DOCSLIB.ORG

Report on Blacklisting: II. Radio-Television

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

$1.25 reporton BLACKLISTING II Radio -Television JOHN COGLEY THE FUND FOR THE REPUBLIC, INC. report on BLACKLISTING II Radio - Television JOHN COGLEY THE FUND FOR THE REPUBLIC, INC. Copyright 1956 by The Fund for the Republic, Inc. CONTENTS Acknowledgment v Foreword vii Counterattack and Red Channels 1 The First Cases 22 Blacklisting: An Institution 49 Newsmen and Commentators 7 1 "Clearance" 89 The Syracuse Crusade 1 00 "Take Their Word" 110 Security on Madison Avenue 115 "Clearance" at CBS 122 Aware, Inc. 129 The Theatrical Unions 1 43 Some Interviews 163 Blacklisting Experiences 173 Industry Viewpoints 192 Blacklisting and Broadway 210 Appendix 218 Anti-Communism and Employment Policies in Radio and Television 221 by MARIE JAHODA Research Center for Human Relations New York University Index 282 iii Acknowledgmento THIS REPORT is based on the findings of a staff of researchers and reporters Edward Engberg, Harriet Davis, Gwendolyn Boulkind, Saul Blackman, Margaret Bushong and William Pfaff. The study conducted by Dr. Marie Jahoda of the Research Cen- ter for Human Relations, New York University, was wholly independent. I am indebted to the Fund for the Republic, which sponsored the study, and to all who supplied the material on which the report is based. This latter group includes not only the research staff but some two hundred persons in the radio-television industry who gave are freely of their time for lengthy interviews. Special thanks due to my assistant Michael Harrington, who gave invaluable help in organizing the mass of material collected, and to James Greene, the project secretary. The conclusions found in these pages are mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect the judgments of any other person. JOHN COGLEY Foreword MOST AMERICANS ARE CONVINCED that loyalty-security investiga- tions of people working for the government in sensitive positions or seeking key federal jobs are necessary to protect the government from the infiltration of persons who might try to destroy it. But when loyalty tests are applied by private groups to people in private industries and people are barred from jobs because they are "controversial" many citizens become alarmed. The present report (with its companion volume dealing with the motion picture industry) embodies the results of a study initiated by The Fund for the Republic in September, 1954, when many Americans had become disturbed by the revelation of blacklisting industries. practices in the radio, television, and motion picture At the time this study was launched, such blacklisting was a subject of vigorous public controversy, involving civil liberties issues of a serious kind. It raised questions of freedom of thought of the individual and speech, of due process, of the protection the against group pressures and of the community against disloyalty of the individual. It was a controversy in which all participants and civil commonly spoke in the name of the Constitution liberty, but in violently conflicting terms. Those who advocated blacklisting practices did so on the ground that Communist and pro-Communist infiltration into the entertain- to the American ment industries represented a serious peril system of law and governance, and therefore to the freedoms which it Communists enshrines. The peril might be direct, through giving vii access to mass media into which they could introduce subversive propaganda, or which they might even sabotage given the proper circumstances. It might be only indirect, permitting Communist sympathizers to enjoy popular esteem, earning incomes which would help support Communist causes, operating their own black- lists against anti-Communists and promoting the interests of an international conspiracy directed toward the destruction of all liberties. In any case, it was contended, the extirpation from the entertainment industries of proven members of the Communist conspiracy and of all who were considered to have lent it their support or had been indifferent to its dangers (and remained im- to institutions. penitent) was essential as a protection American could Opponents of blacklisting contended that such a policy it to held only subvert the rights and liberties sought protect. Some that it violated the Constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech the and thought, since it destroyed an individual's livelihood on beliefs. This raised the issue whether sole ground of his political a sympathy with Communism could properly be regarded as a as of in a "political belief" or must be taken proof complicity could criminal conspiracy, even though no criminal charge be that a con- brought. Beyond that, many who accepted the view vinced Communist should be barred from the cameras and micro- phones were disturbed by the methods being used to achieve this result. It was contended that blacklisting resulted in the ruin of without formal or many entirely loyal individuals charges, hearings or mistaken other safeguards of due process, often on flimsy charges and at the dictates of self-appointed censors or pressure groups. Several things were apparent in this controversy. The major facts which the arguments simply did not meet. The around argu- In these of ments raged were largely unknown. issues, plainly critical importance to all those interested in the preservation of to at valid conclu- civil liberty, the information necessary arriving It not even clear whether a sions was largely unavailable. was vm existed in blacklisting system actually the motion picture, radio and industries. If it it not TV existed, was known on what principles it worked, who controlled it, how accurate were the criteria it applied in screening Communists and pro-Communists out of the industries, what were the motives which might have contributed to its growth. Beyond the somewhat rough-and-ready disclosures of the various investigating committees, there was little useful data on the nature and extent of Communist influence in the industries; on the effect, if any, which it had exerted on the output; on the extent to which the Communists themselves had engaged in black- listing practices, or on numerous other facts essential to formu- lating any answers for the issues of civil liberties here involved. The subject was being debated, in short, in a vacuum. The Fund for the Republic was established as an educational undertaking in the field of civil liberties in the United States. It seemed to its Directors that here were problems of immediate con- cern and that the Fund could render a useful service toward their solution by ascertaining the facts involved. It asked John Cogley, then Executive Editor of The Commonweal, to study and report upon the situation as a whole. This he has done. Mr. Cogley and his associates have interviewed so far as they found it possible to do so every important interest concerned. These include ex- ecutives of the motion picture industry and the radio and TV chains, the advertising agencies, leading advertisers, the theatrical unions, leaders of anti-Communist organizations and others promi- nent in "listing" or "clearing" individuals, and many producers, directors, actors, writers, reporters, news commentators and agency men. From the first it was recognized that this was a highly complex question, and Mr. Cogley and his associates have been scrupulous a in trying to present all significant points of view. He was given free hand in the organization of the study and presentation of the its director facts. While he accepts responsibility for this report as ix and author, the Board of The Fund for the Republic wishes to state its full confidence in the calm deliberation which he has given to its preparation. We believe he has done a thorough job in a very difficult field. It was recognized that many in the industries are aware of the difficulties raised by blacklisting and have been wrestling earnestly with them. Mr. Cogley has tried to give a detailed picture of a situation as it exists. He has brought in no indictments, and has offered no recommendations. The Board of the Fund for the Republic offers none, believing that progress in resolving the con- flicts of interest, viewpoint, and principle involved must and will come hi the first instance from the industries affected. But even this progress must ultimately turn upon public knowledge and understanding of the actual situation and its problems. This report seeks only to supply the data on which such knowledge and under- standing may be established. FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, THE FUND FOR THE REPUBLIC: By Paul G. Hoffman, Chairman v_ Counterattack and Red Channels COUNTERATTACK is a weekly, four-page newsletter published by the American Business Consultants in New York. It was founded in 1 947 as Counterattack, the Newsletter of Facts on Communism. Subscribers to Counterattack ($24 yearly) are entitled to the Special Reports which the newsletter publishes irregularly. The most famous of these reports was made available to the public at one dollar a copy and bore the name Red Channels, The Report of Communist Influence in Radio and Television. Red Channels provided a list of 151 persons in the radio-tele- vision industry who, the editors claimed, were linked, either hi the past or present, with a variety of "Communist causes." The "links" were cited in each case. They included organizations identified as subversive by the Attorney General, the House Committee on Un- American Activities, the California Un-American Activities Com- mittee and other official and private sources. Among the private sources were the authors of Red Channels themselves. At the beginning of the volume there is a disclaimer pointing out that the listed activities or associations may well have been innocent of subversive intent; Red Channels is only reporting them. to This statement made it virtually impossible for the listed people of the obtain legal satisfaction for damages suffered as a result sources has been suc- listing.
Recommended publications
  • ABSTRACT Title of Document: from the BELLY of the HUAC: the RED PROBES of HOLLYWOOD, 1947-1952 Jack D. Meeks, Doctor of Philos

    ABSTRACT Title of Document: from the BELLY of the HUAC: the RED PROBES of HOLLYWOOD, 1947-1952 Jack D. Meeks, Doctor of Philos

    ABSTRACT Title of Document: FROM THE BELLY OF THE HUAC: THE RED PROBES OF HOLLYWOOD, 1947-1952 Jack D. Meeks, Doctor of Philosophy, 2009 Directed By: Dr. Maurine Beasley, Journalism The House Un-American Activities Committee, popularly known as the HUAC, conducted two investigations of the movie industry, in 1947 and again in 1951-1952. The goal was to determine the extent of communist infiltration in Hollywood and whether communist propaganda had made it into American movies. The spotlight that the HUAC shone on Tinsel Town led to the blacklisting of approximately 300 Hollywood professionals. This, along with the HUAC’s insistence that witnesses testifying under oath identify others that they knew to be communists, contributed to the Committee’s notoriety. Until now, historians have concentrated on offering accounts of the HUAC’s practice of naming names, its scrutiny of movies for propaganda, and its intervention in Hollywood union disputes. The HUAC’s sealed files were first opened to scholars in 2001. This study is the first to draw extensively on these newly available documents in an effort to reevaluate the HUAC’s Hollywood probes. This study assesses four areas in which the new evidence indicates significant, fresh findings. First, a detailed analysis of the Committee’s investigatory methods reveals that most of the HUAC’s information came from a careful, on-going analysis of the communist press, rather than techniques such as surveillance, wiretaps and other cloak and dagger activities. Second, the evidence shows the crucial role played by two brothers, both German communists living as refugees in America during World War II, in motivating the Committee to launch its first Hollywood probe.
  • William F. Buckley Jr., National Review E a Crítica Conservadora Ao Liberalismo E Os Direitos Civis Nos Eua, 1955-1968

    William F. Buckley Jr., National Review E a Crítica Conservadora Ao Liberalismo E Os Direitos Civis Nos Eua, 1955-1968

    UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL FLUMINENSE CENTRO DE ESTUDOS GERAIS INSTITUTO DE CIÊNCIAS HUMANAS E FILOSOFIA PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM HISTÓRIA RODRIGO FARIAS DE SOUSA WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY JR., NATIONAL REVIEW E A CRÍTICA CONSERVADORA AO LIBERALISMO E OS DIREITOS CIVIS NOS EUA, 1955-1968. NITERÓI 2013 RODRIGO FARIAS DE SOUSA WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY JR., NATIONAL REVIEW E A CRÍTICA CONSERVADORA AO LIBERALISMO E OS DIREITOS CIVIS NOS EUA, 1955-1968. Tese apresentada ao curso de Pós-Graduação em História Social da Universidade Federal Fluminense, como requisito parcial para o exame de qualificação para o obtenção do Grau de Doutor. Área de concentração: Poder e Sociedade. Orientador: Prof.ª Dra. CECÍLIA AZEVEDO Niterói 2013 Ficha Catalográfica elaborada pela Biblioteca Central do Gragoatá S725 SOUSA, RODRIGO FARIAS DE. William F. Buckley Jr., National Review e a crítica conservadora ao liberalismo e os direitos civis nos EUA, 1955-1968 / Rodrigo Farias de Sousa. – 2013. 371 f. Orientador: Cecília da Silva Azevedo. Tese (Doutorado em História Social) – Universidade Federal Fluminense, Instituto de Ciências Humanas e Filosofia, Departamento de História, 2013. Bibliografia: f. 343-371. 1. Conservadorismo. 2. Estados Unidos. 3. Ideologia. 4. Direita (Ciência Política). 5. Liberalismo. 6. National Review (Periódico). 7. Guerra Fria. 8. Raça. 9. Direito Civil. I. Azevedo, Cecília da Silva. II. Universidade Federal RODRIGO FARIAS DE SOUSA WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY JR., NATIONAL REVIEW E A CRÍTICA CONSERVADORA AO LIBERALISMO E OS DIREITOS CIVIS NOS EUA, 1955-1968 Tese apresentada ao curso de Pós-Graduação em História da Universidade Federal Fluminense, como requisito parcial para obtenção do título de Doutor. Área de concentração: História social.
  • The Roots of the Protest Era: Mccarthyism and the Artist's Voice in 1950S America

    The Roots of the Protest Era: Mccarthyism and the Artist's Voice in 1950S America

    THE ROOTS OF THE PROTEST ERA: MCCARTHYISM AND THE ARTIST’S VOICE IN 1950S AMERICA OVERVIEW ESSENTIAL QUESTION How were musicians and artists affected by McCarthyism in 1950s America? OVERVIEW The so-called “Protest Era” in the United States is largely associated with the Civil Rights movement and anti-war demonstrations of the 1960s. But the roots of the protest era, and even some of the songs associated with it, came out of the late 1940s, during the early years of the Cold War. By the end of World War II in 1945, America’s diplomatic relationship with the Soviet Union, once its wartime ally, had grown strained. During the late 1940s, the Soviets expanded their influence across Eastern Europe and built up a stockpile of nuclear weapons—technology that had previously been in the exclusive possession of the U.S. military. Many people in the United States came to view the Soviets, and the Communist Party that controlled the Soviet Union, as a threat to America’s newfound economic prosperity and position as world leader. In that tension between Soviet and American powers, the Cold War was born—and with it, the U.S. entered into an era in which the flipside of an unprecedented economic boom and rise in world power was the “Red Scare,” a widespread fear and suspicion of Soviets and their ideas, which many viewed as a potential threat to American life. At the center of the Red Scare was Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, a Republican from Wisconsin, who by 1950 had become the face of a national campaign to identify communists in American society.
  • CBS, Rural Sitcoms, and the Image of the South, 1957-1971 Sara K

    CBS, Rural Sitcoms, and the Image of the South, 1957-1971 Sara K

    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2013 Rube tube : CBS, rural sitcoms, and the image of the south, 1957-1971 Sara K. Eskridge Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Eskridge, Sara K., "Rube tube : CBS, rural sitcoms, and the image of the south, 1957-1971" (2013). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 3154. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/3154 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. RUBE TUBE: CBS, RURAL SITCOMS, AND THE IMAGE OF THE SOUTH, 1957-1971 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of History by Sara K. Eskridge B.A., Mary Washington College, 2003 M.A., Virginia Commonwealth University, 2006 May 2013 Acknowledgements Many thanks to all of those who helped me envision, research, and complete this project. First of all, a thank you to the Middleton Library at Louisiana State University, where I found most of the secondary source materials for this dissertation, as well as some of the primary sources. I especially thank Joseph Nicholson, the LSU history subject librarian, who helped me with a number of specific inquiries.
  • The Liberal Mind by William F

    The Liberal Mind by William F

    The Liberal Mind By William F. Buckley, Jr . William F. Buckley, Jr ., author of God and Man at Yale, co-authored with L. Brent Bozell the widely-discussed book McCarthy and His Enemies. Buckley, a 1950 Yale graduate, is a lecturer and regular panelist on Fact s Forums ANSWERS FOR AMERICANS . Buckley has projected a new maga- zine, National Weekly, which, according to Newsweek, is slated to begin publication in September. N recent years, a number of importan t nists, and they, quite evidently, do no t I books and articles have been written, understand the Communists . I believe and important things thought and sai d that our most immediate challenge is to understand our leaders ; and having about the Communist. What is he like ? stream of contemporary political and What goes on in his mind? What is he understood them we must either dis- possess them of power, or make them philosophical thought. the swollen an d afraid of? How can we move him? How irrepressible stream fed for so man y does he operate? What is he likely to d o understand, or prepare to die. For our n leaders, call them what you will—socia l years by the waters of rationalism, posi- in this situation, or that one? How ca tivism, Marxism, and utopianism . we vanquish him here, contain him democrats, Fabians, progressive moder- there, coexist with him over there? W e ates ; I call them Liberals, and I spel l As regards contemporary American haven't mastered the Communist tem- that word with a capital "L"—are the controversies, the Liberal is likely to feel perament, or the Communist mind, true ; unknown in the great equation .
  • Doherty, Thomas, Cold War, Cool Medium: Television, Mccarthyism

    Doherty, Thomas, Cold War, Cool Medium: Television, Mccarthyism

    doherty_FM 8/21/03 3:20 PM Page i COLD WAR, COOL MEDIUM TELEVISION, McCARTHYISM, AND AMERICAN CULTURE doherty_FM 8/21/03 3:20 PM Page ii Film and Culture A series of Columbia University Press Edited by John Belton What Made Pistachio Nuts? Early Sound Comedy and the Vaudeville Aesthetic Henry Jenkins Showstoppers: Busby Berkeley and the Tradition of Spectacle Martin Rubin Projections of War: Hollywood, American Culture, and World War II Thomas Doherty Laughing Screaming: Modern Hollywood Horror and Comedy William Paul Laughing Hysterically: American Screen Comedy of the 1950s Ed Sikov Primitive Passions: Visuality, Sexuality, Ethnography, and Contemporary Chinese Cinema Rey Chow The Cinema of Max Ophuls: Magisterial Vision and the Figure of Woman Susan M. White Black Women as Cultural Readers Jacqueline Bobo Picturing Japaneseness: Monumental Style, National Identity, Japanese Film Darrell William Davis Attack of the Leading Ladies: Gender, Sexuality, and Spectatorship in Classic Horror Cinema Rhona J. Berenstein This Mad Masquerade: Stardom and Masculinity in the Jazz Age Gaylyn Studlar Sexual Politics and Narrative Film: Hollywood and Beyond Robin Wood The Sounds of Commerce: Marketing Popular Film Music Jeff Smith Orson Welles, Shakespeare, and Popular Culture Michael Anderegg Pre-Code Hollywood: Sex, Immorality, and Insurrection in American Cinema, ‒ Thomas Doherty Sound Technology and the American Cinema: Perception, Representation, Modernity James Lastra Melodrama and Modernity: Early Sensational Cinema and Its Contexts Ben Singer
  • What Americans Thought of Joseph Stalin Before and After World War II

    What Americans Thought of Joseph Stalin Before and After World War II

    A Thesis entitled “Uncle Joe”: What Americans Thought of Joseph Stalin Before and After World War II by Kimberly Hupp A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of The Masters of Liberal Studies ______________________________ Advisor: Dr. Michael Jakobson ______________________________ College of Graduate Studies University of Toledo May 2009 1 2 An Abstract of “Uncle Joe”: What Americans Thought of Joseph Stalin Before and After World War II by Kimberly Hupp A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of The Master of Liberal Studies University of Toledo May 2009 A thesis presented on the American public opinion of Josef Stalin before and after World War II beginning with how Russia and Stalin was portrayed in the media before the war began, covering how opinions shifted with major events such as the famine, collectivization, the Great Terror, wartime conferences, the Cold War and McCarthyism. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................ii Table of Contents................................................................................................iii Acknowledgements .............................................................................................v List of Figures……………………………………………………………….vii List of Abbreviations……………………………………………………… .viii Introduction.........................................................................................................
  • Discussion Guide (By Hyperion)

    Discussion Guide (By Hyperion)

    DISCUSSION GUIDE Disney • HYPERION BOOKS C50% B About the Book It is the summer of 1953—and the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union is heating up. Americans Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, arrested for passing top-secret nuclear weapons technology to the Russians, are convicted of treason and executed on June 19 at New York’s Sing Sing prison. A few months later, the Soviets detonate their first hydrogen bomb. U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy, the House Un-American Activities Committee, and the FBI lead a wide-ranging hunt for spies, subversives, and communist sympathizers in the government, the entertainment industry, and other institutions. In this tense environment, even reading certain books can be considered a subversive activity and cast doubt on one’s loyalty to the United States. Yet another problem for bookish fourteen-year-old Richard Bradley, whose best friend Jimmy has ditched him for a cooler crowd while the girl he’s loved forever barely acknowledges his existence. Making things worse, Richard’s dad—one of Hoover’s G-men involved in tracking down spies and subversives—is acting strange: whenever he’s questioned about his work for the FBI, he really loses his temper. Things begin to look up when a new family moves into Richard’s neighborhood in Washington, DC. Vladimir White is the same age as Richard, and the two bond quickly over a shared love of books and music. Vlad’s father is a diplomat in the State Department, and his family’s international experiences and avant-garde ideas about art, literature, and music are attractive and exciting to Richard.
  • Alfred M. Lilienthal Papers

    Alfred M. Lilienthal Papers

    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf9k40070k No online items Register of the Alfred M. Lilienthal papers Finding aid prepared by Linda Bernard Hoover Institution Archives 434 Galvez Mall Stanford University Stanford, CA, 94305-6010 (650) 723-3563 [email protected] © 1998 Register of the Alfred M. 82070 1 Lilienthal papers Title: Alfred M. Lilienthal papers Date (inclusive): 1936-1999 Collection Number: 82070 Contributing Institution: Hoover Institution Archives Language of Material: English and Arabic Physical Description: 260 manuscript boxes, 2 cubic foot boxes, 9 oversize boxes, 1 card file box, 189 envelopes, 2 motion picture film reels(129.2 linear feet) Abstract: Speeches and writings, correspondence, notes, memoranda, press releases, serial issues, conference papers, interviews, studies, clippings, other printed matter, photographs, motion picture film, and sound recordings relating to the Middle East, Arab-Israeli relations, and American foreign policy in the region. Also available on microfilm (157 reels). Physical Location: Hoover Institution Archives Creator: Lilienthal, Alfred M. Access Collection is open for research. Use copies of some sound recordings and motion picture film in this collection are available for immediate access. To listen to other sound recordings or to view videos during your visit, please contact the Archives at least two working days before your arrival. We will then advise you of the accessibility of the material you wish to see or hear. Please note that not all audiovisual material is immediately accessible. Publication Rights For copyright status, please contact the Hoover Institution Archives. Preferred Citation [Identification of item], Alfred M. Lilienthal papers, [Box no.], Hoover Institution Archives. Acquisition Information Acquired by the Hoover Institution Archives in 1982.
  • Platt on Hendershot, 'What's Fair on the Air? Cold War Right-Wing Broadcasting and the Public Interest'

    Platt on Hendershot, 'What's Fair on the Air? Cold War Right-Wing Broadcasting and the Public Interest'

    JHistory Platt on Hendershot, 'What's Fair on the Air? Cold War Right-Wing Broadcasting and the Public Interest' Review published on Thursday, December 13, 2012 Heather Hendershot. What's Fair on the Air? Cold War Right-Wing Broadcasting and the Public Interest. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011. 272 pp. $27.50 (paper), ISBN 978-0-226-32678-8; $91.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-226-32677-1. Reviewed by Daniel Platt (Brown University)Published on Jhistory (December, 2012) Commissioned by Heidi Tworek “I’m not just an entertainer,” the songwriter-turned-television-demagogue Lonesome Rhodes crowed in the 1957 film A Face in the Crowd: “I’m an influence, a wielder of opinion, a force--a force!” Alas, Rhodes’s celebrity proves transient and his grand ambitions a touch too grand, and this begs a question: what status is due to history’s underachieved zealots? In What’s Fair on the Air? Heather Hendershot examines the careers of four such mid-century figures whose extremist conservative harangues on radio and television anticipated the New Right that would rise after their own stars had faded. Seeking to shed light on the relationship between media and political change, Hendershot, a professor in the Department of Media Studies at Queens College, argues that these broadcasters--H. L. Hunt, Dan Smoot, Carl McIntire, and Billy James Hargis--not only tilled “the ground ... for the eventual triumph of [Ronald] Reagan” but also “were the embarrassing nuts who had to be left behind for a more legitimate and effective conservative movement to emerge” (pp.
  • «Jf HALE's Mccarthy Stand Unaltered

    «Jf HALE's Mccarthy Stand Unaltered

    WSONESDAY, BECEMBEB I; . ATtraft Dtiljr Nti Pm h w m U'-b h m lianrlfrBter ^Sttraitts 'm r n m r t m H anchuU r^A City of FUJage Chahn ^ - -- ---------- " «jf HALE'S VOL. LXXin. NO. M A4«urM4af o« tags M) M A h p iE 8n !il. CONN.. THURSDAY. DRCEMBER 3,1958 (EIGHTBCN PAGES). PRICK PIVB CENTS '30Pro-R^d Ungchediiled Stop H oldbacks McCarthy Stand Unaltered Rejec t UN Panmunjom, Dec. 8 ifPy— k second group of 80 South Koreans today unanimouily. ute chose life under the Commu* niste, giving .'Allied perauad* era a total blank for two days of effprts to woo home balky Telb of Being Buried Alive war prisoners. Senate Unit|i There was no violence, but many Denies Ike prieonera were mors talkative than tha so who yesterday llstoMd pas* atvely to 'KOiC axplalnara, than T o R esum e choee CommunUm. Challenged Tha D.N. Command said SO more South Koreans of S28 who refused 'repatriation will be interviewed to* Spy P r o b e A s L e a d e r morrow starting at t a. ra. (7 p. m. E8T Thursdayi. Washington, Doc. 3 (/P)— Waahington, Dec. 3-(/P )^ Others SUII Walt Thera was no Indication when The Senate Internal Security Sen. McCarthy (R*Wis) stuck S3 Americans and 1 Briton who aubcomqiittee decided today to hie guns today in hie die* stayed with the Communiata wUl to go ahead with public hear­ agreement with the admin- be called. ings in Waahington after ac­ stration on foreign policy, Allied officers expreiaed the doM get you placet with \ / opinion that Communist leaders in cepting the Canadian gov­ )ut aaid any contention that the FOW compound probably had ernment’s terms for a secret ie ia challenging Preaident sent'their most thoroughly 'indoc* interview with Igor Gouzen­ Eiaenhower’s GOP leadership trinated fellow prisonera to the ko in Canada.
  • The Roots of Post-Racial Neoliberalism in Blacklist Era Hollywood

    The Roots of Post-Racial Neoliberalism in Blacklist Era Hollywood

    The Roots of Post-Racial Neoliberalism in Blacklist Era Hollywood A Dissertation SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Andrew Paul IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Lary May, Tracey Deutsch March 2014 © Andrew Paul 2014 Acknowledgements Writing this dissertation would not have been possible without the support of countless others. First, I acknowledge the generosity of my dissertation committee. My advisors, Lary May and Tracey Deutsch offered enthusiastic guidance, criticism, and support. Lary’s own contributions to the historiography of the blacklist were second in value only to his personal attention to my work, and his questions yielded important research leads. Tracey helped me to think across sub-fields and pushed me to improve my writing. Both of them encouraged me to take intellectual risks and to make bold claims and interventions. Elaine Tyler May, Riv-Ellen Prell, and Malinda Lindquist all shaped my development as a scholar as well. With thoughtful and critical attention to my writing, they challenged me to clarify my ideas and helped me to see how my work was entering different conversations, and how it might stand to enter others. It was a privilege to be able to discuss my ideas with this committee. I was awarded generous financial sums from the University of Minnesota’s Harold Leonard Memorial Film Studies Fellowship and the University of Minnesota Foundation, which allowed me travel to archives in California, Wisconsin, and New York. In these locales, at the Charles Young Research Library at the University of California Los Angeles, the Margaret Herrick Library and the Paley Center for Media, both located in Beverly Hills, the Wisconsin State Historical Society in Madison, and at the Center for Jewish History in New York City, numerous archivists assisted me in my work., and for this I owe them my gratitude.