“Well-Bred and Well-Fed,” the Science Service Covers Eugenics: 1924 to 1966

Abstract

Founded in 1921 by then-retired newspaper publisher, E.W. Scripps, Science Service was established as an agency for the popularization of science. The original intent of Science Service was to publish its content in newspapers and popular science periodicals. Eventually, however, the organization produced its own popular publications, including the Science News-Letter (News-Letter). Stories written by Science Service writers and occasional contributors appeared in the News-Letter and were often re-published in the mainstream press. In spite of its high aspirations, Science Service became a promoter of eugenics, likely because E.W. Scripps himself believed in the protoscience. From the early-to-mid 1920s until 1966, the News-Letter published articles endorsing the principles, values, and doctrines of eugenics. The goal of this case study is to explore the previously unexamined role Science Service played in propagandizing (or at least promoting) eugenics’ unscientific, nativist ideas about heredity in Science Service publications and in the popular press.

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1 E. W. Scripps, “An Unutopian Utopia,” (1919): 3–4, E.W. Scripps Papers, Mahn Center for Archives & Special Collections (henceforth MCASC), Ohio University Libraries (henceforth OUL). https://media.library.ohio.edu/digital/collection/scripps/id/5743/rec/3.

2 Andre Porwancher, “Objectivity’s Prophet: Adolph S. Ochs and the New York Times,” Journalism History 36, no. 4 (2011): 187; Stephen A. Banning, “The Professionalization of Journalism: A Nineteenth-Century Beginning,” Journalism History 24, no. 4 (1998): 157–63; American Society of Newspaper Editors, “Code of Ethics or Canons of Journalism,” 1922; Ronald R. Rodgers, “‘Journalism is a Loose-jointed Thing’: A Content Analysis of Editor & Publisher’s Discussion of Journalistic Conduct Prior to the Canons of Journalism, 1901–1922,” Journal of Mass Media Ethics 22, no. 1 (2007): 66–82.

3 In How Superstition Won and Science Lost: Popularizing Science and Health in the United States (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1987), 31–40, John C. Burnham describes the history of science popularization and science popularizers in America.

4 H. G. Wells, “Popularizing Science,” Science 50, no. 1291 (1894): 300; William A. Hamor and Lawrence W. Bass, “The Popularization of Science,” Science 70, no. 1826 (1929): 632–4; Watson Davis, “The Rise of Science Understanding,” Science 108, no. 2801 (1948): 240.

5 Ibid.

6 Wells, “Popularizing Science,” 300.

7 W. E. Allen, “Popular Science,” Science 55, no. 1426 (1922): 454.

8 Edwin E. Slosson, “A New Agency for the Popularization of Science,” Science 53, no. 1371 (1921): 321–3. In addition to the establishment of Science Service, there were other contemporaneous examples of journalists being hired by news organizations to write about science. For example, after graduating in 1897 from City College in New York where he majored in science, Waldemar Kaempffert wrote first for The Scientific American, then for Popular Science Monthly. In 1927, Kaempffert became science editor for the New York Times where he stayed for 26 years, with a 3-year interlude during which he worked for the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago, “Waldemar B. Kaempffert Dies: Science Editor of the Times, 79,” New York Times, November 28, 1956, 35.

9 Edward W. Scripps, “Disquisition by Scripps, E.W., American Society for the Dissemination of Science, March 5, 1919,” E.W. Scripps Papers, MCASC, OUL. https://cdm15808.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/search/searchterm/Disquisition%20E.W.%20Scripps%20Dissemination/order/nosort.

10 E. W. Scripps, “Suggestions As To The Work of the Science News Service Submitted by Edwin E. Slosson,” in History of the Scripps Concern, 308–19, E.W. Scripps Papers, MCASC, OUL. https://cdm15808.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/scripps/id/8668/rec/2; Slosson, “A New Agency,” 321–3; Davis, “The Rise of Science Understanding,” 241.

11 Science Service activities would eventually include leasing a wire service to deliver about eight hundred words per day to subscribing newspapers across the US, creating mail copy to be sent to subscribing newspapers, producing radio shows such as the “Adventures in Science” program which was aired by the Columbia Broadcasting System, publishing the Science News-Letter with its circulation of more than fifty thousand, creating science kits for the public, sponsoring fifteen thousand science clubs in secondary schools, organizing a Science Talent Search for the Westinghouse Science Scholarship programs, and publishing scientific books. Davis, “The Rise of Science Understanding,” 239–46.

12 Davis, “The Rise in Science Understanding,” 241; James C. Foust, “E.W. Scripps and the Science Service,” Journalism History 21, no. 2 (1995): 61.

13 Slosson, “A New Agency,” 321–3.

14 Ibid.

15 Susan E. Swanberg, “Psychological Armor: The Science News-Letter Warns Against Propaganda,” Journalism Studies 20, no. 13 (2019): 1–20; Susan E. Swanberg, “Wounded in Mind: Science Service Writer, Marjorie Van de Water, Explains World War II Military Neuropsychiatry to the American Public,” Media History 26, no. 4 (2020): 472–88.

During the Scopes trial, for example, Watson Davis (then the managing editor of Science Service) collaborated with the Scopes defense team while also writing and publishing articles about the trial for the News-Letter and the mainstream press. Watson Davis, “The Rocks and Hills of Dayton Restify (sic) for Evolution,” The Science News-Letter 6, no. 220 (1925): 2–3; “Barnyards, Fields, and Forests to Furnish Exhibits for Defense, Hills and Dales to Support Claim,” Birmingham News (Birmingham, Alabama), July 15, 1925, 1; Watson Davis, “Watson Davis Replies,” Chattanooga Daily Times (Chattanooga, Tennessee), July 15, 1925, 2; Kimbra Cutlip, “The Scopes Trial Redefined Science Journalism and Shaped It to What It Is Today,” Smithsonianmag.com, July 10, 2015, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/scopes-trial-redefined-science-journalism-shaped-it-what-it-is-today-180955881/.

16 For the purpose of this essay, advocacy journalism is defined as “journalism that advocates a cause or expresses a viewpoint.” Merriam-Webster.com; see also Caroline Fisher, “The Advocacy Continuum: Towards a Theory of Advocacy in Journalism,” Journalism 17, no. 6 (2016): 711–26. The definition of “propaganda” has evolved over the last century, but definitions applied herein were penned by Science Service writer, Emily C. Davis and staff journalist, Marjorie Van de Water, who wrote about propaganda for Science Service. Davis wrote, “Propaganda may be good. It may be bad. That depends on its use. Either way, it is an effort to get across information or ideas to people, in hope of influencing them.” Emily Davis, “To Swing Off to War,” Science News-Letter 36, no. 3 (1939): 42–43; Marjorie Van de Water described what she considered were the more sinister aspects of propaganda in her News-Letter article “Propaganda: An Insidious Assault Upon Intelligence,” Science News-Letter 34, no. 15 (1938): 23–235. Several of the most noteworthy hallmarks of propaganda per Van de Water were that it appeals to emotions rather than intelligence and often conceals its sources.

17 See notes 60–69 for circulation information and other evidence of the importance of Science Service in the science media landscape. Also see “Science and the Newspaper Press in the United States,” Nature, February 9, 1935, 240; “News Value of Science,” Nature, April 25, 1936, 697; “Popularization of Science,” Nature, April 3, 1937, 578–9; Faust, “E.W. Scripps and the Science Service,” 58–64.

18 Ralph Brave and Kathryn Sylva, “Exhibiting Eugenics: Response and Resistance to a Hidden History” The Public Historian 29, no. 3 (2007): 35–51.

19 Edwin Black, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race (Washington, DC Dialog Press, 2003); Teryn Bouche and Laura Rivard, “America’s Hidden History: The Eugenics Movement,” Scitable: A Collaborative Learning Space for Science, https://www.nature.com/scitable/forums/genetics-generation/america-s-hidden-history-the-eugenics-movement-123919444/. Paul A. Lombardo, Eugenics: Lessons From a History Hiding in Plain Sight (Sacramento, CA: Senate Publications, 2003), 3; Chloe S. Burke and Christopher J. Castaneda, “The Public and Private History of Eugenics: An Introduction,” The Public Historian 29, no. 3 (2007): 5–17.

20 Lombardo, Eugenics: Lessons From a History Hiding in Plain Sight.

21 Burke and Castaneda, “The Public and Private History of Eugenics,” 9.

22 Even Cynthia Barnett’s excellent history of Science Service, “Science Service and the Origins of Science Journalism, 1919–1950,” Dissertation, Iowa State University (2013) did not mention the term “eugenics.”

23 Daniel J. Kevles. In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995), vii.

24 Allen M. Spiegel, “A Brief History of Eugenics in America: Implications for Medicine in the 21st Century,” Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association 130 (2019): 216–34.

25 As this manuscript was being revised, new controversies emerged regarding the connections of early twentieth century reproductive rights activist, Margaret Sanger, and conservationist, John Muir, to eugenics. Samantha Schmidt, “Planned Parenthood to Remove Margaret Sanger’s Name from N.Y. Clinic Over Views on Eugenics,” Washington Post, July 21, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/07/21/margaret-sanger-planned-parenthood-eugenics/ (accessed on July 22, 2020); Michael Brune, “Pulling Down Our Monuments,” Sierraclub.org, July 22, 2020. https://www.sierraclub.org/michael-brune/2020/07/john-muir-early-history-sierra-club.

26 Bret Stephens, “The Secrets of Jewish Genius,” New York Times, December 27, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/27/opinion/jewish-culture-genius-iq.html.

27 Gregory Cochran, Jason Hardy, and Henry Harpending, “Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence,” Journal of Biosocial Science 38, no. 5 (2006): 659–93.

28 Matthew Iglesias, “The Controversy Over Bret Stephens’s Jewish Genius Column, Explained: Inquiries into Jewish Genes Always Seem to Lead Someplace Ugly,” Vox, December 30, 2019, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/12/30/21042733/bret-stephens-jewish-iq-new-york-times; Adam Shapiro, “The Dangerous Resurgence in Race Science,” American Scientist, January 29, 2020. https://www.americanscientist.org/blog/macroscope/the-dangerous-resurgence-in-race-science. See also Marc Tracy, “James Bennet Resigns as New York Times Opinion Editor,” New York Times, June 7, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/business/media/james-bennet-resigns-nytimes-op-ed.html.

29 “…[S]cientific racism is a scientific tradition in which biology is used not only to prove the existence of race, but also, to maintain existing social hierarchies.” Joel Z. Garrod, “A Brave Old World: An Analysis of Scientific Racism and BiDil,” McGill Journal of Medicine 9, no. 1 (2006): 54; Cochran et al., “Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence,” 685–8.

30 Pauline M. H. Mazumdar, “Essays in the History of Eugenics,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 74, no. 1 (2000): 180–3.

31 Francis Galton, “Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope, and Aims,” American Journal of Sociology 10, no. 1 (1904): 1–25, https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/211280. It is significant that Galton’s article was published in a sociology journal, as it had more to do with, what Galton called the “actuarial side of heredity”—counting and applying statistics to the complex human qualities that interested Galton—than to the science of heredity. Gregor Mendel’s work, which itself was an incomplete story of the complexities of heredity, was “rediscovered” in 1900.

32 Galton, “Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope, and Aims,” 3.

33 Ibid., 3–6.

34 Daniel Okrent, The Guarded Gate (New York: Scribner, 2019), 10–24.

35 Charles B. Davenport, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 6: The Trait Book (New York: Cold Spring Harbor, 1912); Charles B. Davenport, “Research in Eugenics,” Science 54, no. 1400 (1921). 391–7.

36 Edwin Black, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race (Washington, DC: Dialog Press, 2003), 16. Eugenics, which was based upon actuarial data rather than experimentation, was once considered science, but is now deemed pseudoscience. According to Finnish scholar and philosopher of science, Raimo Tuomela, science (as opposed to pseudoscience, protoscience, and non-science) is testable and falsifiable. “If science does not fulfill the requirement of testability,” wrote Tuomela, “it does not reproduce and develop but stiffens and turns into pseudoscience.” Raimo Tuomela, “Science, Protoscience and Pseudoscience,” in Rational Changes in Science: Essays on Scientific Reasoning, edited by J. C. Pitt and M. Pera (Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1987), 84.

37 For critiques of eugenics see Garland E. Allen, “Eugenics and Modern Biology: Critiques of Eugenics, 1910–1945,” Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations (2011), 5; Also see the appendices of Galton’s original eugenics article which contain critiques (both positive and negative) by individuals present at the unveiling of Galton’s theories – Galton, “Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope, and Aims,” 1–25. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/211280; Garland E. Allen, “The Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor, 1910–1940,” Osiris 2 (1986): 228–30; Steven A. Farber, “U.S. Scientists Role in the Eugenics Movement (1907–1939): A Contemporary Biologists’ Perspective,” Zebrafish 5, no. 4 (2008): 244; Okrent, The Guarded Gate, vi–vii, 123, 131–136; Davenport, “Research in Eugenics.”

38 Ran Abramitzky and Leah Boustan, “Immigration in American Economic History,” Journal of Economic Literature 54, no. 4 (2017): 1311–45; Charles Hirschman and Elizabeth Mogford, “Immigration and the American Industrial Revolution From 1880–1920,” Social Science Research 38, no. 4 (2009): 897–920.

39 Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race: or The Racial Basis of World History (New York: Scribner, 1916), 42–51.

40 Thomas C. Leonard, “Retrospectives: Eugenics and Economics in the Progressive Era,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 19, no. 4 (2005): 207.

41 Ibid., 208.

42 Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics, 54–5; Allen, “The Eugenics Record Office…,” 242–3; 234–6.

43 Oscar Riddle, “Biographical Memoir of Charles Benedict Davenport 1866-1944,” National Academy of the United States of American Biographical Memoirs Volume XXV Fourth Memoir (1947): 78, http://www.nasonline.org/publications/biographical-memoirs/memoir-pdfs/davenport-charles.pdf.

44 Randall D. Bird and Garland Allen, “The J.H.B. Archive Report: The Papers of Harry Hamilton Laughlin, Eugenicist,” Journal of the History of Biology 14, no. 2 (1981): 351; Laughlin, Harry, “Analysis of America's Modern Melting Pot.” Testimony of Harry H. Laughlin before the US House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Washington, DC, November 21, 1922, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015037355750&view=1up&seq=1.

45 The American Eugenics Society (AES), founded in 1922 by Henry E. Crampton, Irving Fisher, Madison Grant, Harry H. Laughlin, and Henry Fairfield Osborn, was one of the three most prominent national eugenics organizations in the United States and included most of the leading eugenicists in the US, Margaret Sanger Papers Project, http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/proposals/neh/DIRECTORY.htm; Oscar Riddle, “Biographical Memoir of Charles Benedict Davenport 1866–1944,” National Academy of the United States of American Biographical Memoirs Volume XXV Fourth Memoir (1947): 78, http://www.nasonline.org/publications/biographical-memoirs/memoir-pdfs/davenport-charles.pdf. See also Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995), 102–4.

46 Allen, “The Eugenics Record Office …,” 226, 250–4; Farber, “U.S. Scientists’ Role in the Eugenics Movement …,” Zebrafish, citing Carnegie Institution of Washington, Yearbook No. 38 (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1939).

47 “Background Note,” Eugenics Records Office Records, https://search.amphilsoc.org/collections/view?docId=ead/Mss.Ms.Coll.77-ead.xml.

48 Lisa Ko, “Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United States,” Independent Lens (2016). https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/unwanted-sterilization-and-eugenics-programs-in-the-united-states/. See also Randall Hansen and Desmond King, Sterilized by the State: Eugenics, Race, and the Population Scare in Twentieth-Century North America (Cambridge, UK: University Press, 2013).

49 Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927); https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/274us200.

50 Hunter Schwarz, “Following Reports of Forced Sterilization of Female Prison Inmates, California Passes Ban,” Washington Post, September 26, 2014. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/09/26/following-reports-of-forced-sterilization-of-female-prison-inmates-california-passes-ban/?noredirect=on. See also Corey G. Johnson, “Female Inmates Sterilized in California Prisons Without Approval,” Reveal: From The Center for Investigative Reporting, July 7, 2013. https://www.revealnews.org/article/female-inmates-sterilized-in-california-prisons-without-approval/.

51 Edwin Black, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race (Washington, DC: Dialog Press, 2003).

52 For a selection of representative articles about eugenics and eugenic-themed cartoons in the mainstream press, see: “New Society To discover Laws Governing Heredity,” The Inter Ocean (Chicago, Illinois), May 29, 1904, 9; “Lecture on Eugenics” Houston Post (Texas), June 5, 1904, 16; Watson Davis, “Science Today: Man’s Control Over Life Is Prime Science Impact,” Dunkirk Evening Observer (New York), May 2, 1938, 6.

“Eugenic Father at 80,” Harrisburg Telegraph (Harrisburg, PA), November 23, 1912, 2; “Up in Lynn, Mass…,” Reading Times (Reading, PA), July 31, 1913, 4; “Eugenic Marriage Failure,” Rutland Daily Herald (Rutland, VT), August 1, 1913, 6; Maurice Ketten, “The Eugenic Wife,” Evening World (New York), January 1, 1914, 22; Maurice Ketten, “The Eugenic Wife,” Daily Arkansas Gazette (Little Rock, AK), January 24, 1914, 6; Watson Davis, “Eugenicists Would ‘Certify’ Families Like Live-Stock,” Evening Sun (Baltimore), January 2, 1926, 1. A search of newspapers.com for the term “eugenics” located 167,209 articles between May 17, 1904, when an early article about Galton’s research appeared in the Times (London, England), and December 31, 1945, the year World War II ended.

53 “Disquisition: A Formal Inquiry into or Discussion of a Subject,” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disquisition; Edward W. Scripps, “Disquisition by Scripps, E.W.”

54 Edward W. Scripps, “Disquisition by Scripps, E.W.,” 4.

55 Ibid., 5.

56 Ibid.

57 Slosson, “A New Agency,” 321–3.

58 Ibid.

59 Davis, “The Rise of Science Understanding,” 245–6.

60 Marcel C. LaFollette, Science on the Air: Popularizers and Personalities on Radio and Early Television (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008), 61; Volumes 4–89 (1924–1966) of the Science News-Letter are available through JSTOR, but volumes 1–3 of the News-Letter are not widely available. Science Service archives contain only a few copies of the “Daily Science Bulletin” and a related publication, “Daily Mail Report.” Cynthia Denise Bennet, “Science Service and the Origins of Science Journalism, 1919–1950” (Dissertation, Iowa State University, 2013): 116, 129.

61 Science News-Letter 4, no. 157 (1924): 1; Bennet, Science Service and the Origins of Science Journalism, 1919–1950, 88; Janet Raloff, “Plumbing the Archives,” Science News 181, no. 6 (2012): 20–1.

62 Ibid.

63 “The Annual Meeting of Science Service,” Science 65, no. 1689 (1927): 465.

64 Ibid.

65 “The Annual Meeting of Science Service,” Science 67, no. 1741 (1928): 482.

66 Davis, “The Rise of Science Understanding,” 243.

67 Anna M. Gillis, “Looking Back: From Newswire to Newsweekly, 75 Years of Science Service,” Science News Anniversary Supplement 15, no. 9 (1997): S10.

68 P.M.B. 1970. “AAAS Won’t Absorb Science Service,” Science 170, no. 3956 (1970): 418; Anna M. Gillis, “Looking Back,” S10–1.

69 Gillis, “Looking Back,” S10–1; “Science News: Independent Journalism Since 1921,” www.sciencenews.org.

70 Gillis, “Looking Back,” S10–1.

71 Positive eugenics “aimed to foster more prolific breeding among the socially meritorious” whereas negative eugenics “intended to encourage the socially disadvantaged to breed less—or, better yet, not at all.” Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics, 85, citing Victoria C. Woodhull Martin, “The Rapid Multiplication of the Unfit” (pamphlet; London, 1891), 38, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=chi.48525426&view=1up&seq=40 and also citing C. P. Blacker, Eugenics in Prospect and Retrospect (London, UK: Hamish Hamilton, 1945), 15–6, https://wellcomecollection.org/works/v5jk6cpt/items?langCode=eng&sierraId=b18029334&canvas=27. For a table containing citations to Scripps’ unpublished private papers referencing eugenics, see Susan E. Swanberg, “‘Well-Bred and Well-Fed’, The Science Service Covers Eugenics: 1924–1966,” Mendeley Data V5 (2020), doi: 10.17632/n9tv9hzzhr.5.

72 See Gerald J. Baldasty, “An Advocate of the Working Class,” in E.W. Scripps and the Business of Newspapers (Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1999), 102–19; Scripps, E.W. Papers 1868–1926: About this collection, https://media.library.ohio.edu/digital/collection/scripps.

73 Thomas C. Leonard, Illiberal Reformers (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016).

74 E.W. Scripps, “Disquisition by Scripps, E.W., Eugenics Thoughts Suggested by Raymond Pearl's Article in World's Work, January 1908.” p. 2. E.W. Scripps Papers, MCASC, OUL. http://cdm15808.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/compoundobject/collection/scripps/id/2758/rec/16.

75 Ibid.

76 Ibid.

77 Ibid.

78 Melissa Hendricks, “Raymond Pearl’s ‘Mingled Mess’.” Johns Hopkins Magazine 58, no. 2 (2006), https://pages.jh.edu/jhumag/0406web/pearl.html; Michael Mezzano, “The Progressive Origins of Eugenics Critics: Raymond Pearl, Herbert S. Jennings, and the Defense of Scientific Inquiry,” The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 4, no. 1 (2005): 83–97.

79 “Watson Davis, 71, A Science Editor; Pioneer in Interpreting the Subject to the Public Dies,” The New York Times, June 28, 1967; “American Eugenics Society – Members, Officers and Directors Activities Database,” https://archive.org/stream/AMERICANEUGENICSSOCIETYMEMBERS/AMERICAN%20EUGENICS%20SOCIETY%20MEMBERS_djvu.txt.

80 Watson Davis, “No Victory Over Death,” Kansas City Times (Missouri), January 3, 1928, 15; Watson Davis, “Future of Race Not As Rosy as Often Pictured,” Knoxville News-Sentinel, January 5, 1928, 6; Watson Davis, “Gain In War On Cancer,” Kansas City Times (Missouri), January 5, 1928, 7; Watson Davis, “How To Better The Race Told By Scientists,” Knoxville News-Sentinel, January 6, 1928, 11; Watson Davis, “Votes for the Intelligent Only, Scientist Advocates,” Evening Sun (Baltimore), January 6, 1928, 6; Watson Davis, “Death Due To Brain, Asserts Dr. Carrel,” Pittsburgh Press, January 8, 1928, 87; Watson Davis, “Mortality Called Price of Brains,” (includes a series of reports from the Race Betterment Conference held at Battle Creek) Science News-Letter 13, no. 353 (1928): 19–23.

81 The Science Service archives at the Smithsonian Institution contain correspondence between Science Service staff and the American Eugenics Society (AES). Selected items are available in SIA Records Unit 7091, Science Service Records, 1902–1965.

82 “Immigration Selection Advocated by Eugenists,” Science News-Letter 4, no. 145 (1924): 7.

83 For citations of News-Letter articles referencing eugenics, see Swanberg, “‘Well-Bred and Well-Fed’, The Science Service Covers Eugenics: 1924–1966,” Mendeley Data, V5.

84 The Science News-Letter (News-Letter) published reviews of or notices for new books about eugenics or written by eugenicists including the following: Edward M. East, “Heredity and Human Affairs,” News-Letter 12, no. 349 (1927): 399; Henry Dwight Chapin, “Heredity and Child Culture,” News-Letter 14, no. 388 (1928): 167; Walter B. Pitkin, The Twilight of the American Mind, News-Letter 14, no. 394 (1928): 265; Durant Drake, “The New Morality,” News-Letter 14, no. 395 (1928): 279; “The Alien in Our Midst” (eds. Madison Grant and Charles Stewart Davison), News-Letter 17, no. 473 (1930): 288; Madison Grant, “Conquest of a Continent,” News-Letter 24, no. 654 (1933): 267; C. P. Blacker, “Voluntary Sterilization,” News-Letter 27, no. 729 (1935): 206; J. E. Meade and A. S. Parks, “Biological Aspects of Social Problems,” News-Letter 88, no. 21 (1965): 332.

85 Edward Caudill, “Science in the Publicity Laboratory: The Case of Eugenics,” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Journalism Historians, 3–4. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED362904.pdf.

86 Ibid.

87 The Science Service archives at the Smithsonian Institution contain correspondence between Science Service staff and the American Eugenics Society (AES), including selected items available in SIA Records Unit 7091, Science Service Records, 1902–1965.

88 Marjorie Van de Water. “May 14, 1931 letter to Mr. C.P. Ives 2d. of the American Eugenics Society, Inc., Smithsonian Institution Archives, Records Unit 7091, Science Service Records, Box 132 of 459, Folder 8, American Eugenics Society, Inc. 1931–1932.

89 Watson Davis, “Well Bred, Well Fed…” in People – What Else Matters, 4. SIA Record Unit 7091, Science Service Records, 1902–1965, Box 212 of 459, Folder 10, American Eugenics Society, 1940.

90 Figure 1 illustrating the precipitous decline in the publication of eugenics articles by the Science News-Letter can be accessed at: Swanberg, “‘Well-Bred and Well-Fed’, The Science Service Covers Eugenics: 1924–1966,” Mendeley Data, V5, doi: 10.17632/n9tv9hzzhr.5

91 “Immigration Selection Advocated by Eugenists,” 7 is the earliest News-Letter story about eugenics found in the publication’s JSTOR archives. The story referenced scientist Irving Fisher who was an early partner in the enterprise that would become Science Service until he and Scripps had a falling out. See James C. Foust, “E.W. Scripps and the Science Service,” Journalism History 21, no. 2 (1995): 60.

92 “Immigration Selection Advocated by Eugenists,” Science News-Letter 4, no. 145 (1924): 7.

93 Science Service, “Well Bred Americans Conquer Environment,” Science News-Letter 9, no. 274 (1926): 2.

94 Science Service, “’Unfitness’ Not Encouraged,” Science News-Letter 12, no. 334 (1927): 127.

95 Science Service, “Danger in Race Mixture,” Science News-Letter 12, no. 337 (1927): 206.

96 Science Service, “A Goal for Eugenics,” Science News-Letter 14, no. 395 (1928): 274; Walter B. Pitkin, The Twilight of the American Mind (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1928), 527, 329–31 (accessed on July 28, 2020 through www.babel.hathitrust.org).

97 Science Service, “Encouraging Fit Parents to bear Children Advised,” Science News-Letter 12, no. 579 (1932): 305.

98 Science Service, “Eugenicists Urged to Drop Cattle Breeding Analogy,” Science News-Letter 22, no. 594 (1932): 139.

99 “Eugenicists Approve New German Law,” Science News-Letter 24, no. 656 (1933): 295; “Eugenical Sterilization in Germany,” Eugenical News 18, no. 5, commentary and full translation of the German sterilization statute of 1933 (2).

100 See note 90.

101 Pope Pius XI, “Casti Connubii: Encyclical of Pope Pius XIENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI on Christian Marriage to the Venerable Brethren, Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops, and other Local Ordinaries Enjoying Peace and Communion With The Apostolic See,” https://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html.

102 United Press, “Pope Pius Assails Sterilization Drive,” Pittsburgh Press, May 24, 1935, 1.

103 See note 46.

104 See Science News-Letter archives in JSTOR and note 90.

105 Davis, “The Annual Meeting of Science Service,” Science 67, 482.

106 Science Service, 1921 “Big Families for Well Born, Urged To Rescue Race,” Houston Post (Texas), November, 30, 1921, 8.

107 Ibid.

108 Ibid.

109 Science Service, “Explains Inheritance of Mental Characters,” The Journal (Logan, UT), June 30, 1925, 6; Science Service, “Greatness Not Dependent on Position in Family,” The Journal, June 30, 1925, 4; Science Service, “Breeding Conquers All Environment,” Asbury Park Press, July 9, 1926, 21; Science Service, “Public Should Be Taught The [scientific] Laws Governing Heredity,” The Journal, September 24, 1926, 2; Science Service Leased Wire, “8 States Have Eugenics Laws,” Knoxville News-Sentinel, August 19, 1929, 2; Science Service, “Sterilization Is Advocated For Defectives: Zoologist Says They Should Not Be Permitted to Reproduce Their Kind,” Knoxville News-Sentinel, December 29, 1929, 2; Science Service, “Eugenists Hold Meet Next Week,” Knoxville News-Sentinel, August 21, 1932, 17; Watson Davis, “Eugenists Would ‘Certify’ Families Like Live-Stock,” Evening Sun (Baltimore), January 2, 1926, 1.

110 See the Scripps logo on page 1 of the January 20, 1934 issue of the El Paso Herald-Post.

111 Science Service, “Sterilization Legal Now In Many States,” El Paso Herald-Post, January 19, 1934, 2.

112 “Sterilization Legal Now In Many States,” 2.

113 Science Service, “Operation for Sterilization Usually Simple,” El Paso Herald-Post, January 20, 1934, 3.

114 Science Service, “Eugenics Sterilization Seen as Aid to Nature, Would Eliminate Unfit Who Are Now Nursed to Maturity Under Protection of Modern Civilization,” El Paso Herald-Post, January 22, 1934, 2.

115 Science Service, “Some Oppose Sterilization as Unscientific,” El Paso Herald-Post, January 23, 1934, 2.

116 The Advance of Science, edited by Watson Davis (New York: Doubleday, Doran & Co., Inc., 1934), 275–83.

117 Ibid., vi.

118 Science Service, “Sterilization Failure, Is View of Physician,” Brooklyn Daily Eagle, October 11, 1934, 12; “Sterilization Wrong Approach to Feebleminded Problem,” Science News-Letter 27, no. 718 (1935): 28.

119 “The Dodo’s Dolorous Doom,” Science News-Letter 11, no. 309 (1927): 169.

120 “Dodo and Gingko Tree,” Science News-Letter 12, no. 347 (1927): 363.

121 The flightless Dodo (Raphus cucullatus) is believed to have gone extinct, perhaps due to overhunting, in the seventeenth century, although the exact date of its extinction is still somewhat murky (Andrew Jackson, “Added Credence for a Late Dodo Extinction Date,” Historical Biology 26, no. 6: (2014): 699–701.

122 “The Dodo’s Dolorous Doom,” 169.

123 Malthus, a British political economist of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, opposed Britain’s “Poor Laws” which attempted to ease the lives of rural English families who had moved to the industrialized cities seeking better lives. Malthus believed that the population of the poor would always exceed the ability of society to produce enough food, a myth that was not true even in Malthus’ day. Allen Chase, The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (New York: Knopf, 1977), 72–84.

124 “Medical Association President Criticizes Modern Coddling of Weak,” Science News-Letter 4, no. 167 (1924): 9–10.

125 “Dodo and Gingko Tree,” 363; Alexander Graham Bell, “Is Race Suicide Possible?” Journal of Heredity 11, no. 8 (1920): 339–41.

126 Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race: or The Racial Basis of European History, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons), 1916.

127 Kirsten Spicer, “‘A Nation of Imbeciles’: The Human Betterment Foundation’s Propaganda for Eugenics Practices in California,” Voces Novae 7, no. 7 (2018): 124. Science Service wrote about Popenoe’s work in the marriage counseling field in “Help Cupid Shoot Straight,” Science News-Letter 51, no. 6 (1947): 86. Popenoe developed and edited the popular Ladies Home Journal column, “Can This Marriage Be Saved?” Kathy McMahon, “Marriage Counseling Propaganda That Still Hurts Us,” Medium.com May 1, 2017, https://medium.com/@kathymcmahon/marriage-propaganda-that-still-hurts-us-52b6e7ef0fd3.

128 J. E. Meade and A. S. Parks, Eds. Biological Aspects of Social Problems (New York: Plenium Press, 1965), Proceedings of a symposium held by the Eugenics Society in 1964, “Books of the Week 1965,” Science News-Letter 88, no. 21 (1965): 332.

129 “How to Transmit Culture,” Science News-Letter 89, no. 1 (1966): 5.

130 Ibid.

131 Ibid.

132 “Watson Davis, 71, A Science Editor: Pioneer in Interpreting the subject to Public Dies,” New York Times, June 28, 1967, 45.

133 “Watson Davis, 71,” 45; “Watson Davis 1896–1967,” Science News-Letter 92, no. 2 (1957): 28–9.

134 Garland E. Allen, “Eugenics and Modern Biology: Critiques of Eugenics, 1910–1945,” Annals of Human Genetics 75 (2011): 324.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Susan E. Swanberg

Susan E. Swanberg, formerly a bench scientist and criminal defense attorney, is now an Assistant Professor at the University of Arizona School of Journalism where she teaches news reporting, science journalism, environmental journalism and media law.