- Areas Of Involvement:
- freedom of the press
- Related People:
- Henry Luce
Hutchins Commission
The Commission on Freedom of the Press, better known as the Hutchins Commission, was established in 1943 to examine whether freedom of the press in the United States was endangered and to assess the responsibilities of mass media in a democracy. After extensive deliberation, the commission concluded in 1947 that press freedom was in danger and offered a series of recommendations for government, media owners, practitioners, and the public so that a free press could thrive in a democracy. The commission’s notion that press freedom should be linked to the media’s performance of socially beneficial work contributed to the rise of social responsibility theory in the mid-20th century. Despite criticisms focused on concerns ranging from the commission’s selection to disagreement over the mass media’s role in a democracy, the commission’s findings played a key role in the evolution of U.S. media and remain relevant in the 21st century.
Origins
The commission was formed amid concerns about the performance and priorities of increasingly powerful U.S. media systems in a world threatened by authoritarianism. Many Americans, already familiar with propaganda efforts throughout World War II, criticized concentrated media ownership, sensationalism, and the growing influence of mass media over public opinion. Critics feared that continued dissatisfaction with concentrated media ownership and press performance could increase calls for government regulation. According to its chairman and namesake, University of Chicago President Robert M. Hutchins, the commission addressed the “responsibilities of the owners and managers of the press to their consciences and the common good for the formation of public opinion.”
Officially known as the Commission on Freedom of the Press, it was the brainchild of Henry Luce, editor in chief of Time magazine. One of the most powerful media figures of his day, Luce approached Hutchins in December 1942 and asked him to lead the inquiry, which began a year later. The project was funded with $200,000 from Time Inc. and $15,000 from Encyclopædia Britannica Inc. Although Luce initiated and financed the project through Time Inc., the commission operated independently, and Luce did not control its membership, deliberations, or conclusions. Hutchins chose 12 panelists, including top academics in law, economics, social history, philosophy, and theology. Journalists were excluded, as Hutchins felt this allowed a more objective evaluation.
" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">
Initial word of the commission’s formation buoyed the hopes of journalists eager to upgrade their image, extol press freedom, and demonstrate the industry’s capacity for self-regulation. However, such optimism was somewhat stifled as Hutchins—a longtime associate of Luce, the influential publisher of Time—selected current or former academics. Critics argued that several commissioners shared intellectual or institutional ties with Hutchins and the University of Chicago. Hutchins also was a known press critic who saw the media as an important means of education and lamented the media’s shortcomings. Yet despite the commission’s lack of journalists, many members had firsthand knowledge of press operations. In closed-door testimony, they heard from editors, reporters, research associates, advertising and circulation directors, and readers.
Findings
Between December 1943 and December 1946 the commission heard from 58 men and women connected with the press. The panel considered all forms of media widely available at the time: newspapers, radio, cinema, magazines, and books. Additional interviews were recorded with more than 225 representatives of industries, government, or private agencies concerned with the press. The commission held 17 two- to three-day meetings and studied 176 documents prepared by members or staff. In 1947 these efforts culminated in a general report titled A Free and Responsible Press. Additional reports addressed freedom of the press, government’s role in mass communications, freedom in filmmaking, public discourse, and the radio industry.
The commission offered three reasons why U.S. press freedom was in peril: (1) As the press evolved as a mass communication instrument, so did its public importance, yet this also constrained the public’s ability to communicate through the press. (2) Those able to use the press for mass communication inadequately served societal needs. (3) Press directors occasionally engaged in practices society condemned and risked more regulation if such actions continued.
To counter such threats, the commission outlined five requirements for media to strive toward to meet the demands of a free society. These ideals have since offered an enduring framework for media ethics discussions: (1) provide “a truthful, comprehensive, and intelligent account of the day’s events in a context which gives them meaning,” (2) serve “as a forum for the exchange of comment and criticism,” (3) project “the opinions and attitudes of the groups in the society to one another,” (4) present and clarify “the goals and values of the society,” and (5) provide “a way of reaching every member of the society” with information and ideas. Among other findings, the commission also proposed numerous reforms for government, media, and the public to help the press adequately serve citizens. As media and society continued to evolve, some of these ideas—such as libel law revisions and expanded freedom of expression—gained ground through various means. Others, such as an independent agency to assess press performance, saw traction decline over time.
The trusted destination for professionals, college students, and lifelong learners.
SUBSCRIBE
Legacy
Despite the cool reaction the commission’s report has traditionally received from journalists, media scholars have engaged with its findings. Concerning its long-term impact, some described the report’s recommendations as important to newsroom culture. Others regard the report as directed more toward advising policy makers about press regulation than toward journalists. Despite criticism that the report appeared to condition press freedom on social responsibility, social responsibility remains central to discussions about media’s role in U.S. society. In turn, so do the findings of the Hutchins Commission, as challenges faced by 21st-century media—even those brought by political, social, and technological innovations—largely mirror issues the commission originally addressed.
The original version of this article was published by SAGE Publications in The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society.