THE CENSORSHIP

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 242, 1 July 1918, Page 8

THE CENSORSHIP

» _ WIMMERi MUDDLE DISCUSSED. By Telegraph.—Prees Association. Christchurch, June 30. Asked if ho could explain the reason why the "Otago Daily limes" had the opportunity to print the news of the lose of the Wimmora in advance of other newspapers in tlu) Dominion, Sir James Allen stated that it was past midnight on Wednesday last when he received the news in Dunediu, and he handed it to tho "Otago Daily Times" and gave tho necessary authority for its publication. Early on Thursday morning ho sent a telegram to the" Naval Adviser authorising him to release the news. ' Apparently Sir James Allen was under the impression that the news he had handed to the "Otago Daily Times" v/ould have been sent out as a Press Association messago by the Dunedin agent. At any rate he saw no reason why tho information 6hould have been withheld. REVIEW OP THE SYSTEM URGED. (By Telegraph—Special Correspondent.) Dunedin, June 29. Tho "Evening Star" editoriajly states I that the ridiculous censorship of safe information as to the disaster that overtook the 'Wimmera is another striking demonstration of the erratic censorship system'from which all British comniuu. ities have suffered during the war respecting sane statements as to shipping movemeus, mails, and, most important of all, the splendid deeds of our soldiers and sailors. The paper urges a review of the whole system in New Zealand, the entire suppression of favours, and tho weeding out of the censorial staff. "AEBITRARY AND INCONSISTENT)." The exclusive publication in the "Otago Daily Times" on Thursday morning last of the news of the sinking of the steamer Wimuie"a has served the U6eful purpose of directing attention to the arbitrary exercise of the censorship within the, Dominion, says the "Times in an editorial note. Necessarily the information which was possessed by a few people in Dunedin on AVedii'esday night poncerning tho loss of this vessel was shared with them by a -number of persons, including members of the Press, in Auckland, Wei-' Jington, and elsewhere," The publication i of the news was, however, prohibited exj cent in Dunedin, where the Acting Primo I Minister, who took tho reasonable view ! that nothing was to be gained by any, attempt to preserve secrecy over the matter, happened to be. .What object the Censor had in positively refusing permission to the Press Association to publish the news,of the,disaster it is difficult to imagine. Here was a case in which scores of persons, with a direct knowledge not only of the occurrence, but also of tho cause of. the loss of the vessel, were bound to be centre? from which particulars of the tragedy would bo distributed, far and wido-within iv few hours of tho event. Consequently any attempt to conceal tho occurrence, if that were desirable, was perfectly idle. Not only is. the censorship exercised arbitrarily, but it is also exercised inconsistently. In several cases the Press has been prevented from publishing information, of which it has been in possession, relative to shipping losses, while it. has l>cen permitted to publish the reports of other losses that have occurred in like circumstances. If the publication was not harmful in one instance.-it is difficult to see how it could be linrmfiil in another. W'e are unable to perceive that it could be harmful in any case. The policy of withholding from tho public at large information which is available to and discussed by certain sections of the public is of very doubtful value at any time. Certainly, there was neither rhyme nor reason in the prohibition of the publication of tho report of a tragedy on our own coasts, the occurrence of wh'cli would necessarily in the course of a dnv or two be a topic of. conversation in every train and in every trnmcar and club in the principal cities.