yeah I read that article too, it was the first paragraph that was the best though, imo
I'm reading accounts of men thorughout history who are either seen as guilty/innocent with strong public opinion on either side, but with very few "middleground" stances.
Rubin Carter and OJ were the first, now I'm looking at the Ismay story.
The press were against him, so he was always going to be portrayed in a negative light.J. Bruce Ismay at the time of the disaster, as chairman and managing director of the White Star Line, was held to blame for the loss of the Titanic by the American press; especially those controlled by William Randolph Hearst, a newspaper magnate and one of the richest and most powerful men in America. Ismay had met Hearst years before, when he was White Star's agent in New York. The two men disliked each other intensely and Ismay's refusal to cooperate with the press infuriated the newspaperman storing up problems for the future. Almost twenty years after their first meeting it was the Hearst syndicated press who prosecuted a vicious campaign against him, a full-page cartoon depicting Ismay in a lifeboat watching the sinking Titanic and captioned, "This is J. Brute Ismay" and "We respectfully suggest that the emblem of the White Star be changed to that of a yellow liver."
I'm reading accounts of men thorughout history who are either seen as guilty/innocent with strong public opinion on either side, but with very few "middleground" stances.
Rubin Carter and OJ were the first, now I'm looking at the Ismay story.
