Editor's Note

As media historians know, the military newspaper Stars and Stripes has a rich history. Founded during the Civil War, it has reported on issues affecting members of the military ever since. Among the former staff members are such journalistic luminaries as Harold Ross, Grantland Rice, Alexander Woolcott, and Bill Mauldin. The newspaper is intended to be editorially independent from the Department of Defense, but as Cindy Elmore shows in her article, “Communists at the Stars and Stripes: American ‘Disloyalty’ or... Something Else?,” that has not always been the case. In 1946, a reporter and editor with the newspaper's inaugural Pacific edition were dismissed amid allegations they had been disloyal to the American government. She examines the writings of the two men, who both had prewar ties to the Communist Party, to determine the likely reasons for their firings.

In his article about early corporate public relations, Cayce Meyers explores the roots of publicity agents and their split from the advertising industry. He shows that publicity men were increasingly part of a stand-alone profession. Cristina Mislan examines a little-known broadcast from Cuba in the early 1960s, Radio Free Dixie. Launched by civil rights leader Robert F. Williams, Radio Free Dixie distributed militant messages to black audiences in the United States, framing them as national and transnational symbols of black struggle within the context of the Cold War. In his article, Guolin Yi compares the New York Times and the Washington Post in their coverage of the Sino–American rapprochement from 1963 to 1972. Despite their differences in reading China, the two newspapers converged in their positive responses to the progress in Sino–American relations.

In the second installment of a new feature, “Professional Notes,” Brooke Kroeger writes about the continuing reliance of many historians regarding periodization as a starting point for new research. She discusses her own experiences with the often-artificial designations of historical periods. She also encourages mass media historians to be open to the insights that “re-dating” can make possible.

Finally, this last issue of 2015 gives us the opportunity to publicly thank the many scholars who generously gave their time to contribute manuscript reviews to American Journalism during the year. Publishing a journal of this quality would not be possible without the exacting and thorough critiques of manuscripts that reviewers provide. Thank you for your important service to American Journalism.