an inevitable clash with the medium of the book. The press as a 
collective and communal image assumes a natural posture of 
opposition to all private manipulation. Any mere individual who 
begins to stir about as if he were a public something-or-other is 
going to get into the press. Any individual who manipulates the 
public for his private good may also feel the cleansing power of 
publicity. The cloak of invisibility, therefore, would seem to fall 
most naturally on those who own newspapers or who use them 
extensively for commercial ends. May not this explain the 
strange obsession of the book-man with the press-lords as 
essentially corrupt? The merely private and fragmentary point 
of view assumed by the book reader and writer finds natural 
grounds for hostility toward the big communal power of the 
press. As forms, as media, the book and the newspaper would 
seem to be as incompatible as any two media could be. The 
owners of media always endeavor to give the public what it