Even today, a voice for the otherwise voiceless

Of all the newspaper movies in all the theaters in all the world, there's a grainy Humphrey Bogart film that is, we must sheepishly admit, one of our favorites.

Released in 1952 by 20th Century Fox, "Deadline U.S.A." never enjoyed the cinematic success of more celebrated movies like "The Paper" or "The Front Page," nor was it especially an artistic success either. Even we, big fans, concede its melodramaticism.

And yet it is that very sentimentality that hooks those of us in the newspaper business. Bogie plays the resolute managing editor of The Day, a metropolitan newspaper crusading against a mobster named Rienzo just as it is about to be sold and put out of business. It's not the plot that makes it special; it's the endless run of saccharine quotes Bogart puts down on celluloid.

"About this wanting to be a reporter," he tells a job applicant, "Don't ever change your mind. It may not be the oldest profession. But it's the best."

Tough-guy Bogart playing tough-guy editor uttering cloying things that turn us tough-guy newspaper people weepy.

"It's not enough any more to give 'em just news," Bogart says in one particularly ageless soliloquy. "They want comics, contests, puzzles. They want to know how to bake a cake, win friends and influence the future. Ergo, horoscopes, tips on the horses, interpretation of dreams so they can win the numbers lottery. And if they accidentally stumble on the first page - NEWS!"

Behind the rough veneer, we are, deep down, a sentimental bunch, us newspaper people.

"Call it vanity, call it arrogant presumption, call it what you will," legendary war correspondent Bob Considine once said, "but I would grope for the nearest open grave if I had no newspaper to work for, no need to search and sometimes find the winged word that just fits, no keen wonder over what each unfolding day may bring."

We have spent the past week reflecting on the value of newspapers and expressing confidence in their future. In doing so, we're mindful of our tendency toward romance. Did the blacksmiths see their industry the same way?

Yet, the real question isn't that. It is the one numerous readers have posed to us in this past week: If newspapers aren't watching, who will?

Governments host their own Web sites these days with useful information about their jurisdictions, but will those sites question their spending? Citizens provide news from the spare room upstairs and sometimes very well, but the standards of accuracy and fairness can be a question. Left-wingers and right-wingers engage in investigative research, but it's vested to prove a point-of-view. Television covers the news and often well, but it's rarely local to the school board or Main Street.

News and information is out there, to be sure, but it so often fails to provide the balance necessary to challenge the recipient's preconceived perspective.

News and information is out there, to be sure, but the vast majority of journalism that is performed in the country is still performed by newspapers.

News and information is out there, to be sure, but there is less journalism today than a year or two ago because there are fewer newspaper journalists to do it.

"The people must know before they can act," Ida B. Wells, a one-time slave who became a teacher and writer, said years ago, "and there is no educator to compare with the press."

As we begin this new decade of promise and uncertainty, we think back to a crackling black-and-white film from more than half a century ago and to one more sagacious observation from that hard-boiled editor played by Bogart:

"A free press, like a free life, sir, is always in danger."