ABSTRACT

In A Free and Responsible Press (1947), the Hutchins Commission—officially, the Commission on Freedom of the Press—sharply criticized journalists and journalism educators. In turn, the journalists and the journalism educators sharply criticized the Commission. This article views the battles in terms of academia. Commission chair Robert Maynard Hutchins of the University of Chicago believed that a university must work to improve society rather than walling itself off. All but one of the men he successfully recruited for the Commission was a current or former professor. The orientation affected their analysis and their conclusions concerning both the press, which they viewed as a teaching profession, and schools of journalism, which they considered misguided in teaching skills rather than liberal arts. Journalists pushed back against the report as “academic,” which Hutchins called “a red herring.” Journalism professors pushed back against the report as prejudiced and uninformed, which Hutchins denied. Yet despite the attitudes of professors in 1947, the report subsequently rose to canonic status in schools of journalism. The article argues that the report reflects not only concepts about a free and responsible press but also concepts about a free and responsible university.

摘要

在一个自由而负责任的媒体中（1947 年），哈钦斯委员会——正式名称为新闻自由委员会——严厉批评记者和新闻教育工作者。反过来，记者和新闻教育工作者严厉批评了委员会。本文从学术角度看待这场战争。芝加哥大学委员会主席罗伯特梅纳德哈钦斯认为，大学必须努力改善社会，而不是将自己封闭起来。除了他为委员会成功招募的一名男性之外，其他所有人都是现任或前任教授。这种取向影响了他们对新闻的分析和结论，他们认为新闻是教学职业，新闻学院被他们认为在教学技能而不是文科方面被误导了。记者反驳这份报告，称其为“学术、”哈钦斯称之为“红鲱鱼”。新闻学教授以偏见和不知情为由反驳这份报告，哈钦斯对此予以否认。然而，尽管教授们在 1947 年持不同态度，但该报告随后在新闻学院上升为经典。文章认为，该报告不仅反映了关于自由和负责任的新闻的概念，还反映了关于自由和负责任的大学的概念。