| Abstract: | I disagree with Professor Putnis' claim that the Foreign Office instigated a leveraged buyout of Reuters in 1915. Putnis' thesis is questionable for several reasons. (1) It is at odds with a general unwillingness on the part of government to interfere in the affairs of private business. (2) The fear of a hostile foreign takeover was neutralized and there was no compelling reason to buy out Reuters. (3) It is improbable that the Foreign Office would have devised a plan to take over Reuters before other aspects of wartime mobilization, such as armaments, were decided. Instead, I argue that Reuters initiated an agreement with the Foreign Office to fulfil its strategic aims. Once this is appreciated, the long-term and significant effects of the buyout become apparent. |
