But there is another side to the question. Under an enlightened censorship there is practically no fear of newspapers and newspaper correspondents doing harm. Under enlightened editors there is every chance of their doing a great amount of good for the cause of their country and its navy and its armies in the field. Every body knows that, even the enlightened censorship itself, whose members have had precisely the same training at the same schools and universities as the purblind editorial staffs. But most of all the enemy know it, and, because they know it, they fear the newspapers and rejoice when their freedom of speech is curtailed. They fear first of all their own newspapers; and because of that fear they forbid them not only to tell the truth, but urge them, if they do not command them, to tell lies. That is the sort of thing, I suppose, which is meant when one is asked to take war seriously: as in most things, even in their follies, the Germans are more thorough than England and France. But even more than their own newspapers they fear those of London and Paris, for two reasons. They dread them first of all for the effect which they have on public opinion in the neutral countries, and secondly because they know that to them and their pressure are due practically all the political and military changes, useful to the Allies and detrimental to Germany, which have been brought about during the course of the war. The second of these two points I will not labour to support by instances. They are written large in the leading articles and military articles of _The Times_ and other newspapers. All the world knows what they are, though all the world does not as yet acknowledge them.