Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:24:18.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exclusivity and Cooperation in the Supply of News: The Example of the Associated Press, 1893–1945

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2012

Jonathan Silberstein-Loeb
Jonathan Silberstein-Loeb*
Affiliation:
Keble College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Policy History , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , July 2012 , pp. 466 - 498
Copyright
Copyright © Donald Critchlow and Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

notes

1. Similar organizations include the Australian Associated Press, the Canadian Press, Kyodo of Japan, and Press Trust of India. The British Press Association, established in 1868, predates the incorporation of the AP by twenty-five years, but it was created at the behest of the Post Office and operated more like a news agency, despite being owned by the press, insofar as it employed its own reporters who generated the news reports, rather than providing a platform for the exchange of news among members, which was a defining feature of the AP. The New Zealand Press Association, which also predates the AP, was similar to the American association, but it benefited from a copyright over foreign telegrams. See Hannis, G., “The New Zealand Press Association 1880–2006: The Rise and Fall of the Co-operative Model for News Gathering,” Australian Economic History Review 48, no. 1 (2008): 47–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “Ownership, Cooperation, and the News,” in Journalism and Sense-making: Reading the Newspaper, ed. V. Rupar (Cresskill, N.J., 2010), 89–102.

2. Blaganesh, Contra S., “‘Hot News’: The Enduring Myth of Property in News,” Columbia Law Review 111 (2011): 419–97.Google Scholar

3. On the importance of “unofficial regulation” to American history more generally, see Lurie, J., “Commodities Exchanges as Self-Regulatory Organizations in the Late 19th Century: Some Perimeters in the History of American Administrative Law,” Rutgers Law Review 28 (1974–75): 1107–40.Google Scholar

4. Peritz, R. J. R., Competition Policy in America, 1888–1892 (Oxford, 1996).Google Scholar

5. Kielbowicz, R., News in the Mail: The Press, the Post Office, and Public Information, 1700–1860s (London, 1989)Google Scholar; John, R. R., Spreading the News: The American Postal System from Franklin to Morse (London, 1995)Google Scholar; Starr, P., The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communications (New York, 2004), 84–92.Google Scholar

6. Lee, J. M., History of American Journalism (New York, 1923), 200.Google Scholar

7. Brooker-Gross, S. R., “News Wire Services in the Nineteenth-Century United States,” Journal of Historical Geography 7, no. 2 (1981): 167–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rosewater, V., History of Cooperative News-Gathering in the United States (London, 1930)Google Scholar. For the best treatment of the early period, see Blondheim, M., News over the Wires: The Telegraph and the Flow of Information in America, 1844–1897 (Cambridge, Mass., 1994)Google Scholar. R. Schwarzlose is the only person to cover systematically the period after 1890, but his account stops abruptly in 1920. See The Nation’s Newsbrokers, vol. 2: The Rush to Institution: From 1865 to 1920 (Evanston, Ill., 1990).

8. Silberstein-Loeb, J., “Business, Politics, Technology, and the International Supply of News, 1845–1945” (Ph.D. diss., University of Cambridge, 2009)Google Scholar. The formation of small, regional associations, which then combined to create a larger organization with similar rules, comports with E. Ostrom’s work on the institutions of collective action. “Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems,” American Economic Review 100 (2010): 641–72.

9. Testimony of W. B. Somerville, House Judiciary Committee, “In the Matter of the Western Union Telegraph Company,” 43rd Cong., 1875, NA, HJ-T2 (43), RG233, 11.

10. An increase in bandwidth permitted news associations to lease telegraph lines and to establish private networks. Silberstein-Loeb, “Business, Politics, Technology, and the International Supply of News,” chap. 2. D. Hochfelder, “Where the Common People Could Speculate”: The Ticker, Bucket Shops, and the Origins of Popular Participation in Financial Markets, 1880–1920,” Journal of American History 93, no. 2 (September 2006): 338. Business strategy was also important. Jay Gould, who purchased Western Union, was more willing to lease lines to different news organizations than his predecessors. John, Richard R., Network Nation: Inventing American Telecommunications (Cambridge, Mass., 2010), 191–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. Lawson memo, undated, Newberry Library (NL), Chicago, Lawson papers, box 2, folder 4 [hereafter box/folder will appear with a slash: 2/4)], 238. According to calculations made by the AP, to maintain two competing organizations threatened to generate unnecessary expenses for American publishers of between $500,000 to $600,000 a year. Concluding correspondence relating to the work of the conference committee, 1 July 1895, NL, Lawson, 112/729, 73. In subsequent calculations, this amount was increased to between $700,000 and $800,000; AP Annual Report (1894–95), 6.

12. Lawson to Eggleston, 8 March 1900, NL, Lawson, 4/9, 38–41; Lawson to McLaughlan, 1 November 1893, NL, Lawson, 113/730.

13. “The United Press . . . ,” undated, American Jewish Archives (AJA), Cincinnati, Rosewater papers, 20/17. J. E. Scripps, “The Associated Press v. The United Press,” 11 September 1893, AJA, Rosewater papers, 20/17.

14. Lawson to H. G. Otis, 30 July 1895, NL, Lawson, 3/6, 919.

15. “The United Press,” June–July 1895, AJA, Rosewater, 20/17.

16. Lawson to S. O’Meara, 6 February 1897, NL, Lawson, 3/7, 977.

17. Lawson to de Young, 26 October 1892, NL, Lawson, 2/4.

18. Lawson to A. Bechhoffer, 2 February 1894, NL, Lawson, 2/5.

19. Minutes of stockholders’ meeting, 22 October 1892, NL, Lawson, 113/730.

20. Every member was obliged to publish the following credit: “The Associated Press is exclusively entitled to the use for republication of all news dispatches credited to it or not otherwise credited in this paper and also the local news published herein.” This credit still appears in AP newspapers.

21. Lehmann, F. W., Laws of the Associated Press (New York, 1909), 41.Google Scholar

22. See, for example, F. B. Noyes to Swayne & Swayne, 28 February 1898, Archives of the Associated Press (AP), New York, 01.1, correspondence of Noyes, 1/1. Shmanske has improperly understood the purpose of this non-intercourse clause. See “News as a Public Good,” 64–66.

23. Lawson to Rocky Mountain News Printing Co., 23 July 1896, NL, Lawson, 3/7.

24. Knapp and Diehl to members, 14 September 1900, New York Public Library (NYPL), New York, Ochs papers, 53/9.

25. Rosewater to Stone, 3 May 1895, AJA, Rosewater, 19/17; Edmund Anthony & Sons to Fletcher, 8 August 1890, Baker Library (Baker), Harvard University, New England Associated Press (NEAP) papers, fol. 12.

26. Lawson to Pulitzer, 20 November 1895, NL, Lawson, 3/7, 362–64; Lawson to Knapp, 14 January 1896, NL, Lawson, 3/7, 446; Lawson to Pulitzer, 5 March 1896, NL, Lawson, 3/7, 539; Lawson to Knapp, 3 October 1896; Lawson to Campbell, 10 October 1896, NL, Lawson, 3/7, 725, 730.

27. Lawson to Pulitzer, 17 July 1896, NL, Lawson, 3/7, 678–80; Pulitzer to RP, 28 September 1907, Library of Congress (LOC), Washington, D.C., Joseph Pulitzer papers, Mss 37044, box 6.

28. Lawson to Nicholson, 26 February 1897, Lawson, 4/8, 311–13.

29. Access to foreign news was also a deciding factor. In the run-up to hostilities, Lawson secured an international news report from Reuters. Silberstein-Loeb, “Business, Politics, Technology, and the International Supply of News,” chap. 2.

30. Such network externalities are typical of organizations like the AP, such as cellular telephone providers, in which interconnectivity encourages usage. Western Union, the predominant telegraph company in the United States, encouraged interconnection and increased externalities for the AP. Under arrangements with the telegraph companies, which had been in existence at least since the mid-1880s, it was necessary to send an identical report to no fewer than five points to get the advantage of press association telegraph rates. Regular special newspaper rates were very much higher. Stone to F. Sulles, 3 November 1910, AP, Kent Cooper papers (KC), 01.2, 8/7. Edward McKernon to Martin, 24 January 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/7; Martin to V. S. McClatchy, 26 January 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 13/3.

31. Chandler, A., The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge, Mass., 1977)Google Scholar; Lamoreaux, N. R., The Great Merger Movement in American Business, 1895–1904 (Cambridge, 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; John, R. R., “Elaborations, Revisions, Dissents: Alfred D. Chandler Jr.’s, “The Visible Hand” after Twenty Years,” Business History Review 71 (1997): 158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32. Schawrzlose, Nation’s Newsbrokers, 2:248.

33. The New York Sun, the principal member of the UPA, continued to operate a wire service known as the Laffan News Bureau, named after William Laffan, its manager, who had joined the Sun in 1877. In 1900, the Laffan News Bureau and the AP signed a collusive agreement that prevented the Laffan News Bureau from selling its news to members of the AP, except for several select newspapers, and in return the AP agreed not to suspend those select members allowed to take the Laffan Service. Despite this separate peace, the Sun was barred from membership in the association until Frank Munsey purchased it in 1916. The paper disappeared shortly thereafter, when, in 1920, Munsey merged it with the New York Herald. W. L. McLean to W. Laffan, 20 September 1900, AP, 01.2.

34. Occasionally this strategy was ineffective and the AP became attached to a loser, as in Taunton (Mass.). See F. R. Martin to B. H. Anthony, 9 May 1923, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/10.

35. Peritz, Competition Policy, 28.

36. To counteract pilfering of its news reports, the AP offered rewards of $20,000 ($500,000) leading to the arrest and conviction of those caught misappropriating its news. Stone to members, 10 November 1898, NL, Lawson, 112/729, 141. Stone to AP, 1 January 1898, NL, Lawson, 112/729, 119. All prices listed parenthetically are in dollar prices from 2010 and have been calculated using the consumer price index of S. H. Williamson, “Six Ways to Compute the Relative Value of a U.S. Dollar Amount, 1790 to Present,” MeasuringWorth, 2009. See www.measuringworth.com/uscompare.

37. AP Annual Report (1898–99), 3–4, 71.

38. “Exposes News Trust,” Inter-Ocean (Chicago), 8 February 1898, NYPL, Ochs, 35b.

39. Lehmann, Laws of the Associated Press.

40. Dunlap’s Cable News Co. v. Stone et al., 15 N.Y.S. 2 (1891). Dunlap’s was in cahoots with Dalziel’s, which collected news internationally and briefly competed with Reuters in Britain.

41. Mathews concerned the rules and regulations of the New York State Associated Press, which was incorporated in New York in 1867. The case was different from Inter-Ocean insofar as the New York State AP was incorporated under a special act of the New York legislature (chap. 754 of the laws of 1867). Compare Mathews v. AP, 32 N.E. 981 (1893) and U.S. v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association, 166 U.S. 290 (1897). See Hovenkamp, H., Enterprise and American Law, 1836–1937 (London, 1991), 285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

42. U.S. v. E.C. Knight, 156 U.S. (1895) Record, Brief for the appellant, 25; Addyston Pipe v. U.S., 175 U.S. 211 (1899). Transcript of Record, 306.

43. See, for example, the suit of the Washington, D.C., Evening News. AP Annual Report (1894–95), 42–54; “Associated Press Defeated,” New York Times, 10 June 1894. Hovenkamp, Enterprise and American Law, 272, 281. Burdick, C. K., “The Origins or the Peculiar Duties of Public Service Companies. Part II.” Columbia Law Review 11 (1911): 764.Google Scholar

44. Hovenkamp, Enterprise and American Law, 290, 295.

45. Inter-Ocean v. AP, 184 Ill. 438 (1900).

46. The AP reserved the right to erect and operate telegraphs for fear that relations with Western Union might sour or that Western Union might elect to enter the news business. McCormick to Weymouth, 4 May 1943, and unsigned memo (perhaps McCormick), undated, Cantigny Park, Wheaton, Ill. R. McCormick papers, box 9.

47. Star Publishing Co. v. AP, 159 Mo. 410, 60 .W. 91 (1901).

48. “Associated Press as a Public Calling,” Harvard Law Review 13 (April 1900): 681–22; Wyman, B., “Competition and the Law,” Harvard Law Review 15 (February 1902): 431–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wyman, B., “The Law of the Public Callings as a Solution to the Trust Problem. II,” Harvard Law Review, 17 (February 1904): 299.Google Scholar

49. For mention of intentions to leave, see Report of the board, 30 June 1900, AJA, Rosewater, 19/17; On other suits, see C. Knapp to members, 29 June 1900, NYPL, Ochs, 53.7 and Wilson to Knapp, 21 July 1900, AJA, Rosewater, 19/17, as well as News Publishing Co. v. AP, 114 Ill. App. 241 (1904); On state-based property regimes, see Freyer, T. A., “Business Law and American Economics History,” in The Cambridge Economic History of the United States, vol. 2: The Long Nineteenth Century, ed. Engerman, S. L. and Gallman, R. E. (Cambridge, 2004)Google Scholar, esp. p. 436.

50. Cumming, R. C., Membership and Religious Corporations of New York (New York, 1896), 75–154.Google Scholar

51. J. G. Johnson to Lawson, 25 April 1900, AP, 02A, box 5, folder 2. “John G. Johnson, Noted Lawyer, Dies,” New York Times, 15 April 1917. See 156 U.S. 1 (1894); 221 U.S. 1 (1911); 221 U.S. 106 (1911).

52. Stone, M. E., Fifty Years a Journalist (London, 1922)Google Scholar. AP Annual Report(1919–20), 157–58.

53. Stone to Ochs, 7 June 1900, Ochs papers, NYPL, 53/7.

54. E. F. Mack to Stone, 27 October 1910, AP, 01.2, early operating records, series 1: correspondence of Stone.

55. Noyes to C. L. Brown, 29 April 1926, AP; Memo by Stone, 1 March 1927, AP, KC, 01.2, 27/7.

56. McClatchy, Suggested Defects in the Bylaws, 15 June 1900, AJA, Rosewater, 19/17.

57. In every year, 1937–42, the bondholder vote for each nominee director greatly exceeded the membership vote. Brief for the U.S., p. 16, AP v. US, 326 U.S. 1 (1945).

58. McKelway to W. Hester, 26 May 1900, McKelway papers, NYPL, box 5.

59. Ochs, address to annual meeting, 25 April 1927, Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Oswald Garrison Villard papers, Ms AM 1323, O.G., 2883.

60. Pape to Clark, 16 January 1920, E. H. Butler Library, Buffalo State College, Buffalo, N.Y. (Buffalo), Edward Butler (Butler) papers.

61. AP v. US, 326 U.S. 1 (1945), brief for the U.S., p. 17. Unsigned, Directors of New York corporation, undated, AP, 01.2.

62. P. Cowles to Cooper, 28 December 1927, AP, KC, 01.2, 4/2. On Ochs, see, for example, Ochs to Martin, 5 March, and Martin to Ochs, 6 March 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 9/10. Compare Martin to Ochs, 15 May 1917, with McClatchy to Stone, 16 May 1917, and O. G. Villard to Martin, 17 May 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 9/4; H. S. Thalheimer to Martin, 2 May 1918, AP, KC, 01.2, 9/12.

63. J. P. Wilson to Knapp, 21 July 1900, AJA, Rosewater, 19/17.

64. Ochs, Application for membership, Baltimore Sun—pm, verbatim minutes, 1924, AP, KC, 01.2, 22/12.

65. McKelway to W. Hester, 26 May 1900, NYPL, McKelway papers, box 5.

66. On a few occasions, however, the board had to plead with members to admit applicants at strategic locations, e.g., Noyes to H. S. New, 7 February 1901; Noyes to W. D. Brickell, 13 June 1902; Noyes to M. E. S. Bickham, 14 June 1902, AP, 01.1, correspondence of Noyes, 1/1.

67. Noyes to McClatchy, 21 October 1915, AP, KC, 01.2, 18/5.

68. Lawson, Application for membership, Baltimore Sun—pm, verbatim minutes, 1924, AP, KC, 01.2, 22/12.

69. Cooper to Dealey, 28 November 1924, AP, KC, 01.2, 15/4.

70. US v. AP, 52 F. Supp. 362 (1943), complaint, 37–39; Lewin, J. H., “The Associated Press Decision: An Extension of the Sherman Act,” University of Chicago Law Review 13 (1946): 258CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In the antitrust suit against the AP, C. B. Rugg, in his argument on behalf of the government, laid considerable emphasis on these figures. Rugg to F. Biddle, 12 July 1943, National Archives, Washington, D.C., box 17066, file 134-51-1.

71. D. H. Craig to NYAP executive committee, 1 January 1866, LOC, Marble papers, vol. 12.

72. Bylaws, 21 October 1856, NL, Stone papers, 8:529; Agreement, 1859, NL, Stone papers, 8:529; Smith to Clapp, 1 May 1888, Baker, NEAP, fol. 15.

73. Before publication, but after it was shared among members of the AP, news was similar to an expressed, but not communicated, idea. Ownership of such ideas, observes Bouckaert, “is tantamount to ownership of a moveable. The property rules, protecting the ownership of movables, protect at the same time the exclusive control of the idea. Of course, the author of an expressed but not communicated idea cannot limit himself to maintain his physical control on the material substratum. He must also conceal it.” Published news is akin to ideas that are expressed and communicated, the ownership of which the author must share with others. Bouckaert, B., “What Is Property?” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 13 (1990): 16.Google Scholar

74. Baird, without appreciating the distinction between published and unpublished news, cites several such examples. See Baird, D., “Common Law Intellectual Property and the Legacy of International News Service v. Associated Press,” University of Chicago Law Review 50 (1983): 411–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Property, Natural Monopoly, and the Uneasy Legacy of INS v. AP,” John M. Ohlin Law &Economics Working Paper, No. 246 (June 2005); www.law.uchicago.edu/Lawecon/index.html. See also “Associated Press Nails News Theft,” New York Times, 28 November 1914.

75. H. P. Heatherington to F. R. Martin, 17 January 1913, AP, KC, 01.2, 8.1; E. G. Pipp to Stone, 13 November 1914, AP, KC, 01.2, 8/1; R. R. Buvinger to AP, 30 September 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 8/7. Apparently the courts upheld this practice, although competitors contested its legality. M. E. Stone to J. E. Atkinson, 29 October 1910, AP, Early operating records, 01.2, Stone correspondence.

76. 198 U.S. 236 (1905). The principle advanced in Board of Trade may be traced back to Kiernan v. Manhattan Quotation Tel. Co., 50 How. Pr., 194 (1876). In England, it dates from at least Prince Albert v. Strange, 1 Mac. & G. 25, which was affirmed in Jeffreys v. Boosey, 4 H.L. Cas. 815, 867, and subsequently in EXTEL v. Gregory, [1896] 1 Q.B. 147 and EXTEL v. Central News, [1897] 2, chap. 48. In subsequent opinions, the American courts cited these cases frequently. See, for example, Dodge v. Construction, 183 Mass. 62 (1903). There are numerous parallels between the history of news associations and boards of trade. See J. Lurie, The Chicago Board of Trade, 1859–1905 (Urbana, 1979).

77. For a full exegesis of this point, see Brief for defendant respecting complainant’s appeal, AP v. INS, 240 F. 983 (1917).

78. Report from the Select Committee on Newspaper Stamps, 558 (1851), p. 393, l. 2644–48. See also Mott, F. L., The News in America (Cambridge, Mass., 1952), 98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

79. Innis, H., “Technology and Public Opinion in the United States,” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 17 (1951): 1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Belknap, G. N., “Oregon Sentinel Extras—1858–1864,” Pacific Northwest Quarterly 70 (October 1979): 178–80Google Scholar. See also “The Evening Papers,” Fourth Estate3, no. 65, 23 May 1895, 8.

80. Lawson to Williams, 20 August 1895, NL, Lawson, 3/7, 85–89.

81. 116 F. 126 (1900). For further corroboration of these points, see Siebert, F. S., “Rights in News,” Journalism Bulletin 3, no. 4 (November 1927): 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

82. Contra Epstein, R. A., “International News Service v. Associated Press: Custom and Law as Sources of Property Rights in News,” Virginia Law Review 78 (1992), 94–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a further elaboration of this principle, see US v. AP, 52 F. Supp. 362 (1943), memorandum in behalf of the Chicago Times, and R. J. Finnegan, “The Copy of a Free Press Is Not Commerce,” 6 July 1943, NL, Field Enterprises, 39/498.

83. INS v. AP, 248 U.S. 215 (1918).

84. 240 F. 983 (1917). Epstein rightly notes that this is the important question, and that it was problematic, but he wrongly contends that the decision was in keeping with custom, “International News Service . . . ,” 112–17.

85. 240 F. 983 (1917). The original bill of complaint stated: “An essential part of the plan of operation of the complainant accordingly is that news collected by it shall remain confidential and secret until its publication has been fully accomplished by all of complainant’s members.”

86. This interpretation differed from earlier analogous decisions, such as EXTEL v. Central News and Dodge v. Construction (see note 76).

87. But see Balganesh, “Hot News.” The interpretation developed here also differs from that in Westley, B., “How a Narrow Application of ‘hot news’ Misappropriation Can Help Save Journalism,” American University Law Review 60 (February 2011): 691–730.Google Scholar

88. Contra Balganesh, “Hot news.” Further, there is no evidence to support the claim that the propensity to pilfer published or unpublished news increased before or during the World War I or that worries about free-riding became “rampant.” See Balganesh, 29.

89. Members were concerned about the decision in Standard Oil (224 U.S. 270 [1912]). See AP Annual Report, 1912. Freyer, “Business Law and American Economic History,” 475–6; Peritz, Competition Policy in America, 60–61.

90. “News Control Bill Signed,” New York Times, 14 February 1913.

91. W. Irwin, “What’s Wrong with the Associated Press,” Harper’s Weekly, 28 March 1913, and “The United Press,” Harper’s Weekly, 25 April 1914. See also M. E. Stone, “The Associated Press: Criticism and reply,” Collier’s, 6 and 11 June 1914.

92. AP Annual Report (1915–16), 46. “Gregory Replies to “Sun” Complaint,” New York Sun, 17 March 1915. Much to the consternation of the AP, the UP, like the UPA, sold exclusive contracts to newspapers. Howard to J. G. Scripps, 17 August 1911, University of Illinois at Bloomington (UIB), Howard papers. AP v. US, 52 F. Supp. 362 (1945). K. Roberts, “Antitrust Problems in the Newspaper Industry,” Harvard Law Review 82 (December 1968): 332.

93. For an interesting statement on the benefits and disadvantages of such vertical integration, see J. C. Harper to Howard, 13 August 1912, UIB, Howard.

94. See unsigned to P. Cowles, 26 May 1927, AP02A, 24/10.

95. It could not have been lost on them after 1901, when, in a case involving the St. Louis Star against the AP, the Supreme Court of Missouri observed that unless there was “property” that could be said to be “affected with a public interest,” there was no monopoly and no basis to allege that a monopoly existed. Star Publishing Co. v. AP, 159 Mo. 410 (1901).

96. According to J. F. Neylan, Hearst’s lawyer and representative respecting association matters, Hearst’s investment in the AP in 1934 was worth between $3 and $3.5 million. Neylan to Hearst, 15 March 1934, Bancroft Library (Bancroft), Berkeley, California, BANC Mss C-B 881, box 190, AP, series 23, folder 8. In 1926, Hearst had fifteen papers in the AP, which entitled him to 460 votes. Papers owned by Hearst, 16 April 1928, NYPL, Ochs, 54/1.

97. Howard to J. E. Perry, 31 March 1917, Lilly Library, Bloomington, Indiana, Howard papers.

98. Cooper to Noyes, 11 December 1928, AP, I, 4/2. Cooper was right to the extent that the decision in INS provided the AP with the means to stop the UP from pilfering its news, but it fell short of offering any protection from like use by radio stations. See AP v. KVOS, 9 F. Supp. 279 (1934).

99. Lawson to Barr, 2 November 1892, NL, Lawson, 2:4, 286–87. On cooperation between INS and AP, see Cooper to Noyes, 11 December 1928, AP, I, 4/2; Neylan to Noyes, 25 February 1928, AP, I, 4/1; Neylan to Hearst, 9 March 1934, Bancroft, BANC Mss C-B 881, box 190. INS was also friendly with UP, and Neylan maintained a close and friendly relationship with Roy Howard. See Bancroft, BANC Mss C-B 881, boxes 42, 52, 82, 83, and 92.

100. Galambos, L., “The Triumph of Oligopoly,” in American Economic Development in Historical Perspective, ed. Schaefer, D. and Weiss, T. J. (Stanford, 1994), 241–53.Google Scholar

101. Lawson to Stone, 21 March 1900, NL, Lawson, 4/9, 51–58.

102. Ochs to L. Young, 11 March 1921, NYPL, Ochs, 53/12.

103. See Peritz, Competition Policy in America, esp. 76–89.

104. On the formation of the UP, see Scripps to Howard, 27 September 1912, UIB, Howard papers. Morris, J. A., Deadline Every Minute: The Story of the United Press (New York, 1968), 54Google Scholar. See also Trimble, V., The Astonishing Mr. Scripps: The Turbulent Life of America’s Penny Press Lord (Ames, Iowa, 1992)Google Scholar; Knight, O., I Protest: Selected Disquisitions of E. W. Scripps (Madison, 1966)Google Scholar; McCabe, C., Damned Old Crank: A Self-Portrait of E. W. Scripps (New York, 1951)Google Scholar; McRae, M. A., Forty Years in Newspaperdom: The Autobiography of a Newspaper Man (London, 1925)Google Scholar. E. W. Scripps to Chase, 5 March 1903 (catalogued with correspondence from 1912), UIB, Howard papers.

105. Richard Hooker to F. R. Martin, 6 January 1923, AP KC, 01.2, 1/5; CAP to Garges, 17 September 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 13/7; Edson K. Bixby to Cooper, 8 March 1927, AP, KC, 01.2, 8/13. See also D. M. Owens, “The Associated Press,” The American Mercury 10, no. 40 (April 1927), 385–93.

106. Most of Scripps papers were published in the afternoon, whereas the most powerful members of the AP were morning papers. Lee to Butler, 29 December 1910, Buffalo, Butler.

107. For evidence to this effect, see particularly W. F. Brooks to Lowell, 3 December 1930, and generally AP, KC, 01.2, 4/9.

108. Report of the special committee of the Associated Press, 1 December 1908, LOC, PN4841.A84.

109. His removal had long been foretold. See R. W. Patterson to Rosewater, 8 March 1893, AJA, Rosewater, 20/17; Lawson to Driscoll, 1 August 1895, NL, Lawson, 3/6, 928 1/3–2/3; Lawson to Driscoll, 15 May 1896, NL, Lawson, 3/7, 618–19; Ochs to George, 10 April 1899, NYPL, Ochs, 53/5.

110. Contra D. P. Nord, “Stone, Melville Elijah,” American National Biography Online (February 2000).

111. McRae to E. W. Scripps, 29 March 1916, UIB, Howard. AP Annual Report (1912–13), 3–4.

112. “A Study of Efficiency of the Business Management of the Associated Press,” 1 April 1913, AP, AP01.48. Cooper, Statement to the members of the AP, 25 April 1932, LOC, Howard, box 65.

113. In 1911, the AP franchise of the Boston Transcript was listed at $1 million ($23 million) and the franchise of the Indianapolis News was fixed at $500,000 ($12 million). Related tax cases: American Press Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner 4 B.T.A. 964 (1926); 4 B.T.A. 1096 (1926); see also 9 B.T.A. 1173 (1928); 68 Ct. Cl. 251, 252; 37 F. 2d 783 (1929); and 18 B.T.A. 682 (1930), 23 B.T.A. 862 (1931), 56 F. 2d 550 (1932).

114. Howard to J. Scripps, 17 August 1911, UIB, Howard.

115. E. B. Piper to Stone, 21 November 1916, AP, KC, 01.2, 13/3.

116. Address to the AP, undated (1927), LOC, Howard papers, 14.

117. C. K. Blandin to J. F. Neylan, 17 June 1926, AP, KC, 01.2, 27/5.

118. A. H. Rogers to B. H. Anthony, 2 October 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/9.

119. F. D. Throop to Stone, 14 April 1913, AP, KC, 01.2, 6/4.

120. L. Withington to AP, 5 September 1914, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/7; E. McKernon to F. R. Martin, 22 December 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/7; Cooper to Lawson, 11 November 1921; F. G. Smith to Cooper, 7 November 1921, AP, KC, 01.2, 4/11. Ochs to Martin, 5 March 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 9/10; Application for membership, undated (1914), AP, KC, 01.2, 15/1; Application for membership, undated (1915), AP, KC, 01.2, 12/12; Secretary to A. L. Miller, 26 April 1915, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/12; E. J. Kiest to board of directors, 3 February 1914, AP, KC, 01.2, 15/3; D. Gideon to board, 22 September 1926, NYPL, Ochs papers, 54/3; Assistant Secretary to R. J. Smith, 26 April 1913, AP, KC, 01.2, 17/5; Rosewater to Stone, 3 May 1895, AJA, Rosewater, 19/17; E. Anthony & Sons to Fletcher, 8 August 1890, Baker, NEAP, folder 12; Resolution of the Western Division Advisory Board, 24 April 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 13/3; Cooper to Stone, 8 September 1916, AP, KC, 01.2, 11/4; L. D. Starke to Martin, 3 August 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 16/7; Application for membership and night report, 26 April 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 14/4; Cooper to G. E. Dunham, 28 April 1921, AP, KC, 01.2, 9/15. E. Howard to Stone (Wichita Falls [Tex.]), 18 September 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 15/12; F. W. Hardy to Cooper, 4 October 1927, AP, KC, 01.2, 5/6. Rosewater to Stone, 2 May 1897, AJA, Rosewater, 19/17; Stone to Rosewater, 12 August 1895, AJA, Rosewater, 19/17. Martin to Stone, 25 September 1913, AP, KC, 01.2, 13/7.

121. E.g., Martin to K. G. Colby, 28 September 1923, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/10; F. D. Throop to Stone, 3 December 1913, AP, KC, 01.2, 6/4; F. Motz to F. R. Martin, 7 December 1917 and Motz and C. M. Reed to Cowles, AP, KC, 01.2, 6/8; M. S. Shaw to Stone, 26 February 1914, AP, KC, 01.2, 5/7; A. J. Buchanan to AP, 7 December 1916, AP, KC, 01.2, 14/12; J. D. Stern to Martin, 22 January 1919, AP, KC, 01.2, 5/10; J. O. Abernathy to Noyes, 9 April 1926, AP, KC, 01.2, 12/2. J. S. Elliott to C. W. Jones, 12 July 1928, AP, KC, 01.2, 8/3.

122. Complaint, par. 72, R. 20, admitted R. 126, 141–42, US v. AP, 326 U.S. 1 (1945).

123. P. A. Bryant to Cooper, 13 August 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 11/5. Regarding local industry, see, for example, Hildreth & Rogers Co. to AP, 1 October 1923, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/10.

124. S. L. Lover to board of directors, 29 September 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 16/7. See also V. B. Imes to AP, 30 August 1923, AP, KC, 01.2, 8/6.

125. E. E. Bartlett to Cooper, 17 June 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 4/11.

126. F. Knox to Cooper, 7 October 1926, AP, KC, 01.2, 7/9.

127. E.g., L. T. Bennett to Stone, 11 May 1917. See also J. D. Scanlan to Stone, 11 May, and Martin to Ochs, 15 May 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 9/5; R. Lowrie and L. F. Black to AP, 12 April 1921, AP, KC, 01.2, 5/7; E. K. Gaylord to AP, 1 July 1920, AP, KC, 01.2, 12/10. The application of the Capital was rejected. Cooper to Gaylord, 7 October 1920, AP, KC, 01.2, 12/10.

128. The board refused admission to a one-cent paper in Newark (N.J.) because it undersold incumbent members. See Ochs to Martin, 27 June, Martin to McClatchy, 21 July, and Noyes to Martin, 3 August 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 9/12. According to its bylaws (Art. 13, sec. 1), the AP refused to admit newspapers distributed gratis. See L. P. Bennett to Stone, 15 May 1917, AP, KC, 01.2, 9/4. See J. C. Fisher to L. B. Sheley, 21 June 1916, and Sheley to Frederick Roy Martin, AP, KC, 01.2, 4/11. See also J. D. Stern to Frederick Roy Martin, 17 March 1919, AP, KC, 01.2, 5/10.

129. AP Annual Report (1916–17). Management had made similar threats before. Stone to Butler, 11 April 1903, Buffalo, Butler. Noyes to McClatchy, 21 October 1915, AP, KC, 01.2, 18/5.

130. Noyes to McClatchy, 21 October 1915, AP, KC, 01.2, 18/5.

131. Pilgrim, T. A., “Newspapers as Natural Monopolies: Some Historical Considerations,” Journalism History 18 (1992): 3.Google Scholar

132. “Survival of a Free, Competitive Press: The Small Newspaper: Democracy’s Grass Roots,” Report of the Chairman, Senate Small Business Committee, 80th Cong., 1st sess. (1947), 20. See also Nixon, R. B., “Trends in U.S. Newspaper Ownership: Concentration with Competition,” International Communication Gazette 14 (1968): 186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

133. Easterlin, R. A., “Twentieth-Century American Population Growth,” in The Cambridge Economic History of the United States, vol. 3: The Twentieth Century, ed. Engerman, S. L. and Gallman, R. E. (Cambridge, 2000), 522–23.Google Scholar

134. Freyer, T., Regulating Big Business (Cambridge, 1992), 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

135. Thomas F. Kearns to Cooper, 3 October 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 16/2; G. B. Dealey to board, 17 January 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 15/4.

136. Cooper to Stahlman, 2 March 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 14/6.

137. Calculated from AP Annual Report (1920–21), 4. Annotated membership role, 31 March 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 2/3. Few charter members switched from taking a pony report to taking a leased one as the majority of members started with leased wires, but classification was and is difficult. Unsigned to Noyes, 31 March 1925, AP, KC, 01.2, 2/3.

138. M. Garges to Cooper, 4 March 1927, NYPL, Ochs papers, 54/5. Hearst owned 445 bond votes, while the board in total held only 365, and he had protest rights in thirteen memberships. Application for membership, Baltimore Sun—pm, verbatim minutes, 1924, AP, KC, 01.2, 22/12. For figures: Proxy Committee, Address to the Associated Press Members, AP, KC, 01.2, 27/8; Noyes to members, 29 June 1926, AP, KC, 01.2, 27/5. Unsigned, Papers owned by Hearst, 16 April 1926, NYPL, Ochs, 54/1.

139. Brinkley, A., The End of Reform: New Deal Liberalism in Recession and War (New York, 1995), 106Google Scholar; McCraw, T. K., “Regulation in America: A Review Article,” Business History Review 49 (1975): 161–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

140. , N. W. H. “Recent Legislative Proposals to Classify Newspapers and Magazines as Public Utilities and to Regulate Them Accordingly,” Virginia Law Review 17 (1931): 705–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

141. Vietor, R. H. K., “Government Regulation of Business,” in The Cambridge Economic History of the United States, vol. 3: The Twentieth Century, ed. Engerman, S. L. and Gallman, R. E. (Cambridge, 2000), 975–88Google Scholar. Between July 1948 and June 1949, the Department of Justice brought suit in seven cases involving exclusive dealing. Curran, K. J., “Exclusive Dealing and Public Policy,” Journal of Marketing 15 (1950): 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

142. “Appeal! Why AP Must Appeal to the Supreme Court,” Chicago Times, November 1943, 6.

143. 52 F. Supp. 362 (1943).

144. 326 U.S. 1 (1945).

145. Blanchard, M. A., “The Associated Press Antitrust Suit: A Philosophical Clash over Ownership of First Amendment Rights,” Business History Review 61 (1987): 43–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

146. This was a point members of the AP, and especially Lawson and Ochs, had been making since the outset. It cuts against the prevalent view that the wire services were common carriers. See de Sola Pool, I., Technologies of Freedom (Cambridge, Mass., 1983).Google Scholar

147. P. W. Bruton, “United States v. Associated Press,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 92, no. 2 (December 1943): 210.

148. Silberstein-Loeb, J., “The Structure of the News Market in Britain, 1870–1914,” Business History Review 83 (2009): 759–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

149. “The Problem of the Associated Press,” Atlantic Monthly 114 (1914), 132–37, with Frankfurter’s marginalia, Harvard Law School, Cambridge, Felix Frankfurter papers, reel 12.

150. Silberstein-Loeb, “Business, Politics, Technology, and the International Supply of News,” chaps. 3–4.

151. Peritz, Competition Policy in America, 100–101.

152. See, for example, Board of Trade v. Christie (198 U.S. 236 [1905]), in which the court drew a clear distinction between the rules and contracts of the Board of Trade and the property right it had in its information.

153. Counsel for the government recognized that the UP and INS benefited from the membership restrictions of the AP. AP v. US, 326 U.S. 1 (1945), brief for the U.S., p. 79.

154. Contra Pilgrim, “Newspapers as Natural Monopolies,” 5.