely to come from the “‘alternative’ press, which lacks influence and readership, nor from the new local columnists who are filling the expanded space editors give over to “opinion” writing. In most instances I've seen, the jumped-up local reporters slip easily into the patterns established by the enduring national stars. They know their editors would rather have a quick column on the latest standings of Democratic presidential candidates than an analysis of proposals for redistribution of wealth. A while back in [MORE] I observed that the poverty of coverage of economic issues in American newspapers was “ideological, not technical” (November 1974). Since then. the ideology of privatism in business—the preservation of the sanctity of the corporate boardroom—has begun to crumble before public anger and legal assaults. An anti-business politics is developing in the country. It shows itself in consumers’ movements, political campaigns, and organizing drives among a number of constituencies: the poor. minorities, welfare recipients. At last. that new politics has affected the way some newspapers treat business and corporate news. In the same way, the trouble with political reporting is ideological. not technical. The cult of ‘““‘pragmatism”™ drags political writers into dead center as the cult of privatism kept business writers from snooping away from their desks and the handout bins. The drag of the center will loosen when the movements and changes going on beyond the columnists’ line of vision create a different political climate. Like change in politics, change in journalism does not start at the top with an editor's bright idea but from the demands of readers and groups of readers down at street level. Think of what is now valid material for reporting in Washington, against the topics of three or four years ago. Changes have come within the circle of national politics. They have already affected journalism, and even more drastic shifts in ideology will follow them. Evans and Novak may go on forever, but sooner or later they will be up against writers who have seen a different America and will begin to tell the rest of us about it. STICKS IT TO THE PUB\\SHERS Please send me ______ _-__ copies of M.I.M. by Morrow Wilson at ten dollars a copy’ | enclose dollars. Sold by mail only. Mail to: The Liberation Bookstore Box 17, Radio City Station New York, N.Y. 10019 Name Street City State Zip “Cost includes book, handling, postage, shipping and New York sales tax. Se FEN EEE Rei AK SEER ROR a a ES A 0 ON NN RE Me Ge a Ce cee! Mee Ue Can't wait?; Subscribe?: for yourself.: Send to: MORE] =: Farmingdale NY 11735 I’m tired of standing in line. Start sending me [MORE] right away. { ] One year $12 { ] Two years $21 [ ] Three years $30 [ ] Payment enclosed { ] BillMe Name Address Presses I Want to Get the Taylor Branch on how the press missed Cambodia Alexander Cockburn on the proper coverage of disasters Charlotte Curtis on Willie Morris at Harper's David Halberstam on Neil Sheehan J. Anthony Lukas on James Reston Richard Schickel on misunderstanding McLuhan plus 17 other provocative tales of the news business from the pages of [MORE] by David Alpern, Michael Dorman, Kathleen Hendrix, Judith Adler Hennessee, Bob Kuttner, A. Kent MacDougall, John McCormally, Madeline Nelson, ‘‘Anderson Price,”’ Joseph Roddy, Peter Schrag, Sandford Ungar and Chris Welles have just been collected by Random House in the first anthology from [MORE], Stop the Presses, 1 Want to Get Off’ Scheduled for publication in May at a price of $8.95, you can order your copies in advance right now and, in an exclusive offer to [MORE] readers, save both $2 and a trip to the bookstore. To order Stop the Presses at the special price of $6.95, simply fill out and return the coupon below along with your payment. (Please allow four weeks for delivery.) ‘“[MORE] is required reading not only for the maintenance of our perspective, but for our sanity. "’ Studs Terkel “The best journalists in America write for [MORE], and this book represents the best of that talent.” Gay Talese ‘T don't always agree with everything in [MORE], but the role it plays in watching the media is crucial. In many ways, it is one of the most important publications in the country.” Dan Rather ‘Journalism itself is the most sacred cow in journalism's barn; and [MORE] is our best eye for observing and our best voice for reminding us how spotted that cow often ts." Murray Kempton fe FMLTTE Mailto [MORE] 5 750 Third Avenue 8 New York, New York 10017 Stop! Please send me copies of Stop the Presses, 1 Want to Get Off? I enclose $ at the special rae of $6.95 available only to [MORE] readers. Name Address City State Zip [MORE}23 THE BIG APPLE Clubbed Last June, business writer Chris Welles and Time Inc. editor-in-chief Hedley Donovan figured in separate items in The Big Apple—Welles as victim, Donovan as heavy. Without explanation, New York Times Sunday editor Max Frankel had summarily killed a Welles piece on public broadcasting—most likely on orders from a Times management angered both by Welles’s criticism of it in New York magazine and of the paper’s soft financial coverage in [MORE]. Donovan had so heavily rethought and rewritten an article on the press in Fortune that the author, associate editor Paul Weaver, asked to have his name taken off it. Both Welles and Donovan are back this month—now tangled with each other. It all began when Time magazine business writer John S. DeMott suggested reviewing Welles’s latest book, The Last Days Of the Club (Dutton), an account of the collapsing fortunes of the New York Stock Exchange. DeMott’s senior editor, George J. Church, thought it a fine idea and the review was scheduled for 110 lines on the story list for the magazine dated Nov. 24, closing Nov. 13. On Nov. 11, however, assistant managing editor Edward L. Jamieson returned from Donovan’s office with the Welles review crossed off the schedule. Donovan apparently is still smarting over Welles’s occasional criticism of Time Inc. in_ print, particularly in his last book, The Elusive Bonanza (Dutton). Published in 1970, it grew out of an article on the oil shale controversy that Welles wrote for Life while he was that magazine's business editor in the late sixties. Life editors made him rewrite the piece nine times before they finally killed it because of pressure from oil company advertisers. When Welles then sold the piece to Harper's, Life fired him. (A full account of the episode can be found in The Elusive Bonanza’s appendix, pp. 235-249.) As is his custom, Donovan maintained his imperious silence on the subject, refusing to return all [MORE|’s phone calls. At the time of the incident, Donovan was sitting in for managing editor Henry Grunwald, away on a trip to the west. Now back in the editing chair, Grunwald says he wants to take a look at the book before making a final decision. It is doubtful, however, that he would even try and overrule Donovan. Whatever, Time will tell. ‘A Funny Story’ After surviving three years reporting on the war in Cambodia for ABC radio and television, Denis Cameron claims that within three months of his assignment to Egypt he lost his job due to office intrigue during filming of a documentary on Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Cameron, dismissed by ABC four days before Christmas in 1974, has filed suit in state court in New York for $6 million damages against the network, ABC News Vice President Av Westin and Peter Jennings, chief correspondent for the Peabody award-winning Sadat profile aired last December. Cameron alleges in his brief that while he was doing his job in Cairo in November, 1974, Jennings was telling Westin in New York that throughout the interviews with President Sadat, Cameron was smoking marijuana, he was high, laughing and giggling uncontrollably and uproariously, that at one interview he had fallen into President Sadat’s lap, that he had hit President Sadat on the head with a clapboard used in the filming, and that he had generally caused great confusion and disruption during the interviewing, severely embarrassing President Sadat and the Egyptian government. Not true, according to Cameron and the Egyptian government, whose secretary for foreign contacts, Ashrat Marwan, has provided Cameron with a letter saying, contrary to the rumors which came to our attention regarding your [Cameron’s] actions here in Egypt we know of nothing that would indicate any irresponsibility on your part.... That letter is very comforting for Cameron but it has not necessarily restored the professional reputation that Truth In Packaging The label today does much for the consumer. It tells that the big economy box contains 9.57 ounces. It tells that the bread is not six days old. It tells that the handy pre-mix sauce is 100 per cent fully edible chemicals. But nothi#ig is being done for the poor constmer of American news, who each.day gobbles immense quantities of the stuff with only the vaguest knowledge of the purity of its content. What is needed is a Pure Food & Drug Act for the media. Such legislation would require that the beginning of each story include a statement or product label indicating the quality of major factors affecting the story’s content. There are, of course, many such factors. But we might start with just four: the reporter and three of his most likely sources: the politician, the expert and the businessman. For example, a product label for a story on the economy might State: The reporter who wrote this story is 26; spent two years as a sports rewriteman before being moved to the business page last month; usually takes good notes. Sources for the story were a talkative economics professor not noted for correct forecasts; a politician famed for his personal charm and close partnership with Spiro Agnew; and a businessman with strong Chapter XI leanings. This information would be most helpful in judging the value of what followed. But it is awkward. Something simpler—and kinder to delicate sensibilities—is needed. With a bow to the Guide Michelin, we might employ a series of simple symbols to indicate certain attributes. For reporters, the obvious symbol would be the typewriter. The following categories are suggested. 4 Typewriters: Highly knowledgeable in field 3 Typewriters: Knowledgeable in some field 2 Typewriters: Not very knowledgeable but often accurate 1 Typewriter: Spells well For experts of any kind, the symbol could be a pointed wizard’s hat bearing suns, moons and stars. The categories: 4 hats: Leading authority 3 hats: Knows something about some subject 2 hats: Knows how to get quoted 1 hat: Head accurately fits hat For politicians, the symbol could be an inflated red, white and blue balloon. The categories: 4 balloons: Knowledgeable statesman 3 balloons: Informed officeholder 2 balloons: Uninformed officeholder 1 balloon: Needs the money For businessmen, the symbol could be the dollar sign. The categories: $$$$: Socially-concerned Captain of Industry $$$: Worried Lieutenant of Industry 3$:Captain of Industry who loses money $: Captain's Nephew Application of the various categories would be easy. The previously mentioned story on the economy, for instance, would be preceded by two typewriters, two wizard hats, one balloon and $$. Thus, the consumer would know instantly what to expect when those symbols appeared at the head of the news column or on the TV screen: Here is a story to be followed purely for its entertainment value; or. here is a propitious moment to grab a beer in anticipation of the next commercial. —JAMES A. BAAR his suit claims was wrecked because the story was hot gossip in such major and politically important cities as Washington, D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, London, Paris, Rome, Bonn, Cairo, Beirut, Rabat, New Delhi, Phnom Penh, Saigon, Bangkok, Katmandu, Kuala Lumpur, Tokyo, Manila, Djakarta and Singapore. Jennings declines to take credit for the inspired account of Cameron’s behavior and is also unwilling to accept the suit’s assumption that “the story did get around.’’ Westin denies Jennings told him the story but otherwise offers no comment. ABC’s attorney, Sam Antar, also refuses to discuss the case. That leaves the field to Cameron, who believes he has pieced together an explanation, suitably diabolical, of the story’s origins. Main elements of the plot, as Cameron sees it, are Jennings’ plans to become Washington anchorman for the network’s “A.M. America’’ program that premiered in January 1975S, and a last minute hitch that imperiled filming of a crucial interview with Sadat early in December. Cameron thinks Jennings set him up as the fall guy when it appeared that after six months of work and a considerable investment of money by ABC, the Egyptians were going to cancel the last of several ABC interviews because Sadat’s visit to the United States, then scheduled for January 1975, was being postponed. No wrapup interview, no Sadat show, Cameron says Jennings told him on the phone from New York City in late November, and Cameron surmises that ‘would have meant no anchorman post for Jennings. By the time Cameron called Jennings back (within two days) to say the Egyptians would honor their committment to do _ the _ interview, Cameron says the damage to his career at ABC had already been done, and there was no way Jennings could back out of the story he had allegedly told Westin. Cameron says he was told by telephone and by letter he was dismissed for economic reasons while his reported misbehaving was kept secret from him alone. And since this is intrigue on an international scale, it is fitting that Cameron says he did not hear about his outrageous conduct until he left Egypt for Bangkok in March and encountered an Associated Press photographer there who told hime he had heard a ‘“‘funny = story’ about Cameron in Katmandu. It sounds like fiction,” Cameron admits, and so it does to several ABC executives not tied up in the suit. Two of them, freelance Jules Power, who was senior producer for ‘A.M. America,”’ and Walter Pfister, vice president of special television news programs, say Jennings was secure as anchorman well before the November falling out with Cameron is said to have occurred.(Jennings remained in that job until recently and is now an ABC correspondent in Washington.) Jennings had been anchorman of the 24 [MORE] THE BIG APPLE | ““ABC Evening News”’ for two or three years and ‘“‘was the logical choice’ for “A.M. America,”’ Pfister says. Powers says a complete washout with Sadat ‘would have had no bearing”’ on Jennings’ post on the morning show. —MICHAEL RODDY Frozen Out A Tampax advertisement in the Deman happily riding a dog sled through the woods. The ad promised that a Tampax user will ‘‘feel like a happy Eskimo.” A group of Canadian Eskimos disagreed with that assessment. The protesters, a group called Inuit Tapirisat, claimed the ad was “‘an example of the problems between native people and whites,” and requested that the tampon manufacturer “‘drop the happy Eskimo pitch.” The Canadian Press Agency carried the protest story on Nov. 22, and the CanPress story arrived in the New York offices of the Associated Press late that evening. The story was approved by the AP foreign desk, then passed along to the general desk. But a male supervisor on the general desk decided the agency should not carry the item, reportedly claiming it was in bad taste to carry a story on feminine napkins. So the story never moved on the wire. Bob Johnson, AP’s general manager in New York, denied that the question of taste entered into the decision to kill the story. Instead, Johnson said the editor on duty at the time of the incident considered the item a ‘‘third rate’’ news story—but Johnson said he didn’t- know who this editor was. Johnson himself said it was a “‘trivial’’ story about a “‘silly protest.” and he personally would not have run the item. The AP has a general policy that a Tampax ad that ran in Woman's Day story must be in “‘good taste” to appear in a family newspaper. but setting specific guidelines on that issue is not easily done. *‘We don’t have Victorian attitudes about bodily functions,” Johnson asserted, noting that the AP has run stories on IUDs, vasectomies, abortion and condoms. AP would not hesitate to carry a story about Taxmpax causing cancer of the uterus, for example, or an important item about menstruation or sexual functions. But while AP considers some stories about tampons parently some stories about Canadian Eskimos are deemed | and whites. cember Woman's Day showed two | white women and a parka-clad white | —REBECCA KUZINS | erence to Ellerbee’s disheveled hair, | said to her, “You looked like a two- | WCBS long before the incident, is now informative, ap- | brown hair about her face as she stood on the street before the camera unit. recounting the settlement for the nightly news. Not long after the broadcast. WCBS | City Editor Marvin Friedman called insignificant. |, And that may be another example of | | the problems between native people Ellerbee into his office where, among others, were Executive Producer | James Cusick and Assistant News Di- | | rector Eric Ober. Friedman, in ref- On a cool, blustery day in early | November, Linda Ellerbee was cover- Times-Newspaper Guild | ing the settlement of The New York | Strike at | | Automation House for WCBS-TV. The stiff wind was blowing her long, | dollar hooker standing in that hall- | way.’ When Ellerbee replied that he | | couldn't tell indoor film from outdoor film, and that she was in fact outdoors in the wind, Friedman said, “Then you looked like a_ three-dollar hooker.” An enraged Ellerbee went to Dave Marash, co-anchorman of the 11 p.m. news and shop steward for the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) at WCBS-TV. He advised her to request an apology. The next day, she received one from Friedman, witnessed by the same people who had been present in his office the day before. Ellerbee, who had planned to leave with NBC News. When we called Friedman to say we wanted to ask him a few questions, he could not have | been more cordial. When we told him | what the subject was, however, he hung up. —JOHN MEYERS 'This Article Is Brought To You By...’ credentials unable to politely as his colleagues suggested that he, the man who had brought back the Pulitzer Prize from Moscow, who had reported daringly and brilliantly from North Vietnam, had gone soft. Produced a story closely resembling some sort of hot cereal. The cause for speculation was a piece by Salisbury called ‘Travels Through America,”’ scheduled for the February issue of Esquire. The article, which runs an unusual 23 pages, took Salisbury six months, 18,000 miles and 500 interviews to prepare. He received about $55,000 from Esquire for his wanderings. The money was provided by the Xerox Corporation. Corporate images being what they are these days, many large companies regularly underwrite or sponsor classy news or cultural TV programs whose quality will rub off on the advertiser. But the number of network specials has declined, and competition to sponsor the best shows is intense. So Xerox had a nifty idea: why not apply its standards of quality programming (e.g.. “The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman”) to the print medium —ctreating. in effect. a magazine special? As an Esquire sales and editorial meeting in Bermuda in May 1974, Wally Olesen, Xerox's manager for advertising and promotion, challenged the magazine to come up with something of quality. ambitious and “innovative” that Esquire wouldn’t—couldn't—normally undertake. Xerox would pick up the tab. The gauntlet thrown down, the editors of Esquire brainstormed for a year to find a worthy subject. Finally someone hit on it. On the occasion of the Bicentennial. what could be more exciting, more useful, more “innovative’ than to explore the mood of the nation? Xerox. not surprisingly, liked the idea. And so Salisbury embarked on his odyssey—‘‘in the mood of a latter-day de Tocqueville.” according to Esquire editor-in-chief Arnold Gingrich. Under the agreement with Xerox. | Harrison Salisbury, the weight of his | | journalistic | crease his grey pinstripe suit, listened something | Henry Wolt Arnold Gingrich: ‘‘the seamy parts, too” the printed story would be preceded by a page stating, essentially, ‘the following article is brought to you by...."’ Xerox had no control over the story's content. But it had the right to see the article prior to publication, with the option of removing the company’s name from the story. The original funding could not be rescinded. But another lever existed. As part of the Salisbury package, Xerox had committed itself to $115,000 for 11 or 12 pages of product advertising for 1976. Xerox last advertised in Esquire in 1971. The new schedule could always be canceled. But Xerox liked the piece. and Esquire called a press conference to announce a “‘first’’ for print journalism. | On one wall of the magazine's plush, paneled conference room was an oil semantic debate with a reporter who accused him of fudging words to mask a business deal. The arrangment entailed funding, not sponsorship, Gingrich insisted. Sponsorship, as defined by Gingrich, ‘‘connotes awareness of the project’s content. With funded journalism, there’s no naming of what the project should be, and it would come to fruition even if they withdrew their funding.” Salisbury spoke about the ‘‘declining field for anything more than routine writing in periodicals” and called the extension of arts patronage into literature ‘logical and necessary. His article was not available for viewing, but the press was skeptical. Would Gore Vidal's scathing appraisal of America, published last May in Esquire, have been acceptable to Xerox? Had Salisbury mentioned the contribution to Twentieth Century commerce of the Xerox machine? Did the word “*Xerox” appear anywhere in the manuscript? Salisbury—whose piece begins, “Today I sit. notebook in hand, eyes to the window—aware. I am looking down at a continent, my continent, my America’’—finally responded. “How do you know I haven't written anything bad?” he asked, then proceeded to the bar to refill his cup of coffee. Gingrich leaped to his defense. noting that while the article “emerges | fundamentally optimistic,”’ Salisbury portrait of Gingrich, wearing khaki | shirt, matching hat and suspenders, | looking ready for a duck hunt. At the | head of a 25-foot table covered with green cloth sat another Gingrich, natty in a navy pinstriped suit. and blue checked shirt. ready for reporters. About a dozen of them were present. “Gentlemen.” Gingrich began and later repeated. his journalist’s eye apparently in need of Visine. He called the project a “windfall” and said the magazine would consider similar arrangements with other advertisers. Then he plunged into a had traced “the seamy parts, too.” Gingrich quoted from a few of the closing lines. invoking America’s “mighty rivers” and “beautiful soil.” Of course, the question was not so much whether Salisbury had written pablum, but whether a corporation would fund (sponsor?) anything but. Xerox's Olesen has talked with sales representatives from other magazines about similar projects, but Esquire is thus far the only one to take up the offer. Xerox's future participation will depend on the size of the advertising budget; money for any articles would come from that budget as well. But with the precedent set. the company fully expects other magazines and writers to come looking for a piece of the pie. In exchange for apple pie? —CLAUDIA COHEN [MORE] 25 FINE TUNING The Powers That Be BY PETER SCHRAG Early last November, a Superior Court jury in San Francisco returned a $7.75 million libel verdict against the Pacific Gas and Electric Co., one of the largest such awards in history. The winner in the case, television producer and writer Don Widener, had charged that the company and some of its senior officials had circulated statements accusing him of secretly taping a conversation with a PG&E engineer named J.C. Carroll and inserting ‘‘carefully edited excerpts” from the tape into a television documentary on the hazards of nuclear power plants. The documentary, Powers That Be, had been broadcast over KNBC, the NBC-owned outlet in Los Angeles, on May 17, 1971. After the utility circulated the charges the hourlong documentary was never shown again, and Widener, who had won a pair of Emmys and a Du Pont Award for Broadcast Journalism for two previous documentaries, never produced another documentary for a network station. PG&E has asked the trial judge to set aside the jury's verdict; if he does not there will undoubtedly be an appeal. As aired, the interview that triggered the case lasted no more than a few seconds. Widener and Carroll were shown in the control room of PG&E’s Humboldt Bay Power Plant where Widener asked about “published criticisms of the plant here for using improper construction materials.” Carroll: Well, this is analagous to a problem you have in your industry. There were criticisms of improper design and construction techniques in early color television sets that resulted in excessive radiation to people. Widener: What was it exactly that the critics were talking about in your case? Carroll: I don’t think we ought to answer that. It’s too lengthy a question. Carroll didn’t see the original broadcast; he heard about it from acquaintances in the industry, and he obtained a written transcript from KNBC. He then signed a letter to the station charging, among other things, that Widener had secretly taped a conversation they had before the formal interview and had worked fragments from that conversation into the broadcast in such a way as to make it appear that Carroll had actually said them before the cameras: Mr. Widener apparently taped our informal discussion prior to the filmed interview without my knowledge. Some carefully edited excerpts from the taped discussion [were aired]. I explained to Mr. Widener during this informal discussion that his proposed question about improper fuel cladding material... could be answered either (1) by a one sentence statement that this charge was simply not true or (2) by a five or ten minute discussion in depth of the development of fuel cladding ma- Peter Schrag.a{MORE]contributing editor, writes monthly about broadcasting. 26 [MORE] Sigs SE * Z dis a wee Be Don Widener hasn’ Paul Richer worked in network television since he produced a documentary on nuclear power four years ago for KNBC in Los Angeles. Was he blacklisted? Of course not, says NBC —and yet... terials for boiling water reactors over the past 15 years. Later, during the five-week trial of Widener’s suit, it would become clear that while there might be a question about the ethics of not allowing Carroll more time to explain his answer— Widener said later he thought Carroll was “conning’’ him—there was absolutely no basis for the charge that Carroll had been secretly taped. To do such a thing, and to make the recorded words synchronize with the lip movements on the film, was nearly impossible anyway. PG&E officials had nonetheless concluded that Carroll's charge “could be most effective in preventing. this highly biased program from either ever appearing on the air again or, at least, causing the section referring to us to be wiped out.” Then, as now, the stakes involved in the development of nuclear power were immense. Carroll's original letter had been reviewed and edited by the company’s press, engineering and legal departments: one official suggested that Carroll ‘insert a phrase near the beginning indicating he had been personally slandered’’ and another proposed the addition of ‘‘a threat to invoke [the] fairness doctrine of the FCC.’’ These suggestions did not appear in the final letter, but at least one change of phrasing proposed by a company lawyer was included. Copies of the letter were sent to Robert T..Howard, who was then general manager of KNBC (he is now president of NBC Television); to Dean Burch, then chairman of the FCC; to Sen. Warren Magnuson, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee (with a covering memo addressed ‘Dear Maggie") and to other members of Congress dealing with the regulation of the broadcast industry. In a covering letter to Dean Burch, Ralph B. Dewey, PG&E’s Washington lobbyist, talked about ‘tan NBC reporter’s chicanerous (if not illegal) use of interview material... If the taping of private phone conversations is illegal without the knowledge of the other party, certainly the same legal restraint should be applicable in taping a conversation which goes on the public air waves into the living rooms of America.’ On receipt of the Carroll letter, KNBC coiducted its own internal investigation and _ informed the Commerce committee and PG&E that the charges were without foundation. A few weeks later, a staff member of the Commerce committee told Dewey that Carroll’s charges seemed to be “‘off base.’’ In response, Dewey made a note to himself: “I said the case rests; but the fact that NBC is upset at our aggressive approach is just what we wanted.” Widener filed suit in the fall of 1971, but the case did not come to trial until September 1975. The details of the PG&E campaign. including the letters and memos from which I've quoted, became part of the trial record. Ostensibly this was a dispute between an arrogant corporation and a television producer who believed he had been libeled in what his lawyer, David Pesonen, called ‘a broad scheme and plan... to suppress that film and see that it never saw the light of day."’ What did not become part of the record, and what still remains unclear, was the role of KNBC, the National Broadcasting Co., and the rest of the television industry. Widener made Powers That Be as an independent producer; his contract with KNBC had expired before the program went on the air. Thereafter he made a film on etiquette for a girl's school, produced a promotional film on Tahiti for a travel agency and wrote a couple of books, but he never managed to sell another documentary idea to a network or to a major station. In 1972 he proposed a documentary on the South Pacific in which Marlon Brando had agreed to act as narrator—working for a minimum scale—but there were no takers. Later he tried to sell a more ambitious idea for something which his agent regarded as ‘‘an easy sale.”” Again there were no takers. There is no evidence of a blacklist, although both Widener and his agent, Reese Halsey, are certain that there is an unwritten “acceptable list’’ and that Widener had become too controversial for the business: There’s nothing that says don’t hire Don Widener in the entertainment industry [Pesonen told the jury]. But this is an industry where things aren’t written down, where people’s reputations and word-of-mouth is everything. And when a charge as serious as this is made, people sort of forget the circumstances... It interferes wherever he goes. It eats at him, and other people say bye bye trouble, this guy’s controversial all of a sudden. We don’t need any controversy. NBC, of course, denied that the Carroll episode had anything to do with the fact that Powers That Be was never aired again or with Widener’s subsequent difficulties in finding work. What appears undeniable, however, is that NBC gave Widener virtually no help on the case. On the contrary, even after Carroll filed a $5 million counterclaim (which the jury later rejected), KNBC gave PG&E a copy of the outtakes [film not used] from Powers That Be without any court order and without any formal notice to Widener or his lawyer. KNBC also allowed two PG&E attorneys, in the words of one KNBC employee, “to rummage through the files’’ at the station. Widener learned about the outtakes from acquaintances at NBC; Pesonen then requested, and got, a copy for himself. In the meantime, NBC lawyers let Pesonen know that he couldn't count on much help; Pesonen said that one told him “we don’t want anyone from here making your case for you.’ Although NBC-TV president Robert Howard agreed to give a deposition in which he vouched for Widener’s high professional reputation and skills, he also said that there had been no unusual pressure from PG&E. When Pesonen asked for the testimony of another key NBC official, he was told that the official would be away on vacation in Mexico. The matter of the outtakes, however, may be the most curious element in the case. In theory, I was told, NBC doesn't furnish copies of unused film or tape to outsiders, but that there were exceptions: sometimes there was no point in fighting a subpoena in court; there were “peaceful, relaxed ways to avoid fights."" In the Widener case, the decision to furnish the outtakes was apparently made by a KNBC lawyer named Richard Harper Graham; Graham acknowledged that he had (continued on page 28) FURTHERMORE | Death Watch BY MICHAEL WOOD . suffering from congestive heart failure, the lessening ability of his weakened heart to pump blood. Next, he showed signs of pulmonary edema, the accumulation of fluid in the tiny air sacs of the lungs. Then... began to hemorrhage, or bleed, internally and to suffer from both a loss of intestinal activity and ascites, an accumulation of fluid in the peritoneal cavity.’’ An ulcer is removed, an artery is tied, two gallons of blood are pumped in. Phlebitis develops, the kidneys fail and toxins begin to mount. Most of the stomach is removed. And at last he dies. I am quoting and paraphrasing from Time’s Nov. 17 account of Franco's last weeks, ‘‘a fight in high Spanish style.” It sounds more like a nightmare in the style of Goya, and I wonder whether Time would have given us so many details if Franco had died a few years earlier. Death is in the air, part of our present weather. There are even more people dying than there used to be, according to the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. (Time, Dec. 8). A new discipline called thanatology (the study of dying) is beginning to spread, and the above report looks like eager, applied thanatology. or like something we might call thanatography, the transcription of dying. All those famous American evasions and euphemisms catalogued and sent up by Jessica Mitford and Evelyn’ Waugh seem to have turned overnight into a fascinated literalism. “Pulling the plug.” for example. the harsh current phrase for disconnecting'a Hfé-Support system. is the reverse of a euphemism. It rubs our noses in the technology of dying. “Death is not an event in life.” Wittgenstein wrote. ““We don’t experience death.’’ We don’t experience our own death, and in the case of others we experience our loss and their absence. What we do experience. for ourselves and through others. is dying. which is quite a different matter. But the peculiar and disturbing fact about Karen Ann Quinlan, who has been in a coma since April and is being preserved by a respirator, is that she is effectively neither alive nor dead nor even dying. We can't name her condition, and this is not a linguistic or even in the end a legal problem, but some sort of boundary, a mark of where our comprehension and our competence ends. We can measure death, but we can’t measure life. Karen Quinlan has been passed from medicine to the law, and in the decision of Judge Muir, from the law back to medicine. Her father had asked the court to authorize the disconnection of her respirator, against the wishes of her doctors, and the judge ruled that “there is a duty to continue the life-assisting apparatus if, within the treating physicians’ opinion, it should be done.” But since the doctors appear to have been concerned mainly about the law. the ruling solves nothing, and the question Michael Wood is professor of English at Columbia University and author of America in the Movies (Basic Books). Victor Juhasz Death is in the air. All those famous evasions and euphemisms catalogued by Jessica Mitford and Evelyn Waugh | have turned overnight into a fascinated literalism. ‘Pulled the plug,’ for example. turns in a circle. Time reported the case. as a legal topic; Newsweek as a medical one, complete with diagrams of the brain and an artist's sketch of an emaciated Karen Quinlan on_ her hospital bed. The coverage of the Quinlan case has been sober and sensible enough. Death, or the proximity of death or the discussion of death, produces a hush in most people's prose, although of course there are varieties of hush. Under very similar headlines. The New York Times and the New York Post began stories about Karen Quinlan in this way: ‘The New Jersey court system will begin today to undertake a review of the complex legal questions surrounding....”° “She lies curled in the fetal position at a Denville. N.J.. hospital, her heart pumping. her lungs working, but....” The Philadelphia Evening Bulletin ran a readers’ forum three Saturdays in a row (Nov. 1, 8. 15). allowing equal space to both sides of the argument. thus creating a sense that the debate was more important than the decision. and indeed. the last of those forums was printed after Muir had announced his ruling. The arguments were the obvious, inevitable and unanswerable ones. On one side, nature should be allowed to “take its course” because Karen's life is “not life. it is living death,”” and because switching off her respirator is “not murder, it is ‘letting go." It ends a “pointless and inhumane” prolongation of existence. which. does not reflect a “true reverence for life’’; and because Karen will ‘never again walk or laugh or lead a life that she or any rational person would consider meaningful” (1 am conflating several letters). Against this it is urged that “no one has the right to die” because “death is forever” and “‘life is sacred"; because we can't know why Karen “shduld be going through this” and we must “respect her silence."’ Allowing her to die would “be opening the door to a stream of people who will want a mercy killing’’; and the specters of Hitler and the Nazis flicker in letter after letter. Most of these arguments had already been canvassed in court. and the overriding impression these letters create is a need to talk about the issue rather than a need to resolve it. Or rather, a need to resolve it but to keep talking about it anyway. This is exactly the impression given by the news magazines. which reported Muir's decision clearly and fairly, but as an afterthought. and with a faint note of disappointment at the case being taken away from them—with none of the atmosphere that had surrounded their earlier pieces. Newsweek (Nov. 3) ran a black cover, with an inset photograph of Karen Quinlan, and the words “A Right to Die” in large white letters. The story in that issue conluded, “For it is Karen Quinlan’s lot. in the final act of her tragically shortened life. to pose one of those fundamental ethical problems that human beings are obliged constantly to confront—and never, perhaps, to resolve.” Time, running stories in two consecutive issues (Oct. 27 and Nov. 3), ended on both occasions with that mixture of breathlessness and thoughtfulness which it does so well: Judge Muir will have plenty of weighing to do, for the courts have generally been reluctant to make life and death decisions. Nonetheless, the question of whether the plug can be pulled is unlikely to disappear. And now that the issue has reached the courts, doctors and families around the country await a decision.... The outcome of the case of Karen Quinlan will thus be historic. However he decides, Judge Muir will not merely be interpreting the law. He will be making it. It seems that Judge Muir, against the odds. managed to make an unhistoric decision. Both magazines caricature themselves in the above quotations, but they are doing honorable work here. The case of Karen Quinlan, beneath all the piety and moralizing and shuffling that have sprung up around her, all the rosaries and Lourdes water and recipes for miracles sent to the Quinlans, all the debates among theologians in Italy and ethical specialists everywhere, all the passing of the buck between hospital and court and hospital, does really need exposure if we are-to find out what it means: and Time and Newsweek both provided contexts and paramaters for the whole issue by discovering parallel and contrary precedents and practices. A neurologist told the court that “no physician will ever interrupt a device that is performing lifesaving functions.” but several doctors told both Time and Newsweek that physicians do it all the time. But the most striking feature of the reporting of both magazines is that they. like the New York Post and much of the rest of the media, want us to see Karen Quinlan: Curled in a fetal position and shrunk to half her normal 120 Ibs., Karen Ann Quinlan lies helpless in St. Clare’s Hospital in Denville, N.J.. unaware that she is in effect going on trial for her life.Her eyes are open, unseeing. Her body convulses slightly every few seconds as an artificial respirator, surgically connected to her windpipe, forces her lungs to She lies curled on her bed in the intensive-care unit at St. Clare's Hospital in Denville, N.J. Once, Karen Ann Quinlan was a vivacious girl with frosted brown hair and a ready smile. Now, she weights only 70 pounds. Her hair falls on her pillow in dull, matted strands. Her skin, sallow and waxen, is stretched taut over her skull. Her mouth is in a rigid grimace, her eyes are tightly shut. Thin yellow tubes for drainage and intravenous feeding trail from her nose and arm. Beside her bed, a Bennett MA-1 respirator hisses with a steady In one sense, this is ordinary journalistic practice. the vivid scene, a way of hooking the reader. But it turns into something else as one reads into thanatography of a very special kind, especially since the writers here seem to be working trom descriptions given in briefs and in court rather than from an actual sight of Karen Quinlan. She is really described as dead in both cases: tortured into life in Time. alive only in the past in Newsweek, which attributes life (along with a name and an identity) only to the hissing respirator. | don’t think these passages are trying to-judge the issue for us (although they do; they are trying to cope with a mystery by coming very close to it. They are an extended version of the phrase about pulling the plug. and they raise. in their synthetic specifity, the question that underlies all the questions in the matter (continued on page 28) {MORE]27 Furthermore (continued from page 27) of Karen Quinlan. The question is not. finally, whether she should be allowed to die ‘‘with grace and dignity.” which is her parents’ plea; or whether her life is “*meaningful’; or whether such preservation of life is ‘‘natural’’ (“Death is natural. Tubes and needles protruding from useless bodies hooked up to a machine | are not’—Letter to Time. Nov. 17). There are thousands of lives without grace or dignity or meaning, and all our | lives are without those things some of | the time. The unnatural is all around us, beginning with the typewriter I’m hitting now. The question is not, finally, | whether the decision to let Karen Quin- | lan die or to keep her alive should be | made by her tamily or her doctors or a | court or by God. It is a question that concrete. It is this: what is it that threatens us | so in the condition of Karen Quinlan? | Why is her life-without-life so much more ominous and troubling than her | death (or her life, if she were to recover) | will be? Is it simply that what is hap- | pening to her is happening to one of us, | the race of the living, and not to one of | them, to whom nothing happens? Is it that we need life to run all the way up to death, so that dying is still a way of living, and death is something else, absolutely distinct? Or is the issue not the ‘‘quality of life,”’ in the cant phrase that occurs again and again in the arguments about the case, but something far more elusive and perhaps different for each of us: the set of criteria, intuitively held, hardly ever examined, by which we would wish to certify our own death. Fine Tuning | (continued from page 26) made the decision, though it’s hard to believe that he made it alone. He ex- | plained that he—and NBC—make a | distinction between news programs and | Powers That Be, in his judgment, was a | public affairs program. for us and we broadcast the program. Of course Widener was clean, but we were willing to do almost anything to keep those s.o.b.’s out of our hair.” Widener claims, and Howard denied, that as general manager of KNBC | Howard had urged him not to sue. news documentaries (on the one hand) | and “public affairs’ on the other. | When I asked what the distinction | was, and what difference it made, I was referred to New York where NBC lawyer Marshall Wellborn told me that if there was a distinction it reflected only different personnel and personalities, and not company policy. People in the news department were simply tougher about releasing outtakes than people in other departments. When I pressed Graham to explain how he made his | decision to release the outtakes in this sounds metaphysical but is really very | case he refused comment. There was a legal precedent, he told me, and again I was confused: how could any precedent apply in a situation where no court had issued a subpoena? Neither Graham nor Wellborn explained why KNBC hadn't, at the very least, waited for a subpoena, and why Widener hadn't been notified. Wellborn said he didn’t know the facts of the Widener case—Graham was the man_ who handled it; when I told Wellborn that Widener had received no formal notice, he said “oh, boy.”’ What seems clear in NBC’s conduct is that the company bent over backwards to stay out of the case—that Widener was on his own in dealing with the accusations against his integrity. “We didn’t want to get involved in that suit,” said one NBC official. ‘We were as guilty as Widener was—he worked Nonetheless, the company’s adamant neutrality was in fact no neutrality. If NBC had its doubts about Powers That Be—or has them now—it owes Carroll an apology; if it doesn’t, then it left Widener alone to fight a battle in which the networks should have been participants. Either way, corporate caution prevailed over journalistic responsibility. Was it true that NBC was, as that PG&E lobbyist believed, “‘upset at our aggressive approach”’ and that the PG&E campaign was therefore effective? Consider the networks’ handling | of the outtakes, its failure to show Powers That Be ever again, its refusal to make it available to film libraries and Widener’s difficulties in finding work. Makes you wonder. ba MOVING ON? Don’t miss an issue. Move [MORE] with you by attaching the mailing label from this issue of [MORE] here: (old mailing label) and printing your NEW address here: Name Address City State Zip Mail to: [MORE] Subscription Dept. PO BOX 576 Ansonia Station New York, N.Y. 10023 28 [MORE] Introductory One Year NEW YORK. It sounds pretentious, even outrageous, but we're perfectly serious. What got New York into trouble? Welfare payments, free higher education, and high salaries and pensions for public employees. Five years ago The Washington Monthly began its attack on the swollen bureaucracies with articles like ‘‘We’re All Working for the Penn Central’’ and ‘‘America the Featherbedded.”’ We then questioned the high salaries and tenure enjoyed by civil servants in ‘’The Rising Profits of Public Service’’ and ‘‘The Case Against Tenure.’’ We warned of the growing power of public employees’ unions in ‘‘What a Unionized Civil Service Can Do” and ‘Government Unions: The New Bullies on the Block.” We urged in our ‘Platform for the Seventies’ that higher education be financed not by the public, but by government loans to the students to be paid back with a small percentage of the students’ income over their lifetimes. This would not only save taxpayers and parents money, it would also encourage students to take their education seriously. for $8 _ 2 name £ address t city WE COULD HAVE SAVED In 1970 and again in 1974, we urged adoption of a federal negative income tax to guarantee everyone a minimum annual income. This would have removed New York’s crushing welfare burden. It might also have saved the taxpayer money, by replacing the nation’s welter of income supplement schemes with one sensible, easily administered program. The Washington Monthly does not fit the usual liberal and conservative molds. In an article called ‘Putting Yourself on the Line,’ we wrote: “From the conservative must come the liberal’s humanitarian concern for income security and medical care. From the liberal must come the old conservative respect for entrepreneurship. From both must come a new respect for free criticism of institutions, including their own.” It may be too late for New York, but join us now in our effort to save the rest of the country. Subscribe today. s The Washington Monthly Special Half-Price | g 1028 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington,D.C. 20036 Cipayment enclosed (continued from page 3) the people come to pick up their food stamps at the food stamp office in my town. Most of the recipients arrived by car. tended to look pretty healthy. in the U.S. can be traced to several different causes in my opinion. In a large | number of instances it is a voluntary or temporary situation. For example, students or people who have just decided to live cheap for a while instead of working as much. Some of the low-income group must be social misfits or people with character defects. Others are people of low intelligence. I sincerely doubt that even 10 per cent of the 11.9 per cent are people who are deprived of economic opportunity by the capitalist system. A Swedish friend recently showed me an article from a Swedish newspaper about a terrible slum in Sweden. It was a public housing project housing 750 persons. They lacked hot water, indoor toilets and proper repairs. Vandalism and crime were very high. Sound familiar? If Swedish socialism cannot solve the “‘poverty’’ problem, is it likely that Mr. Harrington’s socialism will solve the problem in the U.S.? In the last 14 years, government transfer payments have increased from $23 billion to $120 billion per year. This is proof that the United States is more than willing to help the ‘“‘poor’’ by giving them money. I think that certain leftists, such as Mr. Harrington, have an ulterior motive for exaggerating the extent and severity of poverty in the U.S. If they can propagate the big lie that this system is cruel, brutal and exploitive, they will be able to convince more people of the utility of socialism and thus further their own dreams of political power. —Norman L. Rogers Mountain View, Calif. Michael Harrington replies: Mr. Rogers attacks with a potpourri of half-truths, myths and outright falsehoods. Indian and Chinese types of poverty do not exist in the United States. True. The American poor, however, do not live in India and China, and their sense of deprivation results from their position in this society. But poverty is not merely a matter of subjective anguish. It is officially defined (with considerable understatement of the problem) in terms of an income based upon an “‘emergency meal” which is adequate for maintaining health during short periods but not medically advisable for the long run. The official figure is now over $5,000 for an urban family of four and the food component of the poverty budget is computed as one third of the total. Moreover, there is abundant evidence that the diet Mr. Rogers proposes is dangerous to health and well-being. particularly to fetuses and babies, many of whom suffer lifelong retardation—in the United States as in India—for precisely that reason. Yes, poverty declined between 1959 and 1972. Since 1972, however, it has increased, as Gerald Ford’s Council of Both the people and the cars | Economic Advisors reported last Febru- | than 1.7 ary. If Mr. Rogers had read my article carefully, he would have noted that it made precisely this point. I have never met a welfare critic who | had not seen those big cars driven by The existence of a low income group | the poor. I have also never met a welfare critic who has examined the scientific statistical evidence which contradicts his imagining, e.g. the data on the poor and automobiles in A Time to Choose. the Ford Foundation report on energy. Mr. Rogers, to put it charitably, doesn't know what he’s talking about. Sweden has a higher living standard than America, unemployment of less LETTERS | | ing that per cent currently, and no slums to match those which are commonplace in the United States. It has | imperfections and some of the finest people in the world working to deal with them. Mr. Rogers cites a quantum leap in transfer payments using, as far as I can tell, 1960 and 1974 figures (without notthe consumer price index doubled in those years, cutting his $97 billion jump at least by half). If he had checked an authoritative source—say the Brookings analysis of the 1974 budget—he would have discovered that most of those cash transfers are for | programs in which the individual has made a prior contribution directly or indirectly: social security, federal employees retirement and the like. As | read the Treasury's Special Analyses of the 1976 budget. I would estimate that around $20 billion is provided to give | people cash who have not previously paid into some fund or done some work. Finally, Mr. Rogers is quite right on one point. The inability of an American government following corporate priorities—and providing much more welfare for the rich than for the poor—to abolish poverty is a very good argument for socialism. YOUR OWN NEWSPAPER HARPER'S WEEKLY is the most unusual publication in America. It's written almost entirely by its own readers. Not by remote experts, gossipmongers, pollsters or pundits. Not by Washington “newsmen” echoing invisible “‘sources." HARPER'S WEEKLY believes the real world is best reported by its real inhabitants. People. You. We publish your first-hand experiences, views and observations. Your personal confrontations, crises and dilemmas. The result. week after week, is a fascinating dialogue between real people talking about real concerns—their heroes, alibis, outrages, marriages, victories, mistakes, adventures, moral choices. About coping with the human condition. HARPER'S WEEKLY is your own newspaper. It's a national conversation, a townmeeting-in-print where in each issue 125,000 Americans exchange Tresh ideas and information. Each issue is a unique treasury of personal stories e How a failing Vermont company's workers saved their jobs by buying the company. e How a judge in Minnesota makes criminals pay back their victims. e How news reporters fool people they interview. e How to find ‘out if the FBI has a secret file on you. e How to force insurance companies to pay off. e How to preserve local handcrafts and landmarks. e How fathers care for their children after Mom walks out. e How an incredibly lucky man escaped from a great white shark that mercifully spat him out of its jaws. e How to find out what school officials know and tell about your child that you don’t know. People just like you write these articles (for an honorarium of $25); others send us jokes. quotes, local proverbs. Still others send the warmest fan letters we've ever read: e HARPER'S WEEKLY is eminently useful! Of all 20 periodicals to which I regularly subscribe, yours most often offers suggestions, ideas, pointers and insights that I can use that very day. It has already improved my life-—Cable Neuhaus, Wilkes-Barre, Pa. e Several months ago my father introduced me to HARPER'S WEEKLY and all I can say is, Dynamite! You are a real experience; you bring me in touch with so many others and so many different points of view —Steff Geiple, Glen Rock, Pa. e HARPER'S WEEKLY is habit-forming. I devour it with my Saturday morning coffee. I mean I read the whole thing from front to back. and never mind what other things need doing. I hope some of our politicians read it; I'm sure they would profit.— Harold Anderson, N.Y., NY. e@ It's heartening to find how many people are articulate. To me they're a refreshing change from the clever journalese of many slick magazine articles. | often feel 1 want to reply to these contributors, and I will.— Alberta Cushman, Agawam, Ma. e I do not know if | would call your paper a Journal of Civilization, as you do. I would call it a Journal of Thoughtful and Reflective Experiencing (which may be a finer compliment). Good luck with your publication. You are bringing forth a citizen's Gream, the establishment's nightmare.—Stanley L. Brodsky, Tallahassee, Fla. e | tried to tell myself “I just don't have time to read it."’ But HW is the first thing | pick up to read—ahead of three weekly magazines, one weekly newspaper, four monthly magazines, and numerous special interest publications.—Phyllis Maurer, Lincoln, Neb. e | have been reading a friend's recycled issues. You win. I surrender. I have just sent my check for a subscription.—Anne Wittels, Palos Verdes Estates, Ca. e After reading my third issue. I feel jubilant and confident that here is a melting pot tor the refinement of ideas. and out of it will come much good. America needs HARPER'S WEEKLY. May it continue to grow and be a “Journal of Civilization."— Marjorie Sutcliffe, Audubon, Ia. e HARPER'S WEEKLY brings me closer to my countrymen who really care about how we live and feel and think. There's integrity in every column.—Dorothy Martin, Hutchinson, Ks. e When my last issue was delayed a few days. I discovered how much I depend on HARPER'S WEEKLY. I was a nervous wreck. Please don't ever send my copy late again!—Robert Nash, Fayetteville, NY. e Reading HW is like getting a bundle of letters that really put you in touch. It's great to read contributions from enthusiastic noncoterie writers. The pros couldn't match the diversity. let alone the involyement.— Maureen Cotter, Newton, NJ. e In one year, HARPER'S WEEKLY has given me the courage 1) to write a children’s book; 2) teach a seminar for government secretaries; 3) take legal steps to use my maiden name instead of my married name. | wonder whether you ever expected to have such influence on your readers.—Mary G. Overfield, Henderson, Ky. * e@ It was exciting to see my words printed in a national publication. But the best reward was still to tome: nine incredibly varied people (aged 18 to S2) took the time to reply personally.—Christine Parker, Fulton, NY. e This issue tells me two things. HARP- ER’S WEEKLY has good editors and there are tons of people out there just waiting to educate me. Thank you for this wonderful opportunity. HW is a forum I'd find it hard to live without.—Carol B. Icard, Dalton, e | am truly amazed at your wealth of subjects. | devour the letters and articles from those who have a compulsion like mine—to share their minds and hearts, to expose their vulnerability a little, to sound off explosively. When I agree. I've found a friend. When | disagree. I've found a reason to re-examine my own view.—Estelle Pfetsch, Niagara Falls, NY. e HARPER'S WEEKLY tells me more about this country and the people in it than a dozen Gallup polls. Congratulations. —Jack McClintock, Indian Rocks Beach, Fla. e Send me 20 subscription blanks to hand out.—Lillian Koslover, Redondo Beach, CA. e I'm so pleased with HARPER'S WEEK- LY that I sent my renewal check giftwrapped. Getting HW is like getting a present every week, and | wanted to return the favor.—Kathleen Marquardt, West Allis, Wisc. e By the time my copy arrives on Saturday afternoon, I've read all the other hogwash that came during the week. That makes HARPER'S WEEKLY seem like strawberry shortcake after eating a supper of cold mashed potatoes.—Darius Petty, Great Barrington, Ma. Share the shortcake. Read HARPER'S WEFKLY and write for us. Help us give the press back to the people. Let's find out together what's really happening in America. KEKEKKEKKKKKHKKKKKKFH X DOLLAR For just ST vou can try out the next 8 weeks America’s Reader- Written Newspaper HARPERS: Y. Two Park Avenue, NY, NY 10016 Enclosed is $1 for 8 weeks. Double my savings. Enclosed is $2 for 16 weeks. Name D2117 Address City [MORE]29 _ CLASSIFIEDS JOBS OFFERED JOBS WANTED Fall 1976 opening expected for assistant or associate professor to teach magazine article writing and other courses in accordance with qualifications. Strong professional experience desirable. Salary to 19,000. Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer. Send resumes to: Dean, School of Public Communications, Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y. 13210. (53) Writers (free lance) for new pet magazine. Pet Gazette, 3500 Market St., Philadelphia, Pa. 19104. (55) The Wounded Knee Legal Committee needs a “public relations” person to coordinate press work for our legal committee offices. No salary other than what you get for selling articles. Room, board and expenses paid. Fresh air and plenty to write about. Contact: Jack Schwartz, WKLDOC National Office, Box 2307, Rapid City, South Dakota, 57701. (53) Copy editors, one full-time, one part-time, for universal AM desk using newest electronic editing equipment. Pay to $364 depending on experience. Please send resume to Robert O. Grover, chief of the copy desk, The Sun, Baltimore, Maryland, 21203. (53) JOBS WANTED ¢ We still offer one month’s insertion for free... with any paid insertions in the Jobs Wanted column. Minimum 25 words... or $12.50. ART DIRECTOR/PHOTOGRAPHER, EXPERIENCED, national monthly, all areas of production, 4 color. Seeks position on monthly or weekly publication. Salary and location secondary to opportunity. D. Hunter, 1221 13th Ave., Oakland, California 94606. (53) YOUR WEST COAST EDITORIAL OR PUBLICITY OF- FICE: Experienced trade, business free-lance writerphotographer now available. Flexible rates. W.A.D.. 5432 Avenue B, Redondo Beach, California90277. (53) EXPERIENCED, VERSATILE feature writer/published children’s writer seeks freelance assignments or staff work in Boston area. Jane Sutton, 33 Cottage Street, Lexington, Mass. 02173. (53) PHOTOJOURNALIST, twelve years experience in education, public relations, newspaper. Writing experience. Published nationally. Accepting freelance assignments or full-time position with small daily. Reply Box 113. [MORE]. (53) EDITOR, Colorado weekly—one man operation—seeks daily report./photog. job in city. Will relocate. 1 year 19,000 daily report. experience. Gary Dehlisohn, c/o 6111 N. Richmond, Chicago, Ill. 60659. (53) Award winning Bay Area journalist seeks editorial position commuting distance from San Francisco. The art of the investigative interview is my specialty. Jeffrey Gale, 1645 Vendola Drive, San Rafael, Ca. 94903. (53) Reporter-editor must relocate to benign climate. Courier-Journal & Times writer. Phone or write Art Ehrenstrom, 4031 Hillsboro Rd., Louisville, Ky. 40207. REPORTER, newspaper and magazine experience,!ooking for position where fluent Spanish could be used to best advantage. Soll Sussman, 1405 Edgecliff, Austin, Texas. 78741. (53) Unusual Individual with Extremely Diversified Background, (T.V., Public Relations, the Arts) wishes to assist literary agent and learn all phases of business. Analyze manuscripts etc. Peter Schwartz, 150 West End Avenue, New York, NY 10023. (53) Female Third Class Licensee seeks work in radio or t.v. in Calif. Reply Box 115. [MORE]. (53) Hard Working Woman seeks job. M.A. Journalism and Mass Communication, B.A. Philosophy. Experience in public radio, video (news, public affairs). Reply Box 114. [MORE]. (53) Music Freak would like to review albums for magazine/ newspaper. | can write, give me a chance. Craig Morrison, P.O. Box 31933, Aurora, Co. 80011. (53) PHOTOJOURNALIST, twelve years experience in education, public relations, newspaper. Writing experience. Published nationally. Accepting freelance assignments or full-time position with small time daily. Reply Box Reporter and Award winning Feature Writer with 2 years business experience for world’s largest bank. Wants newspaper job in California. John Upshaw, 2302 Carleton, Berkeley, Calif. 94704. (53) JOB WANTED: Degreed, experienced freelancer wants freelance editing, writing, production. Bob Quarteroni, (814) 234-4421. 834 E. College Ave., State College, Pa. 16801. (53) Engineer, salesman, investigator, researcher, 55 years old, energetic, tenacious. Wants to start new career in radio or printed medium. J. Enlon, 676-205 S. Haywood Rd., Waynesville, N.C. 28789. (53) PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTITIONER, six years experience, seeks pr position in broadcasting, film, videotape. NYC. BA Journalism; working on MA Media Studies. Reply Box 116 [MORE]. (53) PUBLICATIONS SEX!!! Now that | have your attention, let’s discuss a book column. It costs peanuts... and is thrice as habit-forming. Praised by friends, relatives everywhere. The unique rating/grading system gives reader ‘instant replay.” Free samples—my best advertisement. Tom Stryce THE BOOKSTORE© 6510 Green Valley Circle, #203 Culver City, Calif. 90230 (54) 3-D GUITAR CHORDS: Guitar accompaniment course for all beginners. Especially for visually handicapped. Book in raised black characters and braille. Five cassettes. For full information write: Natalie Lamken, 1724 17th St., N.W., Apt 72, Washington, D.C. 20009. (53) THE BOOK EVERYONE IS TALKING ABOUT! THE ONE THEY ARE TRYING TO SUPPRESS! Read The Diary of a Catholic Bishop by Edward Carben. An exciting and informative novel than runs the gamut of contemporary human experience, from sex, political corruption, and violence, to love, sacrifice and commitment. Excellent reviews! A balm for these troubled times, no matter what one’s beliefs. 314 pp., beautifully designed in hard cover. Makes a memorable and unusual gift! $6.95 from Lynne Prescott Books, Dept E, 415 West Pearl Street, Butler, Pennsylvania 16001. (53) For people who are frustrated by capitalism Yet do not think of socialism— WHAT NEXT? An 8-page thought-provoker by Jessie Lloyd O’Connor. Single copies free; 10 for $1; 100 for $7. Write: Jessie Lloyd O’Connor, Little Compton, Rl 02837 (54) 750 Third Avenue New York, New York 10017 NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP Number of issues to run 30 [MORE] CLASSIFIED RATES REGULAR: 50 cents per word, prepaid; DISPLAY: $42. per column inch ____ Box returns and mail to me. ($1.00 extra) DISCOUNTS: (to apply on an earned basis in any twelve month period) 10% for 3 insertions: 15% for 6 insertions; 20% for 12 insertions DEADLINE: First Friday of month preceding the issue you want the ad to appear in AA A SR NR ORE SEIN GE NES RE SRR GEOR RE SERED ome ES RE CEN EE RT EE SREY Re MES come Fon MERE arse rn PUBLICATIONS MICHAEL HARRINGTON’S NEWSLETTER of the Democratic Left; political, labor, feminist developments plus informed analysis of energy, economic crisis, and future of socialism. $5/year. Newsletter, 853 Broadway, Room 617, New York, New York 10003. (53) “1976” CATALOG OF SURVIVAL/MILITARY—BOOKS/ MANUALS. 50 cents. Guerrilla warfare, special forces. “Survival” Long Storage Foods, List 50 cents. Ken Hale (MO-50), McDonald, Ohio 44437. (55) READ THE GUARDIAN—newsweekly gives MARXIST view point on national and international news. Special 8week trial sub., $1. GUARDIAN, Dept. MO, 33 W. 17th St., NY., NY. 10011. (Full year $12.50, student $7.50) SERVICES OFFERED WRITING WORKSHOPS, Manhattan, Brooklyn; correspondence course, (licensed New York State); criticism service; step-by-step help. PAULINE BLOOM, 20 Plaza Street, Brooklyn, New York, 11238. (53) YOUR COAT OF ARMS researched. Full color drawing and list of references. Send name, country of origin, address, and $2.75 to STOTT CREST, P.O. Box 7266, Tacoma, Washington 98407. (53) Need Press 1D? Send 25c for application to: National Press Registry, P.O. Box 921, Half Moon Bay, Ca. 94019. (53) RISLEY RESEARCH. Library Research. Editing. Access to one of country’s largest libraries. PO Box 2262, Santa Barbara, CA 93102. (805) 965-3866. (53) To consider how our lives are spent. Centered in a deep forest: Workshops/educative community experiences. Contemplative. Write then visit: The Clearings, Marshfield, Vermont 05658. (53) BUMPERSTICKERS — ANY MESSAGE CUSTOM PRINTED $2.00;.75c each additional. Colt, Newvernon, MISCELLANY REAL BARGAIN! BEAUTIFUL TENNIS RACKET COVER which completely covers and fits all tennis rackets. $9.25, guar., Meriam NU-bags, 9505 Lavergne, Skokie, III. 60076. (54) BUMPERSTICKER POTPOURRI plus sure cure brochure for inflation, war and atheism. $10. Jiffy economics course. $1. Century Apex, 1615 Belmont Ave., Yountys-* ~ town, OH 44504. (53) HIPPOS QUOTE SHAKESPEARE. Intelligent, humorous, all-purpose greeting cards. Twelve assorted HIPPOS: $3.30 ppd. Add sales tax. Free brochure. David Prints, Box 502, Miller Place, N.Y. 11764. (53) Minister for Christ. Lifetime ordination, D.D., church characters. Details 25c. Ministry of Christ, Inc., R4, Box 314-D, Delevan, WI 53115. (53) THE PRESS is the newspaper that puts New York together for community, consumer and entertainment news. Try 12 issues for $2.00. THE PRESS, POB 459, NY 10022. (55) “MORE FOR YOUR MONEY.” Bright, practical weekly column on stretching family dollars. Camera-ready or manuscript. Samples. LEFAN FEATURES, 1802 South 13, Temple, Texas 76501. (53) Advertise in 50 different rural newspapers same time. Total cost under $20.00. ECONO ADS, Box 5073-MR, San Angelo, Texas 76901. (53) NEW YORK’S MUSIC AND ENTERTAINMENT PAPER IS NOW FRANCHISING TO CITIES NATIONALLY $12,000 WE’RE LOOKING FOR AREAS WITH LARGE COLLEGE POPULATIONS AND A MUSIC SCENE FOR INFORMATION WRITE: GOOD TIMES 80-32 164 ST. JAMAICA, N.Y. 11432 LONG ISLANDe WESTCHESTERe BROOKLYN QUALITY PAPERBACK BOOK SERVICE The easy, economical way to buy the best paperbacks in print JUSTINE BALTHAZAR MOUNTOLIVE 231. $9.90 f* i ° Sets: THE MEMOIRS OF: | 7 Srenoce Howes Na 3-VOL. SET A. COMAN DOYLE r 171. $6.85 ea Be, wl 2-VOL. SET | 253. $7.90 | 2 ERNEST JONES : De Life and Work of THE NEW YORK TIMES ee. ee Kummer ee | - _— ¢. seae Oe aw BOOK _ WILLROGERS Hh sot OF The Man and His Time } 2-VOL. SET Sa es § Richard M Ketcham ie ' 228. $11.90 HOUSE The Letters of t The Democratk Expenence Sk ea) “ae an S ewe ee 226. $4.95 | The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich 3 THE WORLD SY ilian OF THE PAST 0; MURieyet Pine Sesteny by William L. Shirer 7 OVA A ; Mellinan 113. $7.95 Prices shown are publishers’ list prices seer | More than 7000 distinguished new paperbacks are published each year. No wonder you miss SO many good ones. E THINK YOU'LL ENJOY this easy way to acquire the best paperbacks a a ee j ¢ % W published —even those hard-to-find books you've probably spent hours 11. 6% rym looking for —and you'll save money too. As a trial member of QPB, you'll re- ~ hae a aS ts ceive our informative catalog, the OQPB Review, each issue of which contains 7 2 rat Al approximately one hundred titles to choose from. You'll also immediately qualify for our Free Book Plan. All QPB books are large-size, durable, handsome editions printed on quality paper with modern, readable typefaces. Join QPB today. Any 3 books or sets for only ‘leach You simply agree to buy six more within the next year and as a member you'll immediately qualify for our Free Book Plan 1. You will receive the QPB Review fifteen times a year —about every | QUALITY PAPERBACK BOOK SERVICE, INC. | 32 weeks. This informative catalog describes the Main Selection plus, Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 6-QB379-1-1 approximately one hundred Alternates. The Main Selection is always Pinies eanell ean bb 0 menthar of Gk Qualte Panter: Lite nici | offered at a 20% discount. send me the three books or sets whose numbers I've indicated in the 2. If you want the Main Selection, do nothing. It will be shipped to | boxes below. Bill me only $3 for all three, plus shipping. My only obliga- | you automatically. If you want one or more of the Alternates —or no | tion is to purchase six more books or sets during the coming year, receiving book at all—just indicate your decision on the reply form always! 4 29% discount on every Main Selection I take. My membership is cancelenclosed with the Review and return it by the date specified. able any time after I buy the six additional books or sets. A moderate | 3. Free books. For every book or set you buy (exclusive of your three | shipping charge is added to all shipments. introductory choices for $1 each) you earn at least one Bonus Point, : INDICATE BY NUMBER YOUR and the Bonus Points you accumulate entitle you to free books and | sets. (You pay only shipping charges.) THREE BOOKS OR SETS L | L a | af 4. Return privilege. If your Review is delayed in the mail and there- | fore you receive the Main Selection without having had ten days to! yr y notify us if you did not want it, you may return that Selection at our | MsI expense. 2 te ee ecg: owe oe smote (Please print plainly) | Address I? QUALITY PAPERBACK |“ O00) BOOK SERVICE, INC. tke Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 | THE THIRD PAPER: Most American cities have one newspaper in the morning and another in the afternoon. They also have a third paper...the one people read for the truth behind the news. The third paper is the underground press that grew up in the Sixties. Now it's paying its way into the Seventies. With over 20 million readers worldwide, today's alternative press is one of the most influential voices around. And serious journalists appreciate the freedom in writing for them. The Alternative Journalism Review is a view of the underground press looking at itself and at the world. Exciting and informative, every month it examines the coverage, the personalities, the business and the politics of the underground press. And AJR knows what it's talking about. It's published by the Alternative Press Syndicate, a non-profit association. APS was founded in 1966 as the Underground Press Syndicate with five member publications. Today, it has 250 member publications and offices in New York, London, Zurich, Hong Kong and Buenos Aires. The alternative press is constantly changing, constantly growing, constantly reaching more people. Can you afford to ignore it? Freedom of the press is guaranteed SUBSCRIPTION: $10 per year. only to those who own one. Name Address City State Zip Alternate Journalism Review, Box 777 Cooper Station, New York, N.Y. 10016