Abstract
A Press Divided is a strong collection of articles first presented as conference papers that examine the role of the press prior, during, and after the War. The purpose, says Sachsman, is “to determine the influence of newspapers on public opinion, the pictures in the heads of people North and South and around the world” (p. ix). As the editor of the richly sourced work, he holds the George R. West, Jr., Chair of Excellence in Communication and Public Affairs at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. Sachsman also serves as director of the annual symposium on the l9th Century Press, the Civil War, and Free Expression. In his introduction, Sachsman stresses the influence papers had on the War and how sharply divided that press was, both politically and regionally. The “power of the press” was feared, and President Abraham Lincoln and “his Republican government turned this fear into action by arresting editors and suppressing hundreds of newspapers” (p. x). The question Sachsman and colleagues pose is “whether or not the divisions among the press actually set the agenda for the civil war” (p. ix).
The book is divided into three sections. “Part I: Splitting a Nation” examines press coverage of the presidential election of 1860. “Part II: Covering the Conflict” explores newspaper coverage of the Civil War, including political cartoons and photography capturing the war. “Part III: Dissension and Suppression North and South” analyzes the divide among both Northern and Southern newspapers as well as the treatment of “dissenters by both sides” (p. xiii).
Editing a book about the Civil War, before and after, is a monumental task, so each author has done an extraordinary job referencing, sourcing, and elaborating on their respective areas. From David W. Bulla’s “Newspaper Coverage of the Rise of Lincoln in 1860: Cooper Union, the Republican Convention and the Election” to Wendy Swanberg’s “Ex Parte McCardle and the First Amendment During Reconstruction,” the authors include editorials, headlines, commentaries, cartoons, and disturbing photographs capturing the war.
In Thomas Robinson’s “‘Just Before a Mighty Earthquake’: Secession Crisis in Muscogee County, Georgia,” a quote is referenced by the editor of the Columbus Daily Times, 2 days before ballots were cast (November 9, 1860) in the presidential election—where Lincoln was a shoe-in: Let us not be deceived. Let us not be worshippers of a Union, whose spirit, whose life, whose vitality has departed! Let us act like men. Let us be equals. Let us erect, if necessary, a government for ourselves where the light of liberty will forever shine, and where the demon of abolitionism will never raise his head. (p. 37)
And in “Father Abraham, Mammy Lincoln, and Aunty Abe: Gender in Civil War Cartoons of Abraham Lincoln,” author Andrea Foroughi takes us into depictions,distortions of character, and portraits of our 16th president. Foroughi says, Over the course of Lincoln’s presidency, in at least six cartoons that included him [Lincoln], artists depicted his advisors, associates, or others as female. The tall, lean president was juxtaposed favorably against his pudgy, passive predecessor in two early cartoons. Of the four other cartoons in which Lincoln appeared with men in women’s dress, Lincoln’s strength as a leader was called into question in three cases in 1871 and 1863. The last cartoon, which appeared in l864, communicates a more ambiguous view of gender and leadership. (p. 81)
From cartoons to photographs, Mary Paul’s chapter, “The Mystery Men Who Took the Pictures: Civil War Photojournalists Associated With Mathew Brady’s Gallery From 1861 to 1865,” includes a heart-wrenching photo of the aftermath of Gettysburg. There are several soldiers dead on the field, and the photograph was taken by Timothy O’Sullivan, a prolific Civil War photographer. According to Paul, “Much of O’Sullivan’s Civil War work was brutal and visceral, and very little of it was ever attributed to him” (p. 194). Because of advances in technology during this period, reproductions allowed Mathew Brady and other photographers to document the war. Other photographers mentioned include Alexander Gardner, James Gibson, and George Barnard.
Perhaps my favorite chapter was written by James E. Mueller, “‘Custar’ in the News: George Armstrong Custer in the Gettysburg Campaign.” I have long been intrigued by George Armstrong Custer and his savviness, if you will, of having the press with him in battles. My personal view is that Custer had big ambitions, possibly to be president, and that the media was his way to promote his agenda. Mueller does an extraordinary job with his piece referencing more than 90 sources—including The New York Times in June of 1863 and the battle of Aldie. When reporters first wrote about Custer, they misspelled his name, “Costar” and “Custar.” Mueller also sheds light on the image we all have of Custer. Yes. Tragically his name is associated with “Custer’s Last Stand”—and some historians view the former general as reckless, but overall, the reality is that Custer was a “brave and successful Civil War general, which would certainly indicate he was worthy of news coverage” (p. 142). Second, Custer was charismatic. Mueller mentions that when Custer was promoted to brigadier general, one of the first things he did was to design his own uniform, making it colorful and unique. That helped his image and definitely got the attention of both the public and press. Mueller continues, “Author James Donovan wrote in his story of the Little Bighorn that Custer had learned, ‘the value of tooting one’s own horn’ during the first two years of the Civil War when he served as a staff officer to George McClellan and Alfred Pleasanton” (p. 159). The chapter is solid and concludes that Custer was not an “overnight star” and that how he entered “America’s imagination is more complicated than the tales told following the disaster at Little Big Horn” (p. 159).
Overall, A Press Divided: Newspaper Coverage of the Civil War is a solid work and expression of the press during this extraordinary period in our history. It would be, without a doubt, an excellent supplement for journalism students as well as students studying media relations.
Just a note: The book came out late last year, but coincidentally, it fell a few months before the 150th anniversary of the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln—April 15.