"The organic act which lies back of the work college editors are doing provides for the gathering and dissemination of information. It was never intended that public funds should be used for "institutional promotion," "propaganda," "press-agenting," "space-grafting," "publicity," "self laudation," "selling" or call it what you will. If "institutional promotion" - to give it the benefit of the least obnoxious designation - comes as a "by-product" of news and helpful information, there's no harm done. But an item aimed to benefit the institution rather than the person who reads that item is not only subversive to the purposes of the college, but is also subversive to the interests of the so-called "by-product." The college has no mandate to work the newspapers; yet it has a sufficient warranty to work for its readers."
Author reports that weekly newspapers in New York State are not losing influence. Reports kept by months at Cornell show that the newspapers are using not only more of the college editors' material, but more agricultural news in general.
Notes that farm papers, under financial strain along with their readers, are "sticking to their job of trying to help matters to mend." Says that the educational work of the colleges and experiment stations through local papers comes directly into the field formerly covered by farm papers, but "affords only a fraction of the service a live farmer wants. There is no displacing a good farm journal." Suggests that scientists should recognize the importance of the farm press in their contacts with the public.
"It is fundamentally wrong to take sex sides in any situation, for goodness and badness - intelligence and moronity - are not distributed on the basis of man and woman. It is the individual who counts…"
