{"title":"Russel Ward谈Staniforth Smith","authors":"B. Beattie","doi":"10.1080/13688804.2022.2079481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Russel Ward claimed that Miles ‘Staniforth Smith, a radical Protectionist, who later joined the Labor Party, was perhaps the most rabidly racist member of either House’ 1 of the first parliament. It has gone unchallenged in the literature, a case of sans aucun doubte. 2 This article inquiries into the strength of the claim by first drawing on newspaper reporting and finds that Ward had drawn a longbow. In sum, the article provides an important lesson on taking statements at face value and allowing them to become historical fact.","PeriodicalId":44733,"journal":{"name":"Media History","volume":"29 1","pages":"321 - 337"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Russel Ward on Staniforth Smith\",\"authors\":\"B. Beattie\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13688804.2022.2079481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Russel Ward claimed that Miles ‘Staniforth Smith, a radical Protectionist, who later joined the Labor Party, was perhaps the most rabidly racist member of either House’ 1 of the first parliament. It has gone unchallenged in the literature, a case of sans aucun doubte. 2 This article inquiries into the strength of the claim by first drawing on newspaper reporting and finds that Ward had drawn a longbow. In sum, the article provides an important lesson on taking statements at face value and allowing them to become historical fact.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44733,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Media History\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"321 - 337\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Media History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13688804.2022.2079481\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Media History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13688804.2022.2079481","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Russel Ward claimed that Miles ‘Staniforth Smith, a radical Protectionist, who later joined the Labor Party, was perhaps the most rabidly racist member of either House’ 1 of the first parliament. It has gone unchallenged in the literature, a case of sans aucun doubte. 2 This article inquiries into the strength of the claim by first drawing on newspaper reporting and finds that Ward had drawn a longbow. In sum, the article provides an important lesson on taking statements at face value and allowing them to become historical fact.