As shown in the quotes on this page, there was heated debate over the question of how much censorship was required. It was almost universally agreed upon that some military censorship would be necessary to win the war, but beyond that, there was widespread disagreement about how far censorship activities should be allowed to continue. Some sides argued that as the military had more facts and information, they should have final say over the matter, whereas others argued that the military would censor news that would not harm the war effort and was merely bad press.
On the pretext of preventing the leakage of military information, a censorship was established which has been constantly employed for the suppression of opinion and the stifling of political criticism. It has shown itself to be the worst kind of censorship possible, for it is a military censorship in the sense of being administered by military authorities, but it extends far beyond the military sphere and covers every branch of the national life.
- The North American Review¹
Here the North American Review warns agains the kind of censorship that began to take place in Germany at the time, where any and all negative speech about the government was censored. They describe the danger of a military censor board out of control, as was happening with the Committee on Public Information at the time, as some people were resisting the broad censorship powers granted to the board. Furthermore, despite how those in favor of censorship like to portray the country as completely unified, this quote shows that there were other people, not just Socialists, who were against the concept of censorship. This quote demonstrates the hypocrisy of the American government, as they were censoring their people, while criticizing the Germans for doing the same thing. Finally, this quote demonstrates why the American government attempted to censor the public; to prevent articles and information like this from detracting from unified effort behind the war.
Censorship and the freedom of the press will always be at loggerheads
the censor tending to cut down to the lowest limit the sum total of information that may be made public and the Editor striving, as is his wont, to fill his columns with the largest possible amount of war news. … Now, we are of the decided opinion that for the successful prosecution of this war upon which we have entered, the military and not the editorial mind should have the first and last say as to what may and what may not be published. For the Government alone knows all the facts of the case, and therefore alone is qualified to decide what information should be given out to the public.
- Scientific American²
Here Scientific American describes their support for military censorship because they believe that the government knows the most about the war situation and as such is most qualified to make decisions about what information to release. They were not the only ones who believed that the government should have sole censor authority and that the press should stay quiet and listen to the government. Furthermore, this quotes demonstrates why some people supported the censorship effort, and it lays out some of the reasoning behind the censor efforts.
Even reckless speech may a moderating influence, whereas drastic censorship chokes the safety valve. My plea then is simply for the least possible censorship machinery.
- Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science in the City of New York³
This is an impassioned plea for not a reduction in censorship, but the least amount of machinery possible so that the censorship applied might be the least possible. This actually happened, as eventually all censorship activities were directed under the auspices of the Committee on Public Information. However, instead of there being less censorship, there was an increase in censorship, especially after the Supreme Court allowed for the Espionage and Sedition acts to be held constitutional. Furthermore, this quote demonstrates how there were very few people arguing for no censorship outright, as this publication merely advocates for the least amount which is not the same as none. The Academy of Political Science was founded by the University of Columbia and is respected for its cultural and political analysis.
The press displayed class consciousness and a form of megalomania when it came to the question of submitting to regulation. It vehemently insisted not only that its patriotism could be trusted but also that its discrimination could be depended on at all times and under all circumstances. Its insistence, coupled with its power, coerced enough votes in the Congress to defeat all attempts to place any restriction upon, or to regulate in any manner soever, what it should or should not publish.
… The press not only defeated these utterly inadequate proposals but it prevented any serious attempt to impose either needed censorship or rational restriction. It utterly refused to accept any limitation of its privileges; and as the press proved able to dictate to Congress the power of censorship, which the situation of the country urgently demands and the failure to exercise which is bound to prolong the war and cause infinite loss in blood and treasure, is not included among the almost limitless "war powers" found in the laws passed at the extra session.
- Virginia Law Review⁵⁴
In this aggressive lambasting of the press, the Virginia Law Review champions the idea of even stronger censorship laws. The quote mischaracterizes the Espionage and Sedition Acts as having no effect on the American Public whatsoever. The attack on the press was a forceful attempt to undermine their legitimacy and commitment to the war cause. It also demonstrates the earnest beliefs of many Americans that the press should not attempt to become political in any way, not even to fight for their right to print the facts that they had gathered. Finally, this quote demonstrates some of the mob mentality behind some of the non-governmental forms of censor, mainly attack pieces like this, but also included mobs of people who went after those seen as against the war effort.
All of these quotes demonstrate the fierce debate raging in the country at the time over the necessity and extent of censorship activities. Some of them eloquently argue for and against the topic, while others dissolve into bitter mud-slinging. They show the polarization of the time (not so different than the current political situation). Furthermore, they show how, despite the best efforts of the American government, they were not able to stamp out all dissent on the matter; the debate, as one-sided as it may have been, still existed.
¹ Randall, James G. "Germany's Censorship and News Control." The North American Review 208, no. 752 (1918): 51-62. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25121946.
² "Censorship." Scientific American 117, no. 4 (1917): 54. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26021616.
³ Martin, Frederick Roy. "A Plea for an Uncensored Press." Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science in the City of New York 7, no. 2 (1917): 168-72. doi:10.2307/1172244. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1172244.
⁴ O'Donnell, T. J. "Military Censorship and Freedom of the Press." Virginia Law Review 5, no. 3 (1917): 178-89. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1063233.
² "Censorship." Scientific American 117, no. 4 (1917): 54. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26021616.
³ Martin, Frederick Roy. "A Plea for an Uncensored Press." Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science in the City of New York 7, no. 2 (1917): 168-72. doi:10.2307/1172244. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1172244.
⁴ O'Donnell, T. J. "Military Censorship and Freedom of the Press." Virginia Law Review 5, no. 3 (1917): 178-89. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1063233.