Going Back In Time: White House Crusade Against Independent Journalism
By Wendy Glavin, Founder & CEO, Wendy Glavin Agency“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” – Thomas JeffersonCNN and other news outlets were blocked Friday, February 23, 2017, from an off-camera White House press briefing, raising alarm among media organizations and First Amendment watchdogs. What does this mean for our country?When I heard, as did others, we spoke about how scary the situation is in our country. After several conversations, I was reminded of my childhood when my attorney father, a prosecutor, drilled the meaning of the constitution into me. I decided to speak out.Felix Frankfurter, a friend of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court who served for 23 years was a noted advocate of judicial restraint in the judgments of the court. He said, “Freedom of the press in not an end in itself but a means to the end of a free society.”My father and I watched a lot of legal movies including, “Inherit the Wind, “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “12 Angry Men.” One movie, in particular, “Good Night. And, Good Luck” portrays a case during the McCarthy era that tests the First Amendment and the rights of journalists. “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” – Winston ChurchillHere is a reminder of our country’s history:When Senator Joseph McCarthy began his campaign to root out Communists in America, CBS News producer Edward R. Murrow was adamant about exposing McCarthy's Senate "investigation." Despite pressure from CBS corporate sponsors to stop, Murrow, the CBS team, and producer Fred Friendly continued to expose the senator's lies.If you haven’t heard Edward R. Murrow’s powerful and memorable on-air report, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVS5XvL0RZQ“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason.
If we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to associate, to speak and defend the causes that for the moment were unpopular.This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy’s methods to keep silent or for those who approve. We can deny our heritage and our history but we cannot escape responsibility for the results. We proclaim ourselves indeed as we are the defenders of freedom wherever it continues to exist in the world. But we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay among our allies abroad and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn’t create this situation of fear. He merely exploited it and rather successfully. Cassius was right. ‘The fault, dear Brutus is not in our stars, but in ourselves.’ Good night. And, good luck.” – Edward R. MurrowCassius said this to his friend, Brutus, in Shakespeare’s, ”Julius Caesar.” He was trying to persuade Brutus to stop Caesar from becoming a monarch – an act he felt was not in the best interest of the country. He argues that it is their weak position, not fate, which is exploiting them to act against their will.Other cases heard before the Supreme Court have tested the First Amendment and helped continue to shape the rights of journalists. “The Pentagon Papers” was an extremely important case for journalistic rights. The court ruled in favor of the NY Times stating the need for a balance between the right to a free press and the government’s right to protect our national security. The ruling challenged journalists to use their freedoms responsibly as gatekeepers for disseminating information to the public.Here is the case summary:New York Times Co. vs. United States (1971)In 1971, the U.S. strongly debated its involvement in the Vietnam War. The New York Times obtained a copy of an internal Defense Department report that detailed government discussions about the war, The Pentagon Papers.Governmental officials insisted the district court issue a temporary injunction against The New York Times so the paper could not publish the documents, due to reasons of national security. The Times appealed, arguing that prior restraint (preventing publication) violated the First Amendment.The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the Times. In dissent, Chief Justice Warren Burger noted, “the imperative of a free and unfettered press comes into collision with another imperative, the effective functioning of a complex, modern government."He challenged the wisdom of publishing the highly confidential intelligence, but respected the freedom offered by the First Amendment: "Only those who view the First Amendment as an absolute in all circumstances -- a view I respect, but reject -- can find such cases as these to be simple or easy."It feels as though we’re going back to the time when the framers of the constitution wrote:“The last right we shall mention regards the freedom of the press. The importance of this consists, besides the advancement of truth, science, morality, and arts in general, in its diffusion of liberal sentiments on the administration of Government, its ready communication of thoughts between subjects, and its consequential promotion of union among them, whereby oppressive officers are shamed or intimidated into more honorable and just modes of conducting affairs.”What do you think? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
