Those who turn to journalism naturally care for writing, but in an art to "care" is little and most have never had the personal environment, the training, or the personal command of English to enable them to do more than write a stiff prose with a narrow vocabulary and no sense of style. Even those who have some such capacity are hampered by the family heritage already outlined. College writing is in the same condition; but the average college man is not expecting to earn his living by his typewriter. In order to receive a minimum capacity in writing enough to pass, every year of study for journalism must have a writing course and the technical work must run to constant writing. From start to finish there must be patient, individual correction. The use of the typewriter must be made obligatory. Rigid discipline must deal with errors in spelling, grammar, the choice of words and phrases. Previous college training in composition must in general be revised and made over to secure directness and simplicity. At the end, the utmost that can be gained for nineteen out of twenty is some facility, a little sense of style and diction, and copy that will be above the average of the newspaper and not much above that. Examine the writing in the newspapers issued by some schools and the work in schools that do not, and a distressingly large portion is either dull or "smart," the last, worst fault of the two.
Effective training in reporting must be given in large urban centers
Reporting is the first use to which writing is put and through which the writer is trained. For this, abundant material is indispensable, as much as clinical material for a medical school. As the medical schools gravitate to cities, and the rural institutions flicker out one by one, so in the end the effectively trained reporter will gravitate to a large city. Towns of under 20,000 population furnish a very tame sort of reporting, and those who get this training in them find reporting is under new conditions in a great metropolis. In such a place the peril is that routine news will take too much of the precious time for training the reporter and the demands of academic hours will interfere with sharing in the best of big stories.
Aims in teaching the art of reporting
Routine is the curse of the newspaper, and it is at its worst in reporting. In its face the four hard things to get are the combination of the vivid, the accurate, and the informed and the condensed story. Equipped newspapers of high standards like the New York World require recourse to reference books, the "morgue," and the files in every story where details can be added to the day's digging in that particular news vein. Condensation comes next. The young cub reporter generally shuns both. He hates to look up his subject. He spreads himself like a sitting hen over one egg. Both must be required for efficient training. Compression it is difficult to enforce in a school where paper bills are small or do not exist and the space pressure of the large daily is absent. A number of dailies of large circulation are cultivating very close handling of news and space for feature and woman stuff with very great profit, and the schools give too little attention to this new phase of the newspaper. In all papers, the old tendency to print anything that came by wire is gone and mere "news" has not the place it once had. In particular, local news was cut down one half in a majority of dailies in cities of 250,000 and over from August, 1914, to the close of the war. The small daily in places of less than 50,000 and weeklies did not do this, which is one reason why great tracts of the United States were not ready for war when it came. Woe to the land whose watchmen sleep!
The teaching of copy-editing
Copy-editing is the next task in the training of the coming newspaper man. On the small daily and weekly, there is little of this, but it is practiced on the metropolitan daily. There ten to twelve men are needed, doing nothing else but editing copy. In the office, two or three years are needed to bring a man to this work. No school can teach this unless its men give at least a full day to editing a flood of copy that will fill a 12 to 16 page newspaper. Where the work of the students runs day by day on the copy of one of the lesser dailies, editing for that purpose is secured, but not the intensive training needed to handle the copy-desk requirements of newspapers in a city of 1,000,000 population or more in its urban ring. Success in this field is proved when men go direct from the classroom to such a desk. This carries with it tuition in heads for all needs, make-up, and the close editing of special articles, features, and night Associated Press copy.
A liberal curriculum must be part of training for journalism
Newspaper training will always deal also with subjects and needs a course containing a larger proportion of the studies usually taught in college or offered in its curriculum. Medicine requires the same chemistry, organic and inorganic, the same physics, and the same elementary biology as our college courses cover; these sciences are more or less like a Mother Hubbard, no very close fit and concealing more than is revealed. Johns Hopkins has been able at this point to apply tests, personal and particular, gauging both teacher and taught, more searching than are elsewhere required. The fruits abundantly justify this course, and in time some school of journalism will apply like tests to history,—ancient, medieval, and modern,—political economy, political science, and the modern languages, which are the basis of its work. The practical difficulty is that it is far easier to test the three sciences just mentioned than history, politics, and economics. No one will seriously assert that these are as rigorously taught as chemistry, physics, and biology. The personal equation of the teacher counts for more, it is both easier and more tempting to inject social theories, not yet tested by current facts, than in science. Sciolism is less easily detected in courses which deal with the humanitarian held than in science, but it is not less perilous and it is not less possible to apply the same experimental tests as in the scientific laboratory. He is blind, however, who does not see that much advance in the current teaching at any time of history, politics, and economics has had its experimental tests as complete and as convincing as in any laboratory, which certain teachers wholly refuse to accept—sometimes because they are behind the times, sometimes because they are before the times; sometimes they are in no time whatever but the fool time of vain imaginings that somewhere, somewhen, and somehow there is a place where human desires are stronger than the inevitable laws which guide and guard the physics, the chemistry, and the biology of social bodies.
Social sciences must be related to life