Winship denies categorically that theGlobeis pushing peace candidates. He simply wants to get the issues and the candidates into the paper. "We're going to be damned scrupulously fair to all candidates," he insisted recently, and to substantiate it he pulled out a back issue with side-by-side pictures of Kennedy, McCarthy and Johnson. Nevertheless, he admits, "We gave McCarthy a break."

Silent on McCarthyism

If theGlobehas at least temporarily resumed an editorial policy of neutrality regarding candidates, they are prepared to take flak from readers on issues. The same paper that remained silent on McCarthyism for fear of losing readers was one of the first papers to come out against the war.

Primary resposibility for policy formulation lies with Winship and publisher William Davis Taylor. Winship glibly hands the credit for theGlobe'sstrength to the "wonderfully civilized Taylors" (William Davis--now running for the Harvard Board of Overseers--is only one of a number of Taylors who have owned and published theGlobe'sfor three generations). But although Taylor was responsible for the Globe's backing of Kevin White and consults with Winship on important questions, his contribution has largely been one of non-interference. The active policy-makers are Winship and Whipple.

Charlie Whipple set theGlobe'sfirm but moderate dovish position last May with a series of six page-long editorials criticizing American involvement step-by-step. (A reprint of the series has gone through three printings and has sold 20,000 copies.) Silnce then theGlobestaff has become increasingly dovish. Whipple is still wary of immediate withdrawal, but adds that "conceivably it might come to that under some conditions."

Scolding Eisenhower

TheGlobe's opposition to the war is based on a sons-of-Lincoln idealism. U.S. involvement is not so much immoral in terms of universal humanitarian values as it is violation of traditional American values. Editorials are geared toward building a broad