“It must not be thought that the American girl merely dances her way through life. Not at all. She must have variety, therefore she dabbles lightly in art, literature, politics, or philanthropy. She has days for visiting hospitals or other institutions or she makes political speeches as Miss Barbara Sands, grand-daughter of Mrs. William K. Vanderbilt, has been doing recently, and as Sarah Murray Butler does all the time, or she even takes up business in her odd moments, like Elinor Dorrance, who at eighteen has decided to know all about the famous Campbell soups company of which her father is head and which she will inherit.” This is not parody. It is the real thing, complete with snobbishness, clichés, naïveté, and the conviction that it doesn’t in the least matter how you write or what you write about so long as you are writing for other women. And it is published in a paper whose owners lay stress on the fact that it caters especially for intelligent and cultured womanhood. “The famous Campbell soups company.” “Famous” is the sub-editor’s favourite word,[8] applied by him with unwearying zeal to all men and women who have ever got themselves in the public eye――unless they are really famous――applied even to furniture polishes, blends of whisky, and popular cigarettes. The sub-editor, that romantic soul, also assumes that the normal behaviour of the notorious or the merely well-known is flamboyant, so that when they manage their affairs without limelight they are “quietly married,” or they “leave quietly” for their honeymoon. The one thing the Press will in no circumstances permit them to do is to die quietly. [8] “Amazing,” “mystery,” “thrilling,” and “dramatic” are also hot favourites in the Stock Phrase Stakes. Is it not time that the pages of the Press were one quarter so up-to-date as the machinery which prints them? and that “journalese” should cease to be a synonym for the vapid, the crude, the provincial, and the semi-illiterate? Impartiality being even rarer than commonsense, no one would be foolish enough to demand from a newspaper either complete lack of bias, or the presentation with equal prominence of both sides of a controversial case. Such impartiality would be contrary to human nature. But natural prejudice does not necessarily involve the deliberate distortion of news.