fense most desperately. Many havealready begun to cater again to sensa-tional political and ethical tastes.

The numerous magazines and illus-trated weeklies published in Western Germany today know how to satisfythese tastes. One periodical started lastyear with the" Diaries of Eva Braun ,"which demonstrated a pornographicimagination plus some insight into theprivate lives of Nazi bigwigs. The edi-tors of Wochenend turned to Nazi

uniforms and sex- a hugely profitable

combination. Since then there has beena flood of exposés, memoirs, and" in-sides" on Himmler , Goebbels , Ilse Koch , and the maidens of the S.S.

Yellow and prurient journalism is,however, not the only problem of theGerman press. The fact is that Ameri-can attempts to teach Germans how toseparate news and opinion have, byand large, failed miserably. Only asmall minority of German papers pre-tend to" cover the news" for the pur-pose of informing the public. Duringthe election campaign, papers blandlyignored important mass- meetings ifthey didn't agree with the sponsors.Unabashed editorializing pervades ev-ery inch of newsprint from bannerheadlines to sports.

German reporters are still hardlymore than enterprising office boys. Theart of uncovering the news is almostunknown. Instead, editors dictate phil-osophical treatises in the seclusion ofcarpeted chambers. A combination ofacademic dullness, party narrowness,and the arrogant editorial pose of talk-ing down to the readers kept the cir-culation of a Social Democratic news-paper in the stoutly Social Democratic city of Stuttgart down to two thousand.

But serious as these deficiencies are,the real danger signal appeared whentotally discredited ex- Nazis hastily pre-pared to re- enter the publishing busi-ness. Among them is Max Willmy,owner of the Nürnberg plant whichprinted Julius Streicher 's Stürmer. De-nazification has pronounced Willmyrespectable; he owns one of the best-equipped printing shops, and he almostcertainly can get ahead of the strug-gling" caretakers" who have little morethan their convictions to call their own.

This is the worst of the crisis: Theex- Nazis are going back into businesswith the money that the anti- Nazi , li-censed press has been paying for the

use of their plants and equipment.Most of these" caretaker" contractswere made for five years plus a three-year option; but even if the contractcontinues in operation, the unwealthylicense- holder still depends on thewealthy Nazi landlord.

To pretend, under these conditions,that the end of licensing serves thecause of democracy and freedom iscrude mockery. Talk of free competi-tion sounds sour when a democratic

minority, impoverished by economicand political persecution, must pit itspenniless idealism against the still pow-erful profiteers of Nazism .

The High Commissioners seem tohave sensed the danger. Before theyhanded most of their powers to thenew Bonn government, they reserved ameasure of control over the press. Inview of the desperate plight of the li-censed press, such action was undoubt-edly essential for the moment; but itdoes little more than postpone the hourof reckoning. Controls are negativebrakes at best. At the present low ebbof Allied power in Germany , the brake-of Allied power in Germany , the brake-lining of controls has worn thin.

The only hope is in positive action.As long as politically clean editors andpublishers have to pay homage and

DemocraticPress

money to their political enemies, theyare doomed. The most basic actiontherefore must be to help them securetheir own plants and, with them, theirpolitical destiny.

If a re- examination of the status ofNazi - owned property and Nazi - earnedNazi - owned property and Nazi - earnedassets is the only way out, such stepsmust be taken. It is unrealistic tothink that the Nazi revolution can beundone without removing some of theloot of the Nazi revolutionaries. It isnaive to expect the high ideals of weaknaive to expect the high ideals of weakdemocrats to defeat the low schemesof strong totalitarians.

In Germany , the press is not simplyan industry or a business. It is vital edu-cation. Positive action to strengthen itmust include co- operation with, and

support of, the democratic elements.

Ultimately the problem of the Ger­ man press is part of the vast realm ofre- education. Newspapermen- fromreporter to publisher- must be broughtin contact with their colleagues indemocratic countries. And simulta-neously, the German public must beeducated in school, university, andcitizens' meeting- to demand news-papers worthy of that name.

That the job can be done has beendemonstrated by a few valiantly demo-cratic publications. Eugen Kogon 'sFrankfurter Hefte has achieved a highstandard of objective liberalism. A lit-tle daily in Bremen recently offered abravely signed editorial in devastatinganswer to a reader who had writtenof the glory of Nazi days. Wespennestused the memory of Goebbels ' journal-ism to shock German and Allied friendsinto stopping the flood of returningNazi publishers. But a shining examplewas set by the Frankfurter Rundschau ,which a few weeks ago printed a head-line that criticized the government ofHesse. The Ministry of Justice de-manded public retraction and apology

although no falsehood was involved.The editors replied publicly that theywill appear in court as ordered, butthat they had nothing to retract, andwould cheerfully risk imprisonmentrather than bow to another dictator-ship by unreconstructed, autocraticGerman officialdom.

The Rundschau case, even before ithas been resolved, has been one of thefew victories of democracy in Ger­ many . It has shown what a press, con-scious of its rights and its duties, cando. It should have given a hint toAllied policy- makers- unaccustomedas they are to democratic" resurgence"in Germany - that it will pay tostrengthen, to support, and to protecteven the most bashful flowering of atruly free anti- Nazi press. This mayinvolve some ruthless trampling downof resilient Nazi weeds; it may involveeconomic watering- perhaps withERP aid of the anti- totalitarian buds.If anyone should point to the recipientsof such favors with a sneer at" collab-oration," let him be reminded that ifAmerican funds are helping recon-struct German industry, there is noreason why they should not help re-construct the German mind.

-PAUL WAKEFIELD

The Reporter, October 11, 1949

37