[re_nortex]

I'd be interested in what other Freepers feel is the reason the Titanic story never seems to lose its appeal to the imagination and to the heart......even after a hundred years have gone by.

I hope I'm not passing along an urban myth since so many are associated with Titanic, but here goes anyway. I heard back in 1962, during the 50th Anniversary, that the term Titanic was recognized even in the remotest parts of the world. Along with Coca-Cola, that word was just as well known.

I think part of the reason for why it became such a big story a century ago was that mass communications was really starting to reach a global audience. It was the story of that era. Although we rightfully mock what the New York Times has now become, it reputation as the "Newspaper of Record" was cemented by its excellent coverage of the sinking.

[TexasRepublic]

“I think part of the reason for why it became such a big story a century ago was that mass communications was really starting to reach a global audience. It was the story of that era.”

News still travelled slow to the hinterlands. My grandfather grew up in Haskell County in west Texas. He was 14 when the Titanic sank, and he told me it took a week before they heard about it.

BTW, I just bought the Blu-Ray version of “A Night to Remember” and the restored print looks fantastic. Some of those old B&W films had great tonality.

[ken5050]

I have a copy of that NY TIMES front page...and I often wonder about the headline...was Ismay that well known that it was assumed that everyone would know who he was?

Hearst knew..he had detested Ismay for over 20 years..and devoted every resources of his papers to hounding the guy for the rest of his life, but I can't believe that less than a few hundred NYers would have any idea that day who Ismay was..