4 ms·

Given the sheer number of pamphlets and broadsheets around that timeframe, there were probably far, far more printers then than you expect. Certainly, "the bigg

Given the sheer number of pamphlets and broadsheets around that timeframe, there were probably far, far more printers then than you expect. Certainly, "the biggest local printer doesn't like your opinion" doesn't appear to have been an impediment--I have not read any history of Revolutionary-era US without allusion to very vociferous and boisterous debates going on in the print world.

kevinmchugh 4y ago
Independence from Britain was fairly popular by comparison (usually thought to be like 33%) and was well represented amongst the people likely to own a press - that's Ben Franklin, right? How many atheist pamphlets we're printed? How many advocating for legalized, unstigmatized homosexuality or interracial marriage? Perhaps no one held these opinions, but it's hard to say that if the printing of that was suppressed.
cronix 4y ago
> Given the sheer number of pamphlets and broadsheets around that timeframe, there were probably far, far more printers then than you expect. Yes, but they didn't digitally transmit from one printer to another to spread "news." The speed of horse was the fastest news traveled. I'm not sure the end number of printers means much on its own. > Letters, prior to the postal system, were typically sent with friends, servants, acquaintances, slaves or travelers. Sending a letter 100 miles away took as long as two weeks. Many times, multiple letters were sent out with multiple carriers to increase the chance that at least one copy made it to its final destination. https://www.reference.com/history/did-people-communicate-1700s-f522b0825da9b118 https://www.reference.com/history/did-people-communicate-170...