Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

By Cordelia

In Michael Warner’s article regarding Benjamin Franklin and his role in the press of colonial America, a line that stood out to me was the following:

“By a convenient happenstance, Franklin was also in one way or another involved in each of the political crises of the three major seaports.” (112).

Though his name is forever attached to the print revolution of revolutionary America, perhaps it was not Franklin that spearheaded the press movement but the press movement that spearheaded Franklin. He moves to major cities in the midst of political turmoil and that is when the press gains major ground, however, it could be argued that such political unrest would have caused an increase in calls for public opinion literature, Franklin or no Franklin. It’s fortunate that he was there and he certainly helped the movement, but throughout history, literate populations have responded to political dissatisfaction with literature. This was also the case in America, and Franklin just so happens to be remembered alongside it.

There is no doubting the importance of print in Franklin’s life, as pointed out by Michael Warner, nor the importance of Franklin in the transformation – or really, introduction – of the press, however, I reiterate that in times of political upheaval, the literate continuously respond with writing. See the Magna Carta – see the 95 Theses.

With the large amount of literacy in the American colonies, established primarily by religious schools – Puritan or otherwise – and the impending revolution, the creation of a widespread newspaper system could perhaps be deemed inevitable. The press helped to unify the colonies through the spread of information and this unification was arguably necessary for the upcoming war so the question lies in whether this unification by the press would have been otherwise created without it.

Another parallel question to all of this lies in whether the press developed because of the political upheaval and revolution – as a method to help it along with the increased spread of information – or whether it developed on its own alongside the unrelated happenings of the world at large. Were newspapers inevitable? Or did it take the increased calls for unification in the wake of a revolution for them to develop?