The Dominion. SATURDAY, APRIL 1, 1911. A DISHONEST PRETEXT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1091, 1 April 1911, Page 4

The Dominion. SATURDAY, APRIL 1, 1911. A DISHONEST PRETEXT.

Yesterday a representative of The Dominion followed up his inquiries of the previous day in an endeavour to probe to the bottom the interference of the Advertising Department —a political institution designed to sweeten or penalise the press of the country—with the work of the Defence Department— a Department which above all others should be absolutely free from political influences of any kind. The lcsult was interesting and instructive. Incidentally it served to show the flagrant dishonesty of the onlv pretext which could bo put forward in defence of the boycott of The Dominion and the systematic and grossly improper effort to deprive the readers ot the paper ot public informatics which it is the duty of the Government to place before them. We ' need not repeat here our protests against the impropriety of the misuse of public funds for party purposes wnich we have exposed; nor the equally improper and clangorous introduction of political considerations into the affairs of the Defence Department. No excuse can be, or has been attempted to be, put forward for these abuses on any grounds of principle. But an txcuso has been ventured on, and it is to this we propose for the moment to devote our attention, and to-expose in all its, falseness. When our represents tivc pursued his inquiries' yesterday he was told that the only reason why the proclamation arising out.of the introduction of the new scheme of defence was refused to The Dominion was on the ground of expense. This excuse, it must be borne in mind, was put forward by a Department supposed to be controlled by experts in advertising,, and able, presumably, to form an approximately correct estimate of the value of the return gi-cn by each paper for the particular class of advertising inserted. Let us sec how the feverish desire for economy on the part of this Department, which compels it to boycott The Dominion, and we believe also the Dannevirlc Netcs—aho a recent addition to the list of independent critics of the Government—works out when analysed. The advertisement under review consisted ofa "Special District Order," describing the different areas under the new scheme; the headquarters of each, the officers in charge, and the area "sergeantmajors. There was nlso a short advertisement relating to claims for exemption which should be published in every paper, and which, in consequence, wo need-'not discuss. But taking the larger advertisement, which covered a space of a little over 20 inche.s, wc find that it is divided into four groups, each group being subdivided into areas as follow: —

■WELLINGTON GROW. Headquarters: Wellington and Hutt. MANAWATU GROW. Headquarters: AVanganui, Hunterville, Feilding, and Palmerston North. EAST COAST GROUP. Headquarters: Napier, Gisliorno, Danaovirke; and Masterton. TARANAKI GROW. Headquarters: Stratford, New Plymouth, Haweia and Raetihi. \Vo would direct particular attention to the headquarters of the different areas under • the various groups because they indicate the portions of the country affected by the advertisement. The space occupied by each group in the advertisement ranges from <1 to 5 inches, the balanco of the 20 inches being made up with a few explanatory lines at the beginning and end of the advertisement.

Having explained the nature of the advertisement, let us sec the papers which this desperately economic Advertising Department has selected to secure the best results for the money expended, and the ingenuity'it has displayed in its effort to keep down expense. This advertisement of 20 odd inches has, wo believe, been inserted in full, in more than 40 papers in the particular district covered by the four groups stated. A similar advertisement has no doubt been inserted in hundreds of papers throughout the country. At any rate, in all the papers we have so far seen it has ken published in full The usual charge for Government advertisements is, wc believe, from 'Is. to ss. an inch. Now for the papers. On the authorised list wc find, for instance, the Manawalu Daily Times If our readers will glance back at the groups

and their headquarters as quoted above they will perhaps as struck with bewilderment in an endeavour to understand why this economic Advertising Department of the State should insert in the columns of this up-country journal that large portion of the advertisement which relates, say, to Wsllington city. What oarthly value can that , five inches of advertisement be to.

anyone but tho paper which receives ' payment for if/ Tho Manawntu ■ Daily Times is properly entitled to \ the portion of the advertisement re- | lating to the district in which it eir- i dilates, but will anyone venture to say that the balance of the advertise- ' ment represents anything but a shameful waste of public money'! Let us take a case nearer Wellington—that lively little suburban journal the Hull and I'ctonc L'/iioniclti —a purely local sheet. Glance once more at the various headquarters of tho different areas in the groups stated above. Will anyone pretend that an .advertisement designed for tho information of the people of Gisborne, or Napier, or Wanganui, or Huntcrville, or Stratford, or, indeed, any of the places outside the immediate vicinity of Wellington is of any value to anyone beyond the proprietors of the paper? Of course, they cannot, and sj throughout practically the whole list of the '10 odd papers. Each paper serves a certain limited area, and is entitled as a matter of public concern, to the portion of the. advertisement relating to that area, but to pretend "that—outside perhaps one or two—any paper serves tho whole of the area covered by tho four groups is to insult the intelligence of tho public. There is not an advertising agent or a newspaper proprietor throughout New Zealand who does not know that this one advertisement, if published throughout the rest of the Dominion in the same way as in the Wellington district, will cost the country hundreds of pounds more than is necessary, and that those hundreds of pounds have been absolutely wasted. .Even over the. 40 odd papers mentioned to which tho advertisement has already been'sent, a saving of at least £100 could bo niado without the _ slightest loss in the value of publicity attained. And the Department which so glaringly squanders the public's money in this way to sweeten the press of the country has the effrontery to seek to justify the boycott of The Dominion and its readers on tho score of expense! The cost of inserting the advertisement in The Dominion would not amount to one-twentieth part of tho money that will be thrown away by the incompetence or deliberate breach of trust on tho part of this scandalously-conducted public Department. Tho public must not think that this is an isolated case. There are others equally glaring which wc shall refer to at the proper time; but the facts wc have now stated should leave no room for doubt in tho minds of tho public— if any really exists—as to the insincerity and dishonesty underlying the pretext put forward by Ministers and their subordinates, that the boycott of The Dominion is prompted by reasons of : economy, ilcanwhilc the unpleasant..fact remains .that so far as wc are aware the Defence Department has permitted this interference with the conduct of its affairs at practically the outset of the inauguration of the new system of compulsory military training. What has General Godley to' say to this? Does he think tho readers of The Dominion should be kept in ignorance of his proclamations, so vitally affecting tho smooth and successful wording ~,of defence scheme entrusted to his'administration, because Ministers who arc pledged to keep tho question of national defence f< - ee from politics break their pledges? Has ho tho free hand which Lord Kitchener and tho country demanded for him —is he tho country's servant, or is ho, like other heads of State Departments, the servant of tho Ministry, and so tied that ho cannot keep his Department free from the taint of party politics"