"Newspaper men, perhaps more than any other class, are rated by ability"
About this Quote
Meritocracy is easiest to praise in the room where it flatters you. Franklin Knight Lane, a Progressive-era politician who rose through journalism before landing in high office, is doing something savvy here: he’s blessing the press with the highest compliment a public figure can offer without surrendering control - the idea that “newspaper men” are judged “by ability” rather than by pedigree, party, or wealth.
The intent is tactical admiration. Lane elevates journalism as a profession whose currency is competence: hustle, clarity, access, speed. In an America still rigid with class markers, that’s a democratic fantasy with real bite. It frames the newsroom as a proving ground where talent can outrun background, and where public trust is supposedly earned, not inherited.
The subtext, though, cuts both ways. If newspaper men are “rated by ability,” then their power over reputations and elections can be legitimized as professional expertise rather than partisan influence. It’s a subtle bid to treat press authority as earned authority - the kind you’re expected to respect even when you dislike the headline. It also implies a warning: a reporter’s “ability” includes the ability to wound. Skill in this trade isn’t just virtue; it’s leverage.
Context matters. Lane lived in a moment when mass-circulation papers, muckraking, and sensational “yellow” journalism were reshaping politics. Credibility was contested, and professional identity was being negotiated in real time. His line reads like an attempt to stabilize that identity: yes, newspapers can be unruly, but their ranking system is performance. That’s both reassurance and rationalization.
The intent is tactical admiration. Lane elevates journalism as a profession whose currency is competence: hustle, clarity, access, speed. In an America still rigid with class markers, that’s a democratic fantasy with real bite. It frames the newsroom as a proving ground where talent can outrun background, and where public trust is supposedly earned, not inherited.
The subtext, though, cuts both ways. If newspaper men are “rated by ability,” then their power over reputations and elections can be legitimized as professional expertise rather than partisan influence. It’s a subtle bid to treat press authority as earned authority - the kind you’re expected to respect even when you dislike the headline. It also implies a warning: a reporter’s “ability” includes the ability to wound. Skill in this trade isn’t just virtue; it’s leverage.
Context matters. Lane lived in a moment when mass-circulation papers, muckraking, and sensational “yellow” journalism were reshaping politics. Credibility was contested, and professional identity was being negotiated in real time. His line reads like an attempt to stabilize that identity: yes, newspapers can be unruly, but their ranking system is performance. That’s both reassurance and rationalization.
Quote Details
| Topic | Work |
|---|
More Quotes by Franklin
Add to List
