What do you think?
Rate this book
Lincoln and the Power of the Press: The War for Public Opinion
Harold Holzer makes a significant contribution to our understanding of Lincolns leadership by showing us how deftly he managed his relations with the press of his day to move public opinion forward to preserve the Union and abolish slavery. From his earliest days, Lincoln devoured newspapers. As he started out in politics he wrote editorials and letters to argue his case. He spoke to the public directly through the press. He even bought a German-language newspaper to appeal to that growing electorate in his state. Holzer shows us politicized newspaper editors battling for power, and a masterly president using the press to speak directly to the people and shape the nation.
768 pages, Hardcover
First published October 14, 2014
51 people are currently reading
1256 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews
January 9, 2015
Abraham Lincoln has probably been the subject of more monographs than any other figure in American history. In all the books written about our sixteenth president, be it biographies or monographs dealing with different aspects of the Lincoln presidency, the issue of his relationship with the press has not been mined thoroughly. This gap in Lincoln historiography has been admirably filled by Harold Holzer’s new book, LINCOLN AND THE POWER OF THE PRESS. Holzer, a leading authority on Lincoln and the Civil War serves as Chairman of the Lincoln Bicentennial Foundation and has authored, co-authored or edited 42 books. In his latest effort he has done an excellent job in researching and writing about Lincoln’s relationship to the press, how it affected his political career, and how he approached the dissemination of information during the Civil War. Holzer argues that during the mid nineteenth century through the end of the Civil War, newspapers worked hand in glove with politicians. A number of newspaper editors held political office at the same time they wrote for, or owned newspapers. It was very difficult to separate political parties from the opinions of certain newspapers. In a sense one’s political affiliation was made public by the newspaper they wrote for. In Lincoln’s case, he became the owner of a local paper in a small town in Illinois whose express purpose was to be a mouthpiece for the then future president, and a means of reaching a particular ethnic group in order to further Republican Party chances in the expanding west.
According to the author it was difficult, at times, to separate Lincoln’s role as a journalist and his role as a politician. Lincoln’s views on press freedoms and censorship would undergo great changes once he entered the White House, and Holzer does a commendable job following Lincoln’s evolution on constitutional issues relating to freedom of the press and other important subjects. Holzer’s book is more than a discussion of Lincoln and the press. What the author has prepared is a wonderful study that devotes a great deal of attention to the major newspapers of the time period and the individuals who made them famous. The author does not neglect smaller papers and persons of interest who impacted the time period. The book concentrates on three journalists and their newspapers; Horace Greeley and the New York Journal, Henry Raymond and the New York Times, and James Gordon Bennett and the New York Herald. In presenting his material, Holzer integrates the lives and events of the period and places them in the context of Lincoln’s views, the prevailing political situation, and the personal relationships that most impacted American history. Aside from biographies of these journalists and their relationship with Lincoln, Holzer presents a comparative biography of Lincoln and his most important political foe, Stephen A. Douglas. In this discussion we see the evolution of Lincoln’s constitutional arguments as they relate to slavery, and how the foil of “the little giant,” allowed Lincoln’s analysis of politics and society to crystallize.
According to Holzer, newspapers were the most powerful weapons political campaigns employed in the 1850s. “The mutual interdependence that grew up between the press and politics made for a toxic brew. No politician was above it, no editor beyond it, and no reader immune to it.” (xiv) Springfield, Illinois was a perfect example of this toxicity, especially with Senator Stephen A. Douglas and former congressman, Abraham Lincoln in residence in 1859. If one examines Lincoln’s background one would see a politician constantly courting editors in nearby cities and villages. In May, 1859 he even purchased a German newspaper as a means of courting an ethnic group whose population was rapidly expanding westward, and would greatly influence the 1860 presidential election. Holzer accurately characterizes the relationship between Lincoln, other politicians, and journalists as a “sometimes incestuous relationship” as party machines and individual pols sought patronage and other perks from those officeholders with power. These perks would consist of high paying appointive jobs in the federal bureaucracy, post masterships which allowed further sources of patronage, government printing contracts, a major source of wealth and revenue for newspapers, ambassadorships, etc. Holzer puts it nicely in his introduction by stating that the book “focuses not just on how newspapers reported on and influenced [Lincoln’s] ascent, but how his own struggle for power, and most of his political contemporaries, unfolded within a concurrent competition for preeminence among newspapermen to influence politics and politicians.” (xvi)
Along the way the reader meets a number of remarkable historical figures. Horace Greeley, the editor, author, and politician is foremost among them. Holzer parallels the lives of Greeley and Lincoln who experience many similarities in their lives, but never were able to develop trust in each other, thus negating a close relationship. Greeley’s newspaper was against slavery and its expansion. Greeley became a thorn in the side of the south and a confederacy that saw him as an abolitionist. Greely’s paper became one of the most influential in New York and with weekly editions it had influence nationwide. Greeley had his own political ambitions, and he did not always support Lincoln’s candidacies. At times the somewhat irritating Greeley caused political problems for Lincoln that he always seemed to manipulate to his advantage. By 1864, Greeley would oppose Lincoln’s reelection and try to bring about peace with the south. In James Gordon Bennett we come across one of the most colorful and egoistic characters in 19th century American history. Bennett, whose loyalty was not to a political party or ideology, but to making money and expanding his own influence. Throughout the period Bennett’s paper would flip flop on issues as well as support for certain politicians and parties as long as it met Bennett’s personal goals. He despised Greeley and their “newspaper wars” are fascinating. At first Bennett supported secession, but morphed into a supporter of the union and abolition after making certain “unofficial” arrangements with Lincoln. The most respected journalist of the period was Henry Raymond, who despite disagreements over policy with the Lincoln administration remained loyal to the Republican Party, a party he would assume the chairmanship of before the election of 1864. Raymond is the perfect example of the politician-journalist as he also served in Congress following the Civil War, representing a district from New York City while editing his newspaper.
The book is more than a history of Greeley, Bennett, and Raymond, but more of a general narrative of journalism before the Civil War dating back to George Washington’s difficulties with the press, and it becomes extremely detailed once the reader approaches the Civil War. As newspapers were confronted by the major crisis of the period; Bloody Kansas, John Brown’s Raid, the firing on Fort Sumter, Holzer explores each and how individual newspaper and their political affiliates reacted and tried to make the most out of news coverage. The same approach is implemented in discussing the major battles, political controversies, and personalities that dominate the Civil War. We meet a president who learns how to manipulate the press and reach the public by writing his own editorials, and issuing public letters to avoid answering to a given editor. Whether Lincoln is confronted with military failures, difficult personalities like Greeley, Salmon P. Chase, John C. Fremont, or George McClellan; the president is able to control situations and defuse them, or increase tension in order to implement his vision.
A number of issues and incidents stand out, especially censorship, and the 1863 New York draft riots. After the Union failure at Bull Run in June, 1861 the Lincoln administration was vilified by the Democratic Party press. In efforts to embarrass Lincoln articles were published that many in the military felt were almost treasonous. Once Edwin Stanton became Secretary of War there was a crackdown on certain newspapers and their editors and it raised the question of news suppression being a vehicle for censorship. It is apparent that it was but Lincoln and his allies argued that it was needed in order to safely and effectively prosecute the war. A number of papers met with government action and Holzer delineates them clearly in detail. After what Holzer terms, “the Panic of 1861,” ran its course, the Lincoln administration backed off in most cases and freedom of the press was fairly secure for two years. Censorship reemerges as an issue as the election of 1864 approached and Lincoln was viciously vilified by the Democratic Party press. When the message of what would be tolerated was provided, once again the Lincoln administration limited action against offending papers. On the whole Holzer concludes that Lincoln should be praised for the amount of free press allowed during the war as the Confederacy was using the northern papers as a vehicle in ascertaining what strategies to pursue. In the case of the 1863 New York draft riots, Bennett’s New York Herald stoked racial hatred by publishing rumors to heighten tension. It directed its editorials at the Irish minority in New York that feared that freed slaves would take their jobs. The ensuing bloodshed can, in part, easily be placed at the door of the Herald’s editorial offices.
Though the book concentrates on the northern press, Holzer does find time to discuss the state of confederate journalism. Southern newspapers were at a disadvantage throughout the Civil War, and their newspaper industry was ostensibly destroyed by 1863. The south suffered from a lack of paper since most paper mills were up north. Further, with universal white conscription there were few educated males to write for, and administer the news. In addition, once union forces occupied a given area, pro-confederate editors were seized and their papers shut down and presses confiscated. Lastly, Union forces controlled most telegraph lines and cut those that southern cities and towns depended upon.
Without a doubt, Lincoln loved newspapers, greatly enjoyed the give and take with reporters, and realized the strategic political importance that the press played in everyday life. For the young Lincoln they were a source of education, for the mature Lincoln they were a source of political intelligence and a means of influencing public opinion. The importance of the press during the period under study cannot be under rated as it impacted most major decisions before, during, and after the war. Taken as a whole, LINCOLN AND THE POWER OF THE PRESS will become the standard work on its subject for historians for years to come. Its analysis is incisive, and Holzer’s command of the material, primary and secondary, is incomparable. For those who enjoyed Doris Kearns Goodwin’s TEAM OF RIVALS, Holzer’s new book makes a wonderful compliment as it opens new avenues of thought and discovery. To Holzer’s credit the book is not just designed for historians of the period, but it should also satisfy the general reader who might be interested in the topic.
October 7, 2025
The era, the president and the supporting characters are all different, but I couldn’t help but think about Doris Kearns Goodwin’s The Bully Pulpit: Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and the Golden Age of Journalism when reading this book, which was published about a year after hers. The themes are similar - how a president and the press coexisted, sometimes clashing and sometimes cooperating. But while Goodwin’s effort felt less than fully-formed to me, failing to adequately show how the two intersected and influenced each other, Holzer’s succeeded in weaving together the stories of the president and the press in a way that increases our understanding of both.
Holzer traces the parallel stories of Abraham Lincoln’s rise to political prominence, and the growing success and national influence of the three major New York newspaper publishers of the time - the best known today being the Tribune’s Horace Greeley, along with Herald publisher James Gordon Bennett and the Times’ Henry Raymond.
Their stories don’t fully come together until later in the book, since the New York papers weren’t paying much attention to Lincoln early in his career. But Holzer establishes all of the main characters’ backstories, and fully explains the often-incentuous interplay between politics and the hyperpartisan journalism of the time. “The press and politics often functioned in tandem as a single, tightly organized entity,” he writes, blurring traditional lines in ways that were (until recently, at least) unthinkable to us today, as politicians controlled the narrative of friendly press outlets, and news publishers moved back and forth with ease between covering politics and seeking political appointments and offices themselves.
And while politicians like Lincoln courted, craved and sometimes controlled press coverage, news publishers recognized that their powers of persuasion were almost as important and influential as leading and legislating. Holzer shows no affection or nostalgia for this time, though, noting that openly partisan newspapers often “combined advocacy with almost libelous criticism.” And he argues that the absence of an independent, nonpartisan press in the antebellum era “increased sectionalism and hastened disunion.”
For better or worse, Lincoln learned to play the game as a local legislator. Holzer recounts Lincoln’s early days inserting his views into newspapers as an anonymous editorial writer, visiting local publishers to establish relationships and court their support, and he gives a thorough summary of how Lincoln came to own a German-language newspaper in Springfield - a fact that’s often mentioned briefly in Lincoln biographies but rarely fully explored.
Once Lincoln becomes president, his story and those of the New York publishers start to converge, as Lincoln tries to manage relations with them, influence their coverage and minimize the impact of their criticism. Raymond was generally supportive, Bennett generally critical, while Greeley was most complicated. Dealing with him seemed to take up most of Lincoln’s time and energy, as he was a nominal supporter who still seemed never satisfied, criticizing Lincoln for just about everything he did.
In that vein, Holzer offers excellent analysis of Lincoln’s most famous public exchange with Greeley over emancipation, as Greeley advocated for it without knowing that Lincoln had already drafted his Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation. Every Lincoln biographer has a take on Lincoln’s response - “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.” Holzer’s take is that Lincoln had subtly “introduced the idea of freeing ‘some’ slaves if such an act could win the war and save the Union - the very plan Lincoln had already determined to pursue.”
Holzer backs this up by examining some of Lincoln's other pre-emancipation comments, making a convincing case that he was truly courting the press and the public and steering them toward what he saw as the best policy. For one, “it is difficult to imagine,” Holzer observes, that Lincoln was not behind a pro-emancipation Philadelphia newspaper editorial written “as if to urge the president toward a policy” that he “had already decided upon.” He also concludes it was no accident that Lincoln brought along a reporter for his meeting with a Black delegation in which he urged them to accept colonization overseas. His comments, disappointing to us today, were “aimed at whites” at the time, Holzer concludes, “designed to convince them that he was no particular friend of African Americans” and that his eventual emancipation policy was a military necessity and not just big-hearted benevolence.
And Holzer points out that Lincoln subsequently oversaw leaks to the press about the impending proclamation following his letter to Greeley, “as part of a logical progression toward emancipation.” This secretiveness and equivocation, sometimes interpreted today as reluctance or ambivalence, “served to prepare the country” for emancipation, Holzer concludes, “even if at some cost to Lincoln's subsequent claim to high reputation as a liberator.”
On the issue of often heavy-handed censorship and limitations imposed on the press during the war, Holzer chronicles what occurred without really passing judgment on what seems troublesome to us today, and mostly gives Lincoln a pass. “Lincoln did not initiate press suppression, and remained ambivalent about its execution, but seldom intervened to prevent it,” is about as far as he goes in criticizing him. Only once is Lincoln portrayed as overzealous for getting personally involved in shutting down a New York newspaper and ordering the arrest of its publisher, a move that Holzer says ultimately so chastened Lincoln that he never did anything like it again.
By the time of the 1864 presidential campaign, “the previously restrained free press again operated freely,” Holzer writes, calling it “a condition for which Lincoln has received too little credit,” suggesting that prior press restrictions were only imposed when papers “endangered the troops or the Union itself” and not in response to mere political attacks.
And there were certainly political attacks to contend with. Unlike the Progressive Era crusaders in Goodwin’s book, the New York publishers in Holzer’s book had more inconsistent attitudes, with Raymond, for one, admitting that “the newspaper trade was designed not to reform society but to earn money.” Lincoln found himself up against “the editors’ insatiable appetite for political reward and their irreconcilable antipathy toward each other,” Holzer writes, eventually leading to Lincoln seeking to bypass the need to court them at all, by issuing statements designed to go over their heads and directly to the public.
And yet, Holzer zeroes in on the press clippings found in Lincoln's wallet after his death, concluding that they exemplify the never-ending importance Lincoln put on positive press coverage and support. This is followed by a whatever-happened-to-everyone-else epilogue, and a poignant conclusion linking a symbolic representation of that time with today.
Just when you think there is nothing new that can be written or learned about Lincoln, Holzer’s effort here proves that thinking wrong. By taking a narrow view from a specific angle, this book ultimately gives us a greater understanding of the bigger story.
Holzer traces the parallel stories of Abraham Lincoln’s rise to political prominence, and the growing success and national influence of the three major New York newspaper publishers of the time - the best known today being the Tribune’s Horace Greeley, along with Herald publisher James Gordon Bennett and the Times’ Henry Raymond.
Their stories don’t fully come together until later in the book, since the New York papers weren’t paying much attention to Lincoln early in his career. But Holzer establishes all of the main characters’ backstories, and fully explains the often-incentuous interplay between politics and the hyperpartisan journalism of the time. “The press and politics often functioned in tandem as a single, tightly organized entity,” he writes, blurring traditional lines in ways that were (until recently, at least) unthinkable to us today, as politicians controlled the narrative of friendly press outlets, and news publishers moved back and forth with ease between covering politics and seeking political appointments and offices themselves.
And while politicians like Lincoln courted, craved and sometimes controlled press coverage, news publishers recognized that their powers of persuasion were almost as important and influential as leading and legislating. Holzer shows no affection or nostalgia for this time, though, noting that openly partisan newspapers often “combined advocacy with almost libelous criticism.” And he argues that the absence of an independent, nonpartisan press in the antebellum era “increased sectionalism and hastened disunion.”
For better or worse, Lincoln learned to play the game as a local legislator. Holzer recounts Lincoln’s early days inserting his views into newspapers as an anonymous editorial writer, visiting local publishers to establish relationships and court their support, and he gives a thorough summary of how Lincoln came to own a German-language newspaper in Springfield - a fact that’s often mentioned briefly in Lincoln biographies but rarely fully explored.
Once Lincoln becomes president, his story and those of the New York publishers start to converge, as Lincoln tries to manage relations with them, influence their coverage and minimize the impact of their criticism. Raymond was generally supportive, Bennett generally critical, while Greeley was most complicated. Dealing with him seemed to take up most of Lincoln’s time and energy, as he was a nominal supporter who still seemed never satisfied, criticizing Lincoln for just about everything he did.
In that vein, Holzer offers excellent analysis of Lincoln’s most famous public exchange with Greeley over emancipation, as Greeley advocated for it without knowing that Lincoln had already drafted his Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation. Every Lincoln biographer has a take on Lincoln’s response - “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.” Holzer’s take is that Lincoln had subtly “introduced the idea of freeing ‘some’ slaves if such an act could win the war and save the Union - the very plan Lincoln had already determined to pursue.”
Holzer backs this up by examining some of Lincoln's other pre-emancipation comments, making a convincing case that he was truly courting the press and the public and steering them toward what he saw as the best policy. For one, “it is difficult to imagine,” Holzer observes, that Lincoln was not behind a pro-emancipation Philadelphia newspaper editorial written “as if to urge the president toward a policy” that he “had already decided upon.” He also concludes it was no accident that Lincoln brought along a reporter for his meeting with a Black delegation in which he urged them to accept colonization overseas. His comments, disappointing to us today, were “aimed at whites” at the time, Holzer concludes, “designed to convince them that he was no particular friend of African Americans” and that his eventual emancipation policy was a military necessity and not just big-hearted benevolence.
And Holzer points out that Lincoln subsequently oversaw leaks to the press about the impending proclamation following his letter to Greeley, “as part of a logical progression toward emancipation.” This secretiveness and equivocation, sometimes interpreted today as reluctance or ambivalence, “served to prepare the country” for emancipation, Holzer concludes, “even if at some cost to Lincoln's subsequent claim to high reputation as a liberator.”
On the issue of often heavy-handed censorship and limitations imposed on the press during the war, Holzer chronicles what occurred without really passing judgment on what seems troublesome to us today, and mostly gives Lincoln a pass. “Lincoln did not initiate press suppression, and remained ambivalent about its execution, but seldom intervened to prevent it,” is about as far as he goes in criticizing him. Only once is Lincoln portrayed as overzealous for getting personally involved in shutting down a New York newspaper and ordering the arrest of its publisher, a move that Holzer says ultimately so chastened Lincoln that he never did anything like it again.
By the time of the 1864 presidential campaign, “the previously restrained free press again operated freely,” Holzer writes, calling it “a condition for which Lincoln has received too little credit,” suggesting that prior press restrictions were only imposed when papers “endangered the troops or the Union itself” and not in response to mere political attacks.
And there were certainly political attacks to contend with. Unlike the Progressive Era crusaders in Goodwin’s book, the New York publishers in Holzer’s book had more inconsistent attitudes, with Raymond, for one, admitting that “the newspaper trade was designed not to reform society but to earn money.” Lincoln found himself up against “the editors’ insatiable appetite for political reward and their irreconcilable antipathy toward each other,” Holzer writes, eventually leading to Lincoln seeking to bypass the need to court them at all, by issuing statements designed to go over their heads and directly to the public.
And yet, Holzer zeroes in on the press clippings found in Lincoln's wallet after his death, concluding that they exemplify the never-ending importance Lincoln put on positive press coverage and support. This is followed by a whatever-happened-to-everyone-else epilogue, and a poignant conclusion linking a symbolic representation of that time with today.
Just when you think there is nothing new that can be written or learned about Lincoln, Holzer’s effort here proves that thinking wrong. By taking a narrow view from a specific angle, this book ultimately gives us a greater understanding of the bigger story.
February 26, 2016
This book scratches an itch for me where biography of a particular individual intersects with the larger, longer-term currents of culture, media technology, and business. Lincoln is only one of the individuals shaped by and impacting the world described by this work, but he exhibits his seminal combination of sagacity and pragmatism as these trends evolve.
October 16, 2014
I found the book very boring-and I like books on American presidents and history. Maybe a professional historian would like the book but I found it unreadable.
I think the problem with the book is that it tries to be all things to all people. It does not have a focus or point of view. It does not tell a story. Instead it throws massive unrelated amounts of information at the reader. Some of the information is interesting but it does not stop the book from being dull and hard to read.
For a book about Lincoln, big chunks of the book are about the press. Some readers might think this is a good thing but I found that it made the book overly complex and confusing. (However, the book did bring out one interesting piece of information that in Lincoln's time nothing it was not seen as wrong for the press to be openly partisan and for members of the press to get government appointments in exchange for favorable press).
In regards to LINCOLN and the press, the book focused on three themes.
1) Lincoln himself dabbled in journalism
2) Lincoln was good at public relations with the press
3) There was a lot of restrictions on the press-some people would say censorship of the press during the Civil War(this is what I thought the book would be about). There are questions about what Lincoln's role was in putting restrictions on the press.
I think the book would have been better reading if it focused on one of these aspects of Lincoln and the press. Instead, the book throws massive amounts of information at the reader. It is a very dry book.
I think the problem with the book is that it tries to be all things to all people. It does not have a focus or point of view. It does not tell a story. Instead it throws massive unrelated amounts of information at the reader. Some of the information is interesting but it does not stop the book from being dull and hard to read.
For a book about Lincoln, big chunks of the book are about the press. Some readers might think this is a good thing but I found that it made the book overly complex and confusing. (However, the book did bring out one interesting piece of information that in Lincoln's time nothing it was not seen as wrong for the press to be openly partisan and for members of the press to get government appointments in exchange for favorable press).
In regards to LINCOLN and the press, the book focused on three themes.
1) Lincoln himself dabbled in journalism
2) Lincoln was good at public relations with the press
3) There was a lot of restrictions on the press-some people would say censorship of the press during the Civil War(this is what I thought the book would be about). There are questions about what Lincoln's role was in putting restrictions on the press.
I think the book would have been better reading if it focused on one of these aspects of Lincoln and the press. Instead, the book throws massive amounts of information at the reader. It is a very dry book.
July 9, 2016
I found this book to be a very timely read. Accustomed as we are to the notion of the press as ideally being impartial reporters and indefatigable seekers of the truth, Fox News and three billion in “earned” media promotion seems completely out of the ordinary. After reading this book, it doesn’t seem to be novel in the context of the mid-19th century American press described by Holzer.
What I enjoyed best about this book is its portrayal of how astutely Lincoln was able to manage press coverage and to shape it to his ends. His discussion of how actively the press seeked patronage sheds valuable light on the time that Lincoln spent during the Civil War supplicants for patronage. It illustrates an aspect of Lincoln that John Hay called The Tycoon.
The most difficult aspect of this book was its length. Had the prose not been very readable, completing it would have been a daunting task.
What I enjoyed best about this book is its portrayal of how astutely Lincoln was able to manage press coverage and to shape it to his ends. His discussion of how actively the press seeked patronage sheds valuable light on the time that Lincoln spent during the Civil War supplicants for patronage. It illustrates an aspect of Lincoln that John Hay called The Tycoon.
The most difficult aspect of this book was its length. Had the prose not been very readable, completing it would have been a daunting task.
August 6, 2015
This book is for the serious reader. Well researched and creatively conceived, it traces the influence of the newspaper on young Lincoln, and then follows its role in his emergence as a politician, as a contender for the presidency, and later the complicated relationship between Lincoln and the press during the American Civil War. It raises thorny, thoughtful issues regarding censorship; when do we hold the First Amendment dearest above all, and when may its authority be abrogated for the security and integrity of the Union?
My thanks and gratitude go to Net Galley and Simon and Schuster, who gave me a DRC and let me read it free.
It starts a bit slow, and I began wondering whether this would be one of those rare books that I skim and then review, as opposed to reading every word. Still…LINCOLN. I stayed the course and was rewarded. Just be aware that the narrative doesn’t really wake up until about the 30 percent mark.
Lincoln had amazingly little formal schooling. Though this was common among pioneer families at the time, with settlements sparse and young males needed to help with a tremendous amount of hard physical labor, but knowing not only that he became US president, but that he was an attorney before that, I was surprised to learn that most of his reading skills were obtained by reading every single newspaper he could get his hands on, no matter how old it was by the time it made its way to Illinois, which was then considered the northwestern USA. A sister later recounted seeing him turn a chair over and lean against it while he sat on the floor and used the firelight to read by. How many people are sufficiently motivated today to teach themselves reading skills through this sort of very difficult total immersion?
He later fed his newspaper habit by becoming postmaster, and he used this office to read the newspapers being sent by mail before they were delivered to their intended recipients. (He would later use the franking privilege bestowed upon postmasters to send out his own campaign materials free of charge.)
Newspapers were tremendously influential, approaching the zenith of their importance during this time. There was no radio or any other media to spread the news of the nation besides word of mouth. Litigation for libel or slander had not yet blossomed, and so newspapers were often very loose with the facts, and this made it all the more important to read as many of them as possible in order to tease apart truth and rumor.
Young Lincoln left home hoping to become a journalist himself. He was well known as a gregarious fellow who always had a great story ready for whoever wanted to listen. I envision his parents throwing their arms up in the air: all that work to be done at home and where is their son? Off somewhere talking, talking, talking. I also found this tidbit interesting because it contrasts sharply with the haunted and often depressed man he would later become when authority and personal tragedy marked him.
As a congressman and also as a frequent writer of freelance articles and letters to editors, Lincoln marked out his position against the extension of slavery early and with great passion. He called the war with Mexico for what it was: a land grab that would primarily benefit the feudal rulers of the south. At one point he even suggested that the attack against US citizens by Mexican soldiers was a hoax, demanding to know exactly where on the map this had occurred. Folks in Washington DC, Illinois, and even New York sat up and took notice.
Holzer also traces the beginnings of the most notable newspaper publishers of the time. The unfortunate Elijah Lovejoy is dispatched with haste, just as he was in life. Greeley, the bootstrap newsman and fervent abolitionist, at least most of the time, at first spurned Lincoln. For most of both of their careers, they had a strong working relationship, but Greeley was both quixotic and a bit unstable, and he turned on Lincoln at some pivotal times, most noteworthy when the latter was running for re-election. Bennett, founder of the Herald and innovator of a number of the institutional practices that are still in place today, was conservative politically and represented Manhattan’s pro-secessionist, pro-slavery majority. Raymond was Lincoln’s most steadfast supporter and campaign manager the second time around, though he wavered for a brief but terrible time when the tide seemed to turn in favor of the Copperhead Democrats, who wanted to give the secessionist states independence in order to end the war.
In the land of Dixie, there was no debate about Constitutional rights to freedom of speech and the press; newspapers who even hinted at Union sentiments were quickly suppressed without qualm. Despite Lincoln’s suspension of Habeas Corpus and at times the suppression and/or closure of newspapers that either leant aid to the enemy by publishing battle plans before the fights had taken place, or by less overt and therefore more controversial antiwar editorials, he won his office in a fair fight, not attempting to tamper with the electoral process or outlaw the printed word that ran in favor of McClellan, a former general whom this reviewer regards as a treasonous scoundrel.
I confess it gave me a good deal of food for thought. I was a child during the 1960’s and a teen during the 1970’s, but I recall well the controversy regarding free speech, the Vietnam War, and Nixon’s enemies list. If I am in favor of free speech and press during contemporary times, why should it have been different during the Civil War? But I eventually concluded that it was indeed different, and the exasperation of General Sherman toward the press that gave away critical secrets all in the interest of a scoop and the bottom line was entirely correct.
But that’s just one reviewer’s opinion. If you are willing to devote the time and attention this tome demands, you are sure to come away with a viewpoint of your own.
To those interested in the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln, or the history of the American newspaper, highly recommended.
My thanks and gratitude go to Net Galley and Simon and Schuster, who gave me a DRC and let me read it free.
It starts a bit slow, and I began wondering whether this would be one of those rare books that I skim and then review, as opposed to reading every word. Still…LINCOLN. I stayed the course and was rewarded. Just be aware that the narrative doesn’t really wake up until about the 30 percent mark.
Lincoln had amazingly little formal schooling. Though this was common among pioneer families at the time, with settlements sparse and young males needed to help with a tremendous amount of hard physical labor, but knowing not only that he became US president, but that he was an attorney before that, I was surprised to learn that most of his reading skills were obtained by reading every single newspaper he could get his hands on, no matter how old it was by the time it made its way to Illinois, which was then considered the northwestern USA. A sister later recounted seeing him turn a chair over and lean against it while he sat on the floor and used the firelight to read by. How many people are sufficiently motivated today to teach themselves reading skills through this sort of very difficult total immersion?
He later fed his newspaper habit by becoming postmaster, and he used this office to read the newspapers being sent by mail before they were delivered to their intended recipients. (He would later use the franking privilege bestowed upon postmasters to send out his own campaign materials free of charge.)
Newspapers were tremendously influential, approaching the zenith of their importance during this time. There was no radio or any other media to spread the news of the nation besides word of mouth. Litigation for libel or slander had not yet blossomed, and so newspapers were often very loose with the facts, and this made it all the more important to read as many of them as possible in order to tease apart truth and rumor.
Young Lincoln left home hoping to become a journalist himself. He was well known as a gregarious fellow who always had a great story ready for whoever wanted to listen. I envision his parents throwing their arms up in the air: all that work to be done at home and where is their son? Off somewhere talking, talking, talking. I also found this tidbit interesting because it contrasts sharply with the haunted and often depressed man he would later become when authority and personal tragedy marked him.
As a congressman and also as a frequent writer of freelance articles and letters to editors, Lincoln marked out his position against the extension of slavery early and with great passion. He called the war with Mexico for what it was: a land grab that would primarily benefit the feudal rulers of the south. At one point he even suggested that the attack against US citizens by Mexican soldiers was a hoax, demanding to know exactly where on the map this had occurred. Folks in Washington DC, Illinois, and even New York sat up and took notice.
Holzer also traces the beginnings of the most notable newspaper publishers of the time. The unfortunate Elijah Lovejoy is dispatched with haste, just as he was in life. Greeley, the bootstrap newsman and fervent abolitionist, at least most of the time, at first spurned Lincoln. For most of both of their careers, they had a strong working relationship, but Greeley was both quixotic and a bit unstable, and he turned on Lincoln at some pivotal times, most noteworthy when the latter was running for re-election. Bennett, founder of the Herald and innovator of a number of the institutional practices that are still in place today, was conservative politically and represented Manhattan’s pro-secessionist, pro-slavery majority. Raymond was Lincoln’s most steadfast supporter and campaign manager the second time around, though he wavered for a brief but terrible time when the tide seemed to turn in favor of the Copperhead Democrats, who wanted to give the secessionist states independence in order to end the war.
In the land of Dixie, there was no debate about Constitutional rights to freedom of speech and the press; newspapers who even hinted at Union sentiments were quickly suppressed without qualm. Despite Lincoln’s suspension of Habeas Corpus and at times the suppression and/or closure of newspapers that either leant aid to the enemy by publishing battle plans before the fights had taken place, or by less overt and therefore more controversial antiwar editorials, he won his office in a fair fight, not attempting to tamper with the electoral process or outlaw the printed word that ran in favor of McClellan, a former general whom this reviewer regards as a treasonous scoundrel.
I confess it gave me a good deal of food for thought. I was a child during the 1960’s and a teen during the 1970’s, but I recall well the controversy regarding free speech, the Vietnam War, and Nixon’s enemies list. If I am in favor of free speech and press during contemporary times, why should it have been different during the Civil War? But I eventually concluded that it was indeed different, and the exasperation of General Sherman toward the press that gave away critical secrets all in the interest of a scoop and the bottom line was entirely correct.
But that’s just one reviewer’s opinion. If you are willing to devote the time and attention this tome demands, you are sure to come away with a viewpoint of your own.
To those interested in the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln, or the history of the American newspaper, highly recommended.
October 15, 2014
As with all of Holzer's Lincoln scholarship, this is excellent. My full review for Roll Call is here: http://blogs.rollcall.com/after-dark/...
October 30, 2014
Lincoln and the Power of the Press: The War for Public Opinion was an interesting, indepth study, and at the same time a thorough scholarly work not for the common man. It may be a tough read for the casual reader, history or even civil war buff. Since I count myself among that group, I thought it’d be helpful to write a review from that perspective, while still appreciating the level of professional scholarship entailed.
I’m paraphrasing here, but as they ask in the research world, “did this add anything unique or of substance to what’s already there?” While there has been of course a lot written about Lincoln, and I’m far from expert, but it would seem to me the answer to this is a yes. While I assume much of the info has been presented in different places before, it took Harold Holzer to collect, organize and present it from this perspective. And I appreciate that Holzer focused on the press side of things just as much as on Lincoln and his relationship with it.
It was certainly well researched (90 pages of notes for the 585 pages of text, and a 33-page biblio). Since I’m not an expert, I cannot attest to the accuracy of all the info, but just the analysis, interpretations and conclusions were credible and insightful. And I appreciate that it focused on the press just as much as Lincoln and his relationship with it. With all the info, it was tough to make sense of it all, and Holzer does a decent job with pointing out in an organized coherent manner the multiple interrelationships, connections and relevances. However, he does falter sometimes over the length of it, getting bogged down, elaborating too much, and bringing in seemingly extraneous info. Thus, despite Holzer’s descriptive storytelling style and the occasional illustration that generally kept me engaged, there were times that it was slow going, mundane and even boring.
My impression is that this is a contribution to not only the professional scholarship about Lincoln, but also to broader presidential, political and journalism scholarship. And while it is not an easy read, it was also certainly interesting for this more casual history buff. (3.5 stars)
(I'm excited to have won this as a Goodreads First Read – so thanks, Simon & Schuster!)
I’m paraphrasing here, but as they ask in the research world, “did this add anything unique or of substance to what’s already there?” While there has been of course a lot written about Lincoln, and I’m far from expert, but it would seem to me the answer to this is a yes. While I assume much of the info has been presented in different places before, it took Harold Holzer to collect, organize and present it from this perspective. And I appreciate that Holzer focused on the press side of things just as much as on Lincoln and his relationship with it.
It was certainly well researched (90 pages of notes for the 585 pages of text, and a 33-page biblio). Since I’m not an expert, I cannot attest to the accuracy of all the info, but just the analysis, interpretations and conclusions were credible and insightful. And I appreciate that it focused on the press just as much as Lincoln and his relationship with it. With all the info, it was tough to make sense of it all, and Holzer does a decent job with pointing out in an organized coherent manner the multiple interrelationships, connections and relevances. However, he does falter sometimes over the length of it, getting bogged down, elaborating too much, and bringing in seemingly extraneous info. Thus, despite Holzer’s descriptive storytelling style and the occasional illustration that generally kept me engaged, there were times that it was slow going, mundane and even boring.
My impression is that this is a contribution to not only the professional scholarship about Lincoln, but also to broader presidential, political and journalism scholarship. And while it is not an easy read, it was also certainly interesting for this more casual history buff. (3.5 stars)
(I'm excited to have won this as a Goodreads First Read – so thanks, Simon & Schuster!)
October 27, 2014
Whilst I do want to join the masses for a moment and comment on the massive amount of information the author gathered for this book and compliment him on choosing a different focal point than any other Lincoln non-fiction I have read before, I also thought this book was exorbitant in length and at times seemed to simply be a scattered and disjointed recount of Lincoln facts.
Harold Holzer is an expert, and writes from a scholarly standpoint. This is wonderful for those who have a scholarly or professional interest in the subjects he writes about, but for the general public, I think this book may be a bit overwhelming. The sheer amount of information about Lincoln that is out in the world for grabs makes it hard to narrow down what to include, I would imagine, and I believe I saw that here.
I was very interested in the sections of the book that dealt with the manipulation of the press and Lincoln's rise to success, but there were many other portions of this book that I did not feel supported the original concept.
Overall this was very informative, was well written and impeccably researched and was up to the high standard we have come to expect from Harold Holzer. It isn't a book you want to take on unless you have time to really devote yourself to it. I regret that I was not able to spend more time looking up things that Mr. Holzer referenced in this book.
Recommended for those who have a serious interest in Lincoln.
This review is based on a complimentary copy from the publisher and provided through Netgalley. All opinions are my own.
Harold Holzer is an expert, and writes from a scholarly standpoint. This is wonderful for those who have a scholarly or professional interest in the subjects he writes about, but for the general public, I think this book may be a bit overwhelming. The sheer amount of information about Lincoln that is out in the world for grabs makes it hard to narrow down what to include, I would imagine, and I believe I saw that here.
I was very interested in the sections of the book that dealt with the manipulation of the press and Lincoln's rise to success, but there were many other portions of this book that I did not feel supported the original concept.
Overall this was very informative, was well written and impeccably researched and was up to the high standard we have come to expect from Harold Holzer. It isn't a book you want to take on unless you have time to really devote yourself to it. I regret that I was not able to spend more time looking up things that Mr. Holzer referenced in this book.
Recommended for those who have a serious interest in Lincoln.
This review is based on a complimentary copy from the publisher and provided through Netgalley. All opinions are my own.
August 31, 2014
I received an advanced copy of this book through a goodreads giveaway and I was very excited to get my hands on it early. I must say that the book is interesting and well written, but I have a few critiques of it as well. The book is massive; not counting the notes and bibliography pages it has about 750 pages or so of reading material. This is what causes the book to become bogged down in its own scholarship. Holzer is to be commended for the countless hours it must have taken to dig up all the facts and stories related in this book, but it left me feeling physically tired after reading the entire book. The first part of the book (around 300 pages or so) deals mostly with the lives and back stories of the major newspapermen of the time. Lincoln's role in the entire book comes around this time as well, and this is where it becomes most interesting. We learn how Lincoln would use his political connections to control the press and what was written about him, and we also learn that Lincoln dabbled in the newspaper industry as well. I recommend this book, but also caution the reader that if you wish to read the entire work it will take considerable time unless you are quite the quick reader. Thanks for the advanced copy!
February 18, 2016
This is a hard book to rate. If it were written differently, I would have given it 5 stars. It is a hard read. When I finished reading the book I still didn't quite know why it was written or what was its purpose. Was it a story about Lincoln or about the power of the press? Was it a book about three great editors or the relationship between Lincoln and the press? The author jumped back and forth throughout the book with the time line of history. One moment you are reading about Lincoln's early life, the next the civil war. He includes the names and stories about 100's of different newspaper men, editors and various newspapers. I found myself going back and forth trying to figure out who the author was referring to and who was saying what. Nonetheless, the book was very interesting, in fact, fascinating. You see a different side of Lincoln that reveals a more realistic, positive Lincoln. It was a hard read but well worth the time and effort.
September 4, 2016
Really excellent book regarding news media history. It was quite fascinating to read all the politicized spiel which relates to a bunch of the politicized spiel today. I think reading this book has made me even more cynical regarding the press than I already was.
January 21, 2023
Excellent study of the culture and actions of major newspaper leaders linked to Abraham Lincoln.
December 12, 2014
Readable, novel, and ever-engaging, "Lincoln and the Power of the Press" sheds some much needed light on the rise of print journalism during the Civil War and holds a mirror up to the press, which, in our own time, continues to shape and be shaped by politics.
July 21, 2019
This comprehensive book about how politicians during President Lincoln’s era courted the press makes clear how politicians even then had a love/hate relationship with the press. Just as President Trump courts and regularly appears on the Fox News network while calling everything else “Fake News”, we see the former President doing the same. In fact, all politicians did and newspaper editors wielded significant powers to not only mold political opinion, but also make or break a politician.
While Lincoln scholar Holzer concentrates on the role of the press, the book shares different information about politics of the era. We learn about the influence that newspapers had on Lincoln as a young man and how that developed during his run of public office. While I’ve read about Lincoln in other books, this was the first one that told me that Lincoln had owned a newspaper.
The book is long (769 pages), to stay engaged, a reader must be intrigued by the history of the press or President Lincoln.
While Lincoln scholar Holzer concentrates on the role of the press, the book shares different information about politics of the era. We learn about the influence that newspapers had on Lincoln as a young man and how that developed during his run of public office. While I’ve read about Lincoln in other books, this was the first one that told me that Lincoln had owned a newspaper.
The book is long (769 pages), to stay engaged, a reader must be intrigued by the history of the press or President Lincoln.
August 25, 2017
I found the topic of the book fascinating and well timed, but I just couldn't get through how the book was written. Within the first twenty pages, I was overwhelmed by all of the names and newspapers mentioned, not to mention how much the author jumped around from person to person.
I'm still interested in this topic, but I think I'll wait for an abridged version or for another author to write on this topic.
I'm still interested in this topic, but I think I'll wait for an abridged version or for another author to write on this topic.
November 21, 2018
The substance of the book was outstanding and interesting, but I thought the writing was quite dense. It made it pretty difficult to push through, despite my interest in both journalism history and the civil war. There are so many tie-ins with today's news climate that the book is important. If you decide to give it a read (you should), it will be difficult at times to get through, but in my opinion, worth it.
August 8, 2017
Outstanding study (and rather exhaustive) of Abraham Lincoln's relationship, engagement with, involvement with, and his efforts as President to 'manage' the press and its reporting on his presidency. Supported by pages of notes and a bibliography that will become itself an important tool in studying the subject.
September 18, 2017
Lots of good information if you are into the details and want to gain a deep understanding of the topic. I felt it was too long and too detailed with names and times I just wasn't going to remember. Could have explained the same concepts in a much shorter book.
June 22, 2020
As both a longtime newspaperman and Lincoln admirer, I thoroughly enjoyed reading about such a misunderstood and unappreciated part of our history. Words matter, and few understood this as much as Lincoln.
February 11, 2020
Interesting stories, but confirmational of how the press works.
February 17, 2020
We think about Presidents and the Press as more current day. Lincoln recognized the Power of the Press and how he needed Positive Public Opinion. Great read, and historical resource. Enjoy!
September 8, 2021
More than I wanted to know about the press
December 23, 2016
Holzer gives a detailed history of the engagement of Lincoln and the press from his years in Illinois to the end of his presidency. We are reminded by this history of the level of intense partisanship that existed in mid-nineteenth century America, both prior to and during the Civil War. The ties between the press and the political parties was quite different than we (mostly) see today in that newspapers were overtly organs of the political parties and made no pretense of neutrality or journalistic independence. Lincoln knew quite well that positive news coverage was vitally critical to personal political advancement and to political success in office. Lincoln famously said during his debates with Douglas that "with public sentiment nothing can fail; without it nothing can succeed." Lincoln took an active role throughout his career in managing news coverage; in newly discovered sources Holzer found that Lincoln had purchased a German-language newspaper to assist in courting the German-American populace. Lincoln frequently wrote letters to editors and opinion columns -- sometimes anonymously.
Today, the number of newspapers in the nation has shrunk to a considerably smaller level than in Lincoln's time' this may be largely due to the new forms of media now available. Holzer chronicles the 19th century rise of newspapers with national reach by focusing on three influential New York papers and their publishers/editors: James Gordon Bennett's New York Herald, Horace Greeley's New York Tribune, and Henry Raymond's New-York Times. These press magnates wielded enormous clout on political matters and the interaction between Lincoln and the press is well understood by examining the Machiavellian relationships between these journalists and Lincoln.
The book delves deeply into the affect of the Civil War on freedom of the press. The administration took a strong position against newspapers that showed sympathies toward the South or which were anti-war. Often, stern retribution exacted against newspapers was initiated independently by field generals with no direct sanction by the administration, but with little interference either. Presses were ransacked and editors put in prison for publishing articles deemed inimical to the Northern war effort. While there were expected howls of protest against violations of the first amendment's guarantee of press freedom, the position of the administration was that the existential threat to the preservation of the union justified actions in (temporary) contravention of the Constitution. To sustain the overarching purpose of the Constitution, i.e. a national union, it was necessary to suppress utterances that would imperil it. Alongside such drastic measures of press suppression the government also exercised stringent censorship over the reports of journalists from the field.
The three major newspapers, while aligning generally with either the Republican or Democratic parties, were not mouthpieces for the parties. They attempted to use their reach to influence public sentiment for or against particular policies; two examples detailed by Holzer are the movement toward emancipation and the institution of a draft in 1863. The prospects and means to find a negotiated settlement to the conflict was another reason for interplay between Lincoln and the press. On these and other issues, the editors and Lincoln continually engaged in chess game like strategies to manipulate public opinion. Lincoln was adroit in his handling of these powerful shapers of the public's reaction to his administration's aims; the tension between the two loci of power was never absent. Holzer shows as well how the bitter rivalries among the newspapers for predominance played significantly into the power dynamics of the era. While government suppression of the press during the war was extreme by today's standards, it is important that in 1864 Lincoln did not attempt to subvert press coverage in opposition to his re-election.
One cannot, of course, help but compare the press-political relationship of that era with today. While it may be the case that the press is independent from the political structures it is clearly not neutral, nor should it be. "We report, you decide" is more accurately phrased as "We decide what and how to report so that you will agree". While this results in messiness and strife this tension offers the best hope to our maintaining our freedom.
Today, the number of newspapers in the nation has shrunk to a considerably smaller level than in Lincoln's time' this may be largely due to the new forms of media now available. Holzer chronicles the 19th century rise of newspapers with national reach by focusing on three influential New York papers and their publishers/editors: James Gordon Bennett's New York Herald, Horace Greeley's New York Tribune, and Henry Raymond's New-York Times. These press magnates wielded enormous clout on political matters and the interaction between Lincoln and the press is well understood by examining the Machiavellian relationships between these journalists and Lincoln.
The book delves deeply into the affect of the Civil War on freedom of the press. The administration took a strong position against newspapers that showed sympathies toward the South or which were anti-war. Often, stern retribution exacted against newspapers was initiated independently by field generals with no direct sanction by the administration, but with little interference either. Presses were ransacked and editors put in prison for publishing articles deemed inimical to the Northern war effort. While there were expected howls of protest against violations of the first amendment's guarantee of press freedom, the position of the administration was that the existential threat to the preservation of the union justified actions in (temporary) contravention of the Constitution. To sustain the overarching purpose of the Constitution, i.e. a national union, it was necessary to suppress utterances that would imperil it. Alongside such drastic measures of press suppression the government also exercised stringent censorship over the reports of journalists from the field.
The three major newspapers, while aligning generally with either the Republican or Democratic parties, were not mouthpieces for the parties. They attempted to use their reach to influence public sentiment for or against particular policies; two examples detailed by Holzer are the movement toward emancipation and the institution of a draft in 1863. The prospects and means to find a negotiated settlement to the conflict was another reason for interplay between Lincoln and the press. On these and other issues, the editors and Lincoln continually engaged in chess game like strategies to manipulate public opinion. Lincoln was adroit in his handling of these powerful shapers of the public's reaction to his administration's aims; the tension between the two loci of power was never absent. Holzer shows as well how the bitter rivalries among the newspapers for predominance played significantly into the power dynamics of the era. While government suppression of the press during the war was extreme by today's standards, it is important that in 1864 Lincoln did not attempt to subvert press coverage in opposition to his re-election.
One cannot, of course, help but compare the press-political relationship of that era with today. While it may be the case that the press is independent from the political structures it is clearly not neutral, nor should it be. "We report, you decide" is more accurately phrased as "We decide what and how to report so that you will agree". While this results in messiness and strife this tension offers the best hope to our maintaining our freedom.
January 7, 2016
[Note: This book was provided free of charge by Simon & Schuster in exchange for an honest review.]
As someone who reads a fair amount of books about Abraham Lincoln [1], I am often interested in seeing what a given author provides that is distinctive. Hozier’s book is immense in its scope and achievement, containing more than 700 pages of material that deal with such matters as the conflict between New York’s major newspaper titans, the clandestine ownership of partisan newspapers by politicians like Abraham Lincoln, and the savvy way in which Abraham Lincoln managed the press as a president in order to help the Union cause, despite the agendas of the media bosses themselves. The book is, as might be imagined, extremely complicated and extremely broad in its scope, looking at a wide variety of elements of Lincoln’s interactions with the press, which ranged from virtual house organs to critical but reasonable to outright hostile. Given the partisan nature of the mid-19th century press, which has some important parallels to our own times, and is thus relevant, it is not a surprise that even an immensely able and principled leader like Lincoln found the press difficult to deal with.
To be sure, not all of Lincoln’s moves were savvy. For example, Lincoln’s attempts to woo New York publisher Bennett, a longtime friend of the Democratic party, to his side were immensely unsuccessful. Nevertheless, Lincoln had a much higher view of the importance of the freedom of the press than many of his generals had, and his willingness to overlook some immensely hostile portrayals from the media, which he had the constitutional power to hinder if he had chosen to use it, makes Lincoln far more creditable as a wartime president when compared with Wilson, for example. The book even covers the way in which Lincoln at times was able to borrow expressions and ideas from the newspapers he read voraciously to improve and inform his own prose, ranging from his use of the expression “a new birth of freedom” to his justification of the Emancipation Proclamation as a purely wartime measure based on arguments from Raymond (editor of the once-great New York Times).
To be sure, few people will likely have the free time and the stamina to read a lengthy book about the history of Lincoln’s relationship with the press. That said, the book is filled with skillfully collected anecdotes and an attention to detail that is commendable. Here we see a rare history that looks at the relationship between the press and political history that contains nuance and detail, avoids simplistic conclusions, presents relevant connections but also reminds us that the behavior of neither politicians nor journalists is straightforward, given the tension between trying to shape others and being shaped by others and the tension between the desire for popularity and success and the desire to remain true to one’s own principles. Such tensions were not unique to Lincoln’s time, but they are discussed here very well and in a fashion that offers no hagiography, no whitewashing, and also no axes to grind, but rather a focus on facts and evidence and a desire to present a complex reality as accurately as possible. For those who can endure its length, the book presents many pleasures in its large scope as well as its miniature portraits of people and incidents.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
As someone who reads a fair amount of books about Abraham Lincoln [1], I am often interested in seeing what a given author provides that is distinctive. Hozier’s book is immense in its scope and achievement, containing more than 700 pages of material that deal with such matters as the conflict between New York’s major newspaper titans, the clandestine ownership of partisan newspapers by politicians like Abraham Lincoln, and the savvy way in which Abraham Lincoln managed the press as a president in order to help the Union cause, despite the agendas of the media bosses themselves. The book is, as might be imagined, extremely complicated and extremely broad in its scope, looking at a wide variety of elements of Lincoln’s interactions with the press, which ranged from virtual house organs to critical but reasonable to outright hostile. Given the partisan nature of the mid-19th century press, which has some important parallels to our own times, and is thus relevant, it is not a surprise that even an immensely able and principled leader like Lincoln found the press difficult to deal with.
To be sure, not all of Lincoln’s moves were savvy. For example, Lincoln’s attempts to woo New York publisher Bennett, a longtime friend of the Democratic party, to his side were immensely unsuccessful. Nevertheless, Lincoln had a much higher view of the importance of the freedom of the press than many of his generals had, and his willingness to overlook some immensely hostile portrayals from the media, which he had the constitutional power to hinder if he had chosen to use it, makes Lincoln far more creditable as a wartime president when compared with Wilson, for example. The book even covers the way in which Lincoln at times was able to borrow expressions and ideas from the newspapers he read voraciously to improve and inform his own prose, ranging from his use of the expression “a new birth of freedom” to his justification of the Emancipation Proclamation as a purely wartime measure based on arguments from Raymond (editor of the once-great New York Times).
To be sure, few people will likely have the free time and the stamina to read a lengthy book about the history of Lincoln’s relationship with the press. That said, the book is filled with skillfully collected anecdotes and an attention to detail that is commendable. Here we see a rare history that looks at the relationship between the press and political history that contains nuance and detail, avoids simplistic conclusions, presents relevant connections but also reminds us that the behavior of neither politicians nor journalists is straightforward, given the tension between trying to shape others and being shaped by others and the tension between the desire for popularity and success and the desire to remain true to one’s own principles. Such tensions were not unique to Lincoln’s time, but they are discussed here very well and in a fashion that offers no hagiography, no whitewashing, and also no axes to grind, but rather a focus on facts and evidence and a desire to present a complex reality as accurately as possible. For those who can endure its length, the book presents many pleasures in its large scope as well as its miniature portraits of people and incidents.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
September 22, 2016
Astonishing book that gets into kind of the rise of newspapers & politics. Lincoln actually OWNED a newspaper...a German language newspaper that reached a lot of his voters who were German immigrants in Illinois. But this book chronicles the influence of editors not just in politics but in public thought. In particular the owners of New York papers who through the establishment of the AP (Associated Press) sent through telegraph lines were racing news about a divided nation and war to readers everywhere who were desperate for news.
- Politicians like Lincoln courted newspapers for their influence. They wanted the newspapers to in many ways become mouthpieces for their readers. When Lincoln debated Stephen Douglas they debated together at the suggestion of the newspaper editors who thought it would make good copy. It turned Lincoln from a backwater unknown figure into the leader of the Republican party.
- Papers were often subsidized by Congress. They were paid by Congress to publish notices & because of the patronage system this often inspired loyalty to parties. You could have papers that when falling out of favor could quickly fold because they didn't have access to public funding.
- Abolitionist papers were sold but the owners & editors frequently came under public attack. But the papers were read & especially in the North after John Brown's raid they became shared among everyone. Books like Uncle Tom's Cabin were printed first as serials in newspapers giving those who didn't understand slavery a clear picture about what the experience was like. It influenced people.
- Lincoln in his strategy of 'malice toward none' in many ways was an attempt to have news editors keep an open mind for his candidacy & it helped him influence & shape the reporting on him as he was campaigning for President.
- As the Civil war became inevitable the editors split about how to keep the nation together. Editors became openly hostile & sometimes openly criticized Lincoln. The President & his own military engaged in a tug of war over newspapers as the military closed many of the newspapers suppressing them with Lincoln doing everything he could to keep a press free if possible even if it was critical of him. In many ways how he acted towards the newspapers (when he could have just shut them all down) spoke volumes about his commitment to democratic ideals.
- The editors during the war often became so aggressive in fighting with each other that they despised one another and worked to sabotage each other. Lincoln eventually realized that the best way to reach voters was to not lobby the editors but to speak directly to them. As the war came to a close & he advocated for an amendment banning slavery the editors by their silence in not covering the arm twisting for the crucial vote helped lawmakers get it passed.
- As Lincoln was killed the newspapers finally united in their coverage of his death for over a month. It took his death to unite them all on the same page.
- Politicians like Lincoln courted newspapers for their influence. They wanted the newspapers to in many ways become mouthpieces for their readers. When Lincoln debated Stephen Douglas they debated together at the suggestion of the newspaper editors who thought it would make good copy. It turned Lincoln from a backwater unknown figure into the leader of the Republican party.
- Papers were often subsidized by Congress. They were paid by Congress to publish notices & because of the patronage system this often inspired loyalty to parties. You could have papers that when falling out of favor could quickly fold because they didn't have access to public funding.
- Abolitionist papers were sold but the owners & editors frequently came under public attack. But the papers were read & especially in the North after John Brown's raid they became shared among everyone. Books like Uncle Tom's Cabin were printed first as serials in newspapers giving those who didn't understand slavery a clear picture about what the experience was like. It influenced people.
- Lincoln in his strategy of 'malice toward none' in many ways was an attempt to have news editors keep an open mind for his candidacy & it helped him influence & shape the reporting on him as he was campaigning for President.
- As the Civil war became inevitable the editors split about how to keep the nation together. Editors became openly hostile & sometimes openly criticized Lincoln. The President & his own military engaged in a tug of war over newspapers as the military closed many of the newspapers suppressing them with Lincoln doing everything he could to keep a press free if possible even if it was critical of him. In many ways how he acted towards the newspapers (when he could have just shut them all down) spoke volumes about his commitment to democratic ideals.
- The editors during the war often became so aggressive in fighting with each other that they despised one another and worked to sabotage each other. Lincoln eventually realized that the best way to reach voters was to not lobby the editors but to speak directly to them. As the war came to a close & he advocated for an amendment banning slavery the editors by their silence in not covering the arm twisting for the crucial vote helped lawmakers get it passed.
- As Lincoln was killed the newspapers finally united in their coverage of his death for over a month. It took his death to unite them all on the same page.
May 5, 2015
Bring together the titans of American journalism as they existed in the 1850s and 1860s and Abraham Lincoln under the careful and thoughtful direction of renowned Lincoln expert Harold Holzer, and you have a highly readable and fascinating book that often has the intrigue of a great novel without all the fiction.
The author takes a massive subject--one that would be daunting to some of the rest of us--and distills it into essentially the story of four men--Lincoln, Henry Raymond, New York Times; Horace Greeley, New York Tribune; and, James Gordon Bennett, New York Herald. This is the story of how these men worked together and sometimes tugged at one another from different directions.
I thoroughly enjoyed this account of journalism, the presidency, and the nation in crisis. Lincoln constantly dealt with the reality of confederate spies and the use of confederate or opposition papers to publish information useful to Lincoln's enemies. Lincoln and his war department were in no way afraid to close newspapers when it became clear that the data being published was undermining Union efforts toward victory. According to Holzer, some 200 papers were temporarily or permanently closed in one year of the civil war. One of those whose work was watched and ultimately closed was the grandson of Francis Scott Key, the writer of the poem that has since become the national anthem of the United States. Ironically enough, Key's grandson was imprisoned inside Fort McHenry, the very fort whose flag had inspired his grandfather to pen the immortal words of the anthem.
If you're looking for a book that creates stick figure characters of Lincoln and the giants of New York journalism, this isn't your book. Holzer does an excellent job of bringing all of these characters to life without making Lincoln some kind of villain for closing the papers and the journalists some kind of heroes for nobly pressing forward despite the heavy-handed opposition of government info gatekeepers. Rather than focusing on the newspaper closures, this book looks at the turbulent tuggings among men who were larger than life and who had agendas often radically different from one another.
Although Holzer is a Lincoln scholar, this is not by any measure a book that is dry and dull. It is written for anyone with an interest in Lincoln and American journalism in general. Iwas neither bored nor confused by this book. I thoroughly enjoyed it even though I read it with synthetic speech as opposed to the audio recorded copy. I first heard of the book on the Civil War Talk Radio podcast. While it is long, (more than 700 pages), it is ever so worth your time.
The author takes a massive subject--one that would be daunting to some of the rest of us--and distills it into essentially the story of four men--Lincoln, Henry Raymond, New York Times; Horace Greeley, New York Tribune; and, James Gordon Bennett, New York Herald. This is the story of how these men worked together and sometimes tugged at one another from different directions.
I thoroughly enjoyed this account of journalism, the presidency, and the nation in crisis. Lincoln constantly dealt with the reality of confederate spies and the use of confederate or opposition papers to publish information useful to Lincoln's enemies. Lincoln and his war department were in no way afraid to close newspapers when it became clear that the data being published was undermining Union efforts toward victory. According to Holzer, some 200 papers were temporarily or permanently closed in one year of the civil war. One of those whose work was watched and ultimately closed was the grandson of Francis Scott Key, the writer of the poem that has since become the national anthem of the United States. Ironically enough, Key's grandson was imprisoned inside Fort McHenry, the very fort whose flag had inspired his grandfather to pen the immortal words of the anthem.
If you're looking for a book that creates stick figure characters of Lincoln and the giants of New York journalism, this isn't your book. Holzer does an excellent job of bringing all of these characters to life without making Lincoln some kind of villain for closing the papers and the journalists some kind of heroes for nobly pressing forward despite the heavy-handed opposition of government info gatekeepers. Rather than focusing on the newspaper closures, this book looks at the turbulent tuggings among men who were larger than life and who had agendas often radically different from one another.
Although Holzer is a Lincoln scholar, this is not by any measure a book that is dry and dull. It is written for anyone with an interest in Lincoln and American journalism in general. Iwas neither bored nor confused by this book. I thoroughly enjoyed it even though I read it with synthetic speech as opposed to the audio recorded copy. I first heard of the book on the Civil War Talk Radio podcast. While it is long, (more than 700 pages), it is ever so worth your time.
January 7, 2015
Harold Holzer shows why he is considered the leading Abraham Lincoln expert as he adds to his tremendous legacy of scholarship. The focus of this latest book is Lincoln's relationship with the press. It's important to know that the newspapers of the day were highly partisan and often closely aligned with a particular party or candidate. They were also fiercely antagonistic to each other and to the opposing party. If a politician didn't have a good relationship with the press, they had no compunction to viciously and directly attacking him, and in many cases, making things up.
The book is broken into two main parts. The first spends a lot of time tracking the three main editors of the influential New York press - Horace Greeley of the Tribune, Henry Raymond of the Times (both of whom supported Republicans), and the openly racist James Gordon Bennett of the Herald (who supported Democrats). While these three often are the main foils, Holzer has no shortage of other key papers and editors to add to the mix. In this first, pre-war, part, Lincoln usually is trying hard to get the big eastern papers to notice him, then mostly an unknown lawyer and one-term congressman in "the west" (i.e., Illinois).
The second part focuses on the direct interactions between Lincoln and the press, again focusing on the three main editors but amply filled in with myriads of other newspaper accounts across the now-split nation. Holzer's adept story telling follows the action as each editor reports, and often makes, the news. Holzer brings to life key incidents in which Lincoln used the press to his advantage, for example, to prepare the nation for the Emancipation Proclamation in a famous letter to Horace Greeley, as well as many lesser known examples.
For a long book - 565 of text, with another 100 or more in extensive notes - it moves along crisply, at least for people with some degree of knowledge about Lincoln and the times. I suspect some readers may find it a bit too long, but that would short-change the wonderful value this book provides. Harold Holzer's book is as powerful as the press were during the Civil War. It's well worth the read.
The book is broken into two main parts. The first spends a lot of time tracking the three main editors of the influential New York press - Horace Greeley of the Tribune, Henry Raymond of the Times (both of whom supported Republicans), and the openly racist James Gordon Bennett of the Herald (who supported Democrats). While these three often are the main foils, Holzer has no shortage of other key papers and editors to add to the mix. In this first, pre-war, part, Lincoln usually is trying hard to get the big eastern papers to notice him, then mostly an unknown lawyer and one-term congressman in "the west" (i.e., Illinois).
The second part focuses on the direct interactions between Lincoln and the press, again focusing on the three main editors but amply filled in with myriads of other newspaper accounts across the now-split nation. Holzer's adept story telling follows the action as each editor reports, and often makes, the news. Holzer brings to life key incidents in which Lincoln used the press to his advantage, for example, to prepare the nation for the Emancipation Proclamation in a famous letter to Horace Greeley, as well as many lesser known examples.
For a long book - 565 of text, with another 100 or more in extensive notes - it moves along crisply, at least for people with some degree of knowledge about Lincoln and the times. I suspect some readers may find it a bit too long, but that would short-change the wonderful value this book provides. Harold Holzer's book is as powerful as the press were during the Civil War. It's well worth the read.
February 16, 2015
"Our government rests on public opinion. Whoever can change public opinion can change the government." Abraham Lincoln
An interesting book though a bit dry. It tells the story of not only Lincoln's political life in light of making and writing the news but also the story of the three most influential newsmen of his day. A few things it reveals about Lincoln that may be off the beaten path of common knowledge:
Lincoln owned a German language newspaper;
Lincoln wrote a great many newspaper articles. Usually under a pseudonym so no one would know it was him. We don't even know how many for sure he wrote since even as president he frequently hid his authorship.
Lincoln became close to his wife thru their mutual interest in writing political articles under fake names.
One of the duels he was challenged to and showed up to fight was based on him taking the blame for a scandalous article Mary wrote.
"The newspaper press, controls the state and the church; it directs the family, the legislator, the magistrate, and the minister. None rise above it's influence, none sink below its authority." An unnamed newspaper editor.
An interesting book though a bit dry. It tells the story of not only Lincoln's political life in light of making and writing the news but also the story of the three most influential newsmen of his day. A few things it reveals about Lincoln that may be off the beaten path of common knowledge:
Lincoln owned a German language newspaper;
Lincoln wrote a great many newspaper articles. Usually under a pseudonym so no one would know it was him. We don't even know how many for sure he wrote since even as president he frequently hid his authorship.
Lincoln became close to his wife thru their mutual interest in writing political articles under fake names.
One of the duels he was challenged to and showed up to fight was based on him taking the blame for a scandalous article Mary wrote.
"The newspaper press, controls the state and the church; it directs the family, the legislator, the magistrate, and the minister. None rise above it's influence, none sink below its authority." An unnamed newspaper editor.
June 4, 2016
I have read a lot of books about Abraham Lincoln and this is one of the better ones I have read recently. The size would be daunting to some people. It's over 700 pages, with a lot of bibliography (over 200 pages) but it is well written and able to keep the reader's attention. Harold Holzer is a great writer who definitely does his research and he is one of the foremost Lincoln authorities. Lincoln, despite being a great president, always had a public image problem and the opinion of the public about him was certainly enhanced by the press of the day. I wonder if, with today's fast-paced, 24 hour news cycle, if Lincoln could even get elected if he ran for president this year. This book is a testament to the dawn of journalism and the power the media wielded for over a century.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews