[whataretheysaying] Mary Madigan: As etiquette demands

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by Mary Madigan:
As etiquette demands
http://whataretheysaying.powerblogs.com/posts/1151335987.shtml


   Bill Keller, the executive editor of The Times, [1]responds to reader
   questions about the Times's publication of information concerning
   government efforts to track and prosecute the financial support of
   terrorism:

     I don't always have time to answer my mail as fully as etiquette
     demands...It's an unusual and powerful thing, this freedom that our
     founders gave to the press. Who are the editors of The New York
     Times (or the Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, Washington
     Post and other publications that also ran the banking story) to
     disregard the wishes of the President and his appointees? And yet
     the people who invented this country saw an aggressive, independent
     press as a protective measure against the abuse of power in a
     democracy, and an essential ingredient for self-government. They
     rejected the idea that it is wise, or patriotic, to always take the
     President at his word, or to surrender to the government important
     decisions about what to publish.

   [2]Instapundit points out that the founders did not give freedom of
   press to the press. They gave it to the people.

     The founders gave freedom of the press to the people, they didn't
     give freedom to the press. Keller positions himself as some sort of
     Constitutional High Priest, when in fact the "freedom of the press"
     the Framers described was also called "freedom in the use of the
     press." It's the freedom to publish, a freedom that belongs to
     everyone in equal portions, not a special privilege for the media
     industry.

   The media has become accustomed to certain privileges that aren't
   given to ordinary citizens, but those privileges aren't based on any
   constitutional rights given to the media as in institution. They're
   based on the media's presumed willingness to respect a standard of
   ethics and responsibility. Mostly, they're based on trust.

   Can ordinary citizens just walk into a presidential press conference,
   without any press affiliation? Could you walk into the Pentagon with a
   camcorder and say - 'I'm a US citizen' and expect to be invited to ask
   Rumsfeld detailed questions about our current actions in Iraq. Were
   you, as an American citizen with full rights to publish your beliefs
   and ideal, invited to Stephen Colbert's oh-so-daring and truthy
   Bush-bash? Does Joe Wilson have your number on his speed dial? Are
   wealthy and influential politicians willing to meet with you privately
   without the presence of security guards and advisors?

   The press and the government have a symbiotic relationship, and this
   relationship depends on a certain degree of trust. The privileges and
   perks that the press have long enjoyed are not protected by the
   Constitution. In fact, the media's belief that they are more equal
   than than the average citizen might bother the founding fathers.

   The New York Times was, for many years, a legitimate and trustworthy
   news source. They betrayed that trust. Their recent actions have
   proven that they're not worthy of the privileges they've been given.
   As a result, they should lose those privileges.

References

   1. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/25/business/media/25keller-letter.html?_r=1&8dpc&oref=slogin
   2. http://instapundit.com/archives/031092.php