Without a commitment to party or religion, the Fortnightly revealed journalism's breadth. Entries spanned such diverse subjects as British foreign correspondence; imperial, European, and American newspapers; and the women's press in and out of the kingdom.

1. Editor [G. H. Lewes]. “Robert Buchanan.” 1 (1865): 443–58.

Noted that book reviews were often hastily done.

2. Trollope, Anthony. “On Anonymous Literature.” 1 (1865): 491–98.

Commended French journalistic signature because it created professionals with honor. Britain's anonymity suited a newspaper's “prevailing spirit” on politics, but signing other articles would catalyze more careful writing and eliminate the “eulogistic” writing typical of periodical criticism.

3. Gurney, Archer. “France as It Is.” 1 (1865): 721–32.

Flagged French “seizure of English papers,” among them the “respectable Morning Herald”; Charles de Remusat and other admirable writers in the Revue des Deux Mondes; and the political alignment of Paris newspapers.

4. Pelly, Lewis. “British India.” 2 (1865): 31–42.

Spelled out that the British in India once read only the Army List, Gazette, and “a local paper.”

5. Editor [G. H. Lewes]. “Criticism in Relation to Novels.” 3 (1865–66): 352–61.

Fretted that “[e]ven in the best journals,” criticism of novels was too laudatory. The press did not judge novels as literature but by the “ordinary canons which would be applied to a history, an article, or a pamphlet.”

6. Editor [G. H. Lewes]. “Causeries.” 4 (1866): 503–09.

Disdained anonymous criticism because responsibility for it might attach to any writer of the journal where it appeared.