Newspaper Postersadvice needed

[niall bates]

Hi hi - I'm trying to buy my wife a gift of matching front page newspaper posters (don't need to fork out a fortune for the authentic things, just reproductions are fine) of the launch and the sinking of the Titanic. I found the perfect thing on the New York Times web site https://www.nytstore.com/ProdDetail.aspx?prodId=2903 for the sinking but they don't have the same for the launch. I'm trying to find a newspaper reproduction for both - ideally 1 newspaper for both, if not, another one for the launch of the Titanic to match the NYT one of the sinking - any help very much appreciated.

 

[Michael H. Standart]

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean, but I think you'll find that the launch of the Titanic just wasn't front page news in a lot of places. As the second sister, she just didn't rate that sort of attention, and even the start of her maiden voyage was a non event in the eyes of the public and the media. That sort of notoriety came only with her spectacular demise.

The short version is that except as a footnote in a story about the Olympic, you may not be able to find much of anything about the Titanic's launch at all save in some local newspapers and some of the trade media.

[Moderator's note: This post and the one above it were in another topic, but have been moved to here. JDT]

 

[Dave Gittins]

Michael is right. On 1 June 1911, The New York Times gave 94 words on page 2 to Titanic's launch. Olympic got more attention. On 15 June, she got 282 words and on 18 June, 773. In London The Times gave Titanic's launch six or seven inches.

You may find something more in the Belfast press, such as The Belfast New-Letter. The main English coverage was in The Shipbuilder. You may find something in Scientific American.

 

[niall bates]

Much appreciated guys - thought the launch would have been bigger news given her size etc but feedback much appreciated. Guess I'll just have to go with the report of her sinking (bit morbid as a christmas present but will have to do!).

 

[Michael H. Standart]

>>thought the launch would have been bigger news given her size <<

As the second sister of the planned trio, Titanic recieved the usual second son treatment of being almost ignored. The first ship in a noteworthy class of vessel has almost always tended to be the star of the show, barring some notable event...like sinking the first time out.

Her sheer size was more of a publicity thing in an ongoing game of one upmanship then something that had any substantive meaning. Her slightly higher goss registered tonnage reflected the fact that she had more enclosed space. The actual weight of the two ships at their designed full load navigation draft was the same at 52,310 long tonnes. The general public was not entirely aware of that, though the trade press tended to be wise to it.

 

[Dave Gittins]

Perhaps you could use the front page of The New York Times of 16 April 1912, which reported the sinking, and balance it with the front page for 19 April, which reported the arrival of the survivors. Both can be readily bought from The New York Times in a collection of reproduced pages related to the disaster.