But all this describes only the independent structure of Associated Press. The bulk of the personnel of the American press is also a part of the A.P. apparatus. Member papers--which means most of the country’s newspapers and _all the important ones_--must make all their news available to A.P. and are expected to withhold it from anyone outside of A.P. Even employees of the papers are similarly bound. Any news they “spontaneously” acquire belongs to A.P. Thus, instead of a mere 5,000 to 10,000 employees, A.P. really has some 100,000 persons working for it every hour of the day and night. It coordinates the whole news-gathering apparatus of the American press. It does this on an exclusive basis. It is not only a monopoly but the expression of the monopolistic organization of the American press. Pikers Barred The monopoly structure of the industry plus the size and complexity of newspaper operation from a business point of view, have made it impossible for any but multimillionaires to enter the field. As a logical result, there has been a steady shrinkage of the field--a drop in the number of dailies from 2,600 in 1909 to 1,744 at the beginning of 1945. This shrinkage has been accompanied by a virtual disappearance of competition in most cities. In 1899, 353 cities were dominated by a single newspaper. In 1920 there were 720 such cities. In 1945 there were 1,103. In many of the remaining cities, the “competing” papers were under a single ownership so that the actual number of cities without competition in 1945 was 1,277. Conversely, there were 549 cities with local competition in 1920 but only 117 in 1945. In percentages it is still worse. Of all cities having newspapers, only 8.4 per cent had competition in 1945. Even these figures are flattering to the myth of free and competitive enterprise. Veiled joint ownership and “gentlemen’s agreements” plus the spread of the chains and the general standardization process still further reduce the area of competition and restrict the diversity of views. Only the half-dozen largest cities in the United States have dailies with competing views in even the narrowest sense. The 25 largest cities average but three ownerships. _Editor and Publisher_, organ of the owners, admits the phenomenon and apologizes for it. The condition has arisen not by the will of any individual or group, but from a gradual growth of custom, both in newspaper operation and in the purchase of advertising space. This refers to the preference of advertisers for fewer papers with larger circulations. The net effect is that the local monopolies are barricaded against competition and the price of admission is several million dollars. _Chapter II_ FOR WHOM THE PRESS TOILS