Monday-Morning Missilemen

Stung by a barrage of editorials charging that Pentagon ballyhoo had witlessly buoyed up hopes for a successful Vanguard launching, the Government last week tucked the missile program back behind its security curtain. At Alabama's Redstone Arsenal, Army Ballistic Missile Agency people were even forbidden to talk to the press on any aspect of satellite plans, whether classified or not. Defense Department Pressagent Murray Snyder announced that future missile shoots will not be announced in advance, nor will newsmen on the spot be helped by officialdom.

Though Government mimeographs orbited overtime on the Vanguard project, and an uncommon flow of information on firing times and other matters was directed to newsmen, the press itself played no small part in building up for the letdown. Few of the 127 U.S. and foreign reporters who covered the launching gave any strong warning to editors and readers--as briefing officers warned them--that they were there for a test shoot, and that one of three missile tests turns out to be a flop-nik. With perhaps half a dozen exceptions, the press corps at Cape Canaveral had no grounding in the infinitely complex mechanics of missilery. In any event, since word of a scheduled firing spreads fast on the missile beat--postponement of last week's scheduled Atlas test was known to the press within a few hours--most of the newsmen who blanketed the Vanguard shoot would have been there with no prodding from the Pentagon.

Instead of jerry-building new security barricades, reasoned some Monday-morning missilemen, the Pentagon should try to see that the public is not again gulled by over-optimistic news stories. One way to assure "full and balanced dispatches," suggested the Christian Science Monitor's Editor Erwin D. Canham, would be to give newsmen full briefings on the next Vanguard test, but insist that they file their stories on a "hold-for-release" basis for use after the shoot. Straight from the launching pads came the best-aimed proposal of all. Said Lieut. Colonel Sid Spear, public relations officer at Patrick Air Force Base:

"Reporters with binoculars can see just as much from the beach as they can inside the base. If we could have them inside, we could give them the straight dope on just how the firing went, and stop them guessing. Their guesses are pretty wild sometimes, and what comes out in the papers is apt to be more damaging to security than the truth. A LIFE photographer [Stan Wayman] awhile back zeroed in so close on an Atlas you could almost see the rivets on it. If we had photographers on the base, they could develop their film right here and submit it for clearance through security channels on the spot. They'd have better pictures--and we would be able to airbrush classified details. This way the public would get far more reliable coverage."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.