Hacker News Reader

Comment by defrost | Hacker News Reader

Historians account?

Surely the contemporous Neill-Reynolds report of 1906, commissioned by President Theodore Roosevelt, confirmed Uptons depictions and resulted in the Federal Meat Inspection Act of 1906.

But hey, I'm just an Australian and you clearly know better.

View on HN

Here you go:

https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1906/06/05/101...

If you want to cite the report, that's great. Citing a novel with no references, nope. People can be educated just fine using facts instead of novels.

Rarely noted is TR commissioned two reports, because he didn't like the first one. The NR report was the second. I've never been able to find what the first one said.

>Rarely noted is TR commissioned two reports

Do you have the names of the authors of the first one?

A lazy google search didn't mention the commission of two reports

No, I don't. I couldn't find any information on it other than he'd commissioned it and didn't like the result.

Can you then cite where you read he commissioned it and didn't like the result?

"Intrigued by Garfield's reaction, Roosevelt finished reading the novel and invited the author to the White House during the first week in April. Although he proceeded to disparage the socialist diatribe tacked on to the conclusion, Roosevelt assured Sinclair that "all this has nothing to do with the fact that the specific evils you point out shall, if their existence be proved, and if I have power, be eradicated." By the time Sinclair arrived for lunch on April 4, a Department of Agriculture investigator was en route to the stockyards with an order from the White House to evaluate the novelist's charges. Sending a representative of the very agency that had failed properly to inspect the plants, Sinclair objected, "was like asking a burglar to determine his own guilt." His objections prompted Roosevelt to dispatch two additional investigators with no official ties to the department. He chose two well-respected men: Commissioner of Labor Charles P. Neill and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury James Bronson Reynolds."

--- "The Bully Pulpit" pg 461 by Kearns

I appreciate you citing the source, but that doesn't seem to back up the statement "he commissioned it and didn't like the result". He commissioned it, was advised of a potential conflict of interest, and dispatched a different set of investigators.

Not liking the result because of a conflict of interest is still not liking it.

That sounds like you're twisting the facts to fit a narrative. It's not clear a report was made by the first investigator.

> instead of novels

You maybe. Parable and story has been used in humanity’s entire history because humans listen and grok better that way. Story is just .. human. It touches hearts in a way scientific report won’t.

That's ridiculous. Works of fiction can and do carry messages or reflection. Threads (the film) is a more impactful depiction of nuclear war than any dry report can ever hope to convey.

In fact, this very book proves that! It touched public opinion in a way that obscure and dense reports did not. That's just how people work.

Heck, are you a Christian? You might be familiar with a certain 1st-century apocalyptic preacher who liked to speak in parables...

The actual report:

https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1906/06/05/101...

is a short and easy read.

> are you a Christian?

I find it ironic that you compare the Bible to "The Jungle". Socialists regard TJ as their sacred text. I know some who have read it so many times they have it practically memorized. The scale of the umbrage when I disrespect it betrays the tale.

But to answer your question, I am not a Christian. I do not cite the Bible as fact, although parts of it have been verified by archaeology.

You are free to learn history from movies and novels. But how are you going to know what parts are true, and what parts are propaganda? Do you really want to base your worldview on fiction?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com