The Role of the Press in the Aftermath of the Johnstown Flood

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

Was the press’ obsessive coverage of the flood harmful or helpful to the recovery of Johnstown?  McCullough seems to present two radically different arguments in his telling of the Johnstown Flood.  On the one hand, McCullough describes members of the press as opportunistic vultures just looking for their next scoop, but on the other, he repeatedly points out that their coverage helped Johnstown obtain upwards of three million dollars in relief funds.

In chapter VII McCullough describes an interesting interaction between Arthur J. Moxham, Johnstown’s temporary “dictator,” and the National Guard.  Earlier in the chapter McCullough wonders at Moxham’s clear-headedness, labeling his decision to begin clearing the mess as “extraordinary” (190).  Yet McCullough sends the National Guard packing when they show up because he believed it best that “the people handle their problems themselves.”  I thought Moxham made an interesting point, but wondered how he could possibly turn down free help when it was offered.  After reading on, I realized the help was not exactly free.  Johnstown would have to find shelter and food for any visitors who tried to help or write about the flood—shelter and food that the population of Johnstown desperately needed.

The accounts of the many different reporters who came to Johnstown demonstrate that members of the press did not take this into consideration when coming to town.  One reporter for the Philadelphia Press, Richard Harding Davis, expected to find a restaurant, a horse and buggy, and a pressed shirt (216).  Instead, he had to compete for resources with the rest of Johnstown and the many relief workers, reporters, family members, and opportunists in town.  Many reporters stretched the truth beyond recognition, and in some cases the lies spread by the reporters led to trouble for members of the Johnstown community.  With headlines as brass as “Fiends in Human Form” and “Drunken Hungarians, Dancing, Singing, Cursing, and Fighting amid the Ruins,” newspapers like the New York Herald endangered the lives of the Hungarians in town since they fed on prejudices and created panic (211).

However, McCullough balances this irreverent description of the press by citing the millions of dollars of relief their publicity had inspired.  Not only did the press’ publicity garner the town money, but also supplies like lumber, furniture, quicklime, etc. (225).  McCullough notes that leaders of Johnstown declared that any able bodied man who stayed in Johnstown needed to help with relief efforts, and many members of the press adhered to this rule to stay in town.

With all of this information, I wonder what opinion of the press I am supposed to have.  As Amani points out, McCullough inserts his own opinions about humanity into his narrative.  With that in mind, I was left with the idea that McCullough believed the press to be a short-term hindrance to the reconstruction of Johnstown, but an overall blessing for the survivors.