The New York Times
In the 1960s, readers would most likely find news about things happening around the world dealing with the United States and other countries in the Times. This paper mostly included stories on the topic of Cuba and communism, Korea and the issues of Kennedy’s presidency. It might be a surprise to find out that there weren’t that many stories on blacks in America in the paper unless there was an event happening in the Civil Rights movement but when there was action, they reported on it. Along with the stories they printed, they would often include stories nearby that present a multiple sided view on a subject happening during the Civil Rights.
The Times also made strides in providing special content over the weekend for readers about the Freedom Riders and the Civil Rights movement. In the May 28, 1961 edition of their paper, they provide a full page on the rights that blacks have in this country compared to the whites. They also compared education and economic status. They even provide cartoons that criticized the president and racial groups such as the Ku Klux Klan. They had a graphic that gave a timeline of the Freedom Riders journey along with a map for the readers to visually see were the Riders traveled.
The Jackson Daily News
The Clarion Ledger during the 1960s was more a statewide paper than just a local paper for the city of Jackson. While the Ledger was a paper of its own, there was a sub paper being ran under them called The Jackson Daily News. This paper included things that were happening throughout the city of Jackson, such as deaths in the area, people graduating from school and other news in the city. To be honest, there really wasn’t any news pertaining to blacks in the region unless it was for causing problems to the “traditional Southern way of life”.
One of the unique things about The Jackson Daily News is its usage of the editorial comments on the front page of the paper. This came in different varieties. Every day in the paper there was a section to the left corner of the paper dedicated to the Editor in Chief Jimmy Ward called “Covering the Crossroads”. The front page part of the paper allowed Ward to make commentary on various topics of national, state and local issues and how they pertain to the South. During the Freedom Rides, this section of the paper contained some nasty comments about the “agitators” who came to disrupt the South. If the Covering the Crossroads wasn’t enough editorial for the editor, he also would periodically write a special editorial that would appear next to a news story to provide his insight on that news item.
Here’s an example of his comments on the front page of the paper: “Gov. Ross Barnett, Mayor Allen C. Thompson and all public officials concerned are to be commended for their serious-minded planning and calm statements regarding the bumptious conduct of that band of crackpots who falsely call themselves ‘freedom riders.’ That cluster of misguided or deranged mammals is nothing but a crew assembled in a conspiracy to create violence to the detriment of the nation in the eyes of the world.” He would later refer to the Riders as “a group of mentally deranged people who deserve a nitwit net more than physical challenge” and “the lint-headed diabolical, inconsiderate sadistic-thinking leadership”.
There have been numerous books and journals written on the topic of the coverage of events during the Civil Rights era. The reason that researching the topic of a possible biasness in the news is important because it gives people who read history books or what documentaries on the subject to ask themselves “Did the media do a good job?” “Why did they report on this and not that?” “Did the publication use different words to describe the participants in the Freedom Ride movement?” At the end of the day, the research on the Southern papers coverage of the Freedom Riders is meant to open dialogue and put the history of the events in perspective through the eyes of press. This will give away a better understanding over the readership of the paper, an expanded view on how much commentary really goes into a paper direct or indirectly and whether the public was given a fair shot of forming their own opinion.