Freedom of the Press?

Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. This is common knowledge to every schoolchild in America, and especially to those of us who seek higher education in the field of journalism. Hence why a recent article in The Washington Post was of particular interest to me.

Last week, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times reported on a banking surveillance program used by the Treasury Department to bypass traditional banking privacy protection in a bid to identify terrorist funding operations. The Washington Post quickly matched reports. But according to a June 29 article, President Bush was “genuinely outraged by the news stories in The New York Times and other newspapers about the surveillance program, in which the U.S. government has tapped international banking records for information about terrorist financing.”

Debate has grown about whether the disclosures actually aided terrorists or made the government’s burden more difficult. I would have to agree with Victor Comras, a retired diplomat and consultant on terror financing, who said he “finds it doubtful that the disclosure had much impact because many terrorists have taken steps in recent years to mask their transactions, aware that they might be under surveillance.” I have a feeling that hundreds of terrorists didn’t pick up the newspaper last week and gasp in amazement, “Oh no, we’re being watched by the US government!!!” Duh.

It’s no secret to any of you reading this blog that I am a supporter of the President, and the Republican Party. But President Bush called the conduct of the New York Times “disgraceful,” and on this point I have to disagree. A Republican congressman wants the Times prosecuted, and National Review says its press credentials should be yanked. Are you kidding me? As a journalist, it is my opinion that not only was it the right of these newspapers to publish information that would be of interest to the American public, but it was their responsibility.

Clashes between the government and the press are not new news. Presidents Kennedy, Nixon, and Reagan are all known to have deliberately withheld details of government activity from the press, and therefore the American public. But newspapers, by default, tend to be a fairly liberal form of media. And it’s no surprise that the Times, with its national prominence and liberal editorial page opposed to the war in Iraq, is proving to be an increasingly irresistible target for many Republicans. But this time I think they’ve gone too far.

Publishing information is the responsibility of any news media outlet, and the question is, when is there a reason to withhold information? To some extent, journalists and newspapers should stop and think before rushing stories to the presses. But in most cases, the media reports on news that has proved important to the general public. Which is their obligation to American citizens, as long as the publication of this information does not threaten national security.

As a democracy, we are meant to continually question and examine the decisions of our leaders. Newspapers provide us the means to read about, discuss and even publish our opinions on increasingly difficult subjects. This is the power of the press, the core of which is deeply rooted in the establishment of our nation – our right to freedom.

I’d like to take a moment to remind everyone of the Bill of Rights/Amendment I: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

If this subject interested you at all, check out another article by Howard Kurtz that was published in The Washington Post last week.