A Not-So-Free Press
Early on in the Republic, after the Constitution had been drafted and ratified, many felt that some important rights had been left out. Congress met to deal with this, yielding the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution.
James Madison proposed the following language for the first of the amendments:
Madison's version of the speech and press clauses, introduced in the House of Representatives on June 8, 1789, provided: ''The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.''
As the amendment wended its way through Congress, the language was changed and additional rights added to get to the final version:
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 peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Although the final version is more direct, I wish that Congress had retained some of Madison's eloquence, especially that part about a free press being "the bulwark of liberty." Then, perhaps, current journalists would have more of a sense of the duties their profession has in a democracy.
This has been a rough couple of years for journalists in terms of ethics. Several reporters have been caught inventing rather than covering the news. A few have accepted money from government agencies to help push the current administration's agenda:
There's always been a busy revolving door operating in Washington, in which members of the press cycle in and out of administration positions. And even in their capacity as journalists, some pundits, and conservatives in particular, have enjoyed unusually close working relations with the White House.
For instance, last week it was disclosed that Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, as well as Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, helped Bush with his inauguration address -- an address the two men praised publicly without revealing their hand in crafting it.
However, the recent episodes suggest a new trend in which pundits don't wait for the revolving door to spin but simply get paid by the government to act as policymakers while remaining members of the press corps.
Armstrong Williams, Michael McManus, and Maggie Gallagher received payment from the government and never disclosed that payment in their newspaper columns on subjects related to their government gigs. Apparently it never occurred to any of them that this just might be a conflict of interest.
Apparently those revolving doors are also used by legislator. One Nevada state state senator found an outside job moonlighting for a Las Vegas television station.
CARSON CITY -- Sen. Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas, has a contract to consult with the news director at KVBC Channel 3 on news content, including on issues going on in the Legislature.
...
Rogers [the station owner] said Thursday that he sees no conflict with hiring Cegavske, who he said is retained for about $3,000 a month to help the KVBC newsroom "so we know if something big is happening."
Now isn't that convenient? Not to mention cheap...I mean, to get the news from the state legislature might require actually hiring a real journalist to cover the issues. Fortunately, enough of a flap arose that Ms.Cegavske eventually resigned from the television gig.
Now, getting our news from people paid by the government to shill, or directly from people who are part of the government certainly doesn't seem to fit with the ideal of "the bulwark of liberty." But wait, there's more! It's possible to not get the news at all.
I've already commented ('Crickets') on the unseemly delay in publishing the damning British memo from the July, 2002 meeting between the US and Great Britain. Even after this story appeared on the media radar, it was considered not front page news and was buried inside the paper. This is, unfortunately, not an unusual state of affairs.
Some reporters at ABC admitted as much here :
NEWS SUMMARY
Brides gotta run, planes gotta stray, and cable news networks gotta find a way to fill a lot of programming hours as cheaply as possible. (CNBC gets to talk about the booming April retail sales numbers, and the NRA's television network will replay the Secretary of State on Larry King over and over.)
We say with all the genuine apolitical and non-partisan human concern that we can muster that the death and carnage in Iraq is truly staggering. And/but we are sort of resigned to the Notion that it simply isn't going to break through to American news organizations, or, for the most part, Americans.
Democrats are so thoroughly spooked by John Kerry's loss —- and Republicans so inspired by their stay-the-course Commander in Chief —- that what is hands down the biggest story every day in the world will get almost no coverage. No conflict at home = no coverage.
Instead, think of the Bolton confirmation hearing, the Ways and Means Social Security kickoff hearing, and the evening tribute dinner for Tom DeLay (and the conservative movement) as classic Beltway set pieces, complete with (semi-)compelling casts of characters, dramatic arcs, conflicts galore, and pure unadulterated entertainment.
(May 12, 2005)
Poor James Madison must be spinning in his grave.
James Madison proposed the following language for the first of the amendments:
Madison's version of the speech and press clauses, introduced in the House of Representatives on June 8, 1789, provided: ''The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.''
As the amendment wended its way through Congress, the language was changed and additional rights added to get to the final version:
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 peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Although the final version is more direct, I wish that Congress had retained some of Madison's eloquence, especially that part about a free press being "the bulwark of liberty." Then, perhaps, current journalists would have more of a sense of the duties their profession has in a democracy.
This has been a rough couple of years for journalists in terms of ethics. Several reporters have been caught inventing rather than covering the news. A few have accepted money from government agencies to help push the current administration's agenda:
There's always been a busy revolving door operating in Washington, in which members of the press cycle in and out of administration positions. And even in their capacity as journalists, some pundits, and conservatives in particular, have enjoyed unusually close working relations with the White House.
For instance, last week it was disclosed that Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, as well as Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, helped Bush with his inauguration address -- an address the two men praised publicly without revealing their hand in crafting it.
However, the recent episodes suggest a new trend in which pundits don't wait for the revolving door to spin but simply get paid by the government to act as policymakers while remaining members of the press corps.
Armstrong Williams, Michael McManus, and Maggie Gallagher received payment from the government and never disclosed that payment in their newspaper columns on subjects related to their government gigs. Apparently it never occurred to any of them that this just might be a conflict of interest.
Apparently those revolving doors are also used by legislator. One Nevada state state senator found an outside job moonlighting for a Las Vegas television station.
CARSON CITY -- Sen. Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas, has a contract to consult with the news director at KVBC Channel 3 on news content, including on issues going on in the Legislature.
...
Rogers [the station owner] said Thursday that he sees no conflict with hiring Cegavske, who he said is retained for about $3,000 a month to help the KVBC newsroom "so we know if something big is happening."
Now isn't that convenient? Not to mention cheap...I mean, to get the news from the state legislature might require actually hiring a real journalist to cover the issues. Fortunately, enough of a flap arose that Ms.Cegavske eventually resigned from the television gig.
Now, getting our news from people paid by the government to shill, or directly from people who are part of the government certainly doesn't seem to fit with the ideal of "the bulwark of liberty." But wait, there's more! It's possible to not get the news at all.
I've already commented ('Crickets') on the unseemly delay in publishing the damning British memo from the July, 2002 meeting between the US and Great Britain. Even after this story appeared on the media radar, it was considered not front page news and was buried inside the paper. This is, unfortunately, not an unusual state of affairs.
Some reporters at ABC admitted as much here :
NEWS SUMMARY
Brides gotta run, planes gotta stray, and cable news networks gotta find a way to fill a lot of programming hours as cheaply as possible. (CNBC gets to talk about the booming April retail sales numbers, and the NRA's television network will replay the Secretary of State on Larry King over and over.)
We say with all the genuine apolitical and non-partisan human concern that we can muster that the death and carnage in Iraq is truly staggering. And/but we are sort of resigned to the Notion that it simply isn't going to break through to American news organizations, or, for the most part, Americans.
Democrats are so thoroughly spooked by John Kerry's loss —- and Republicans so inspired by their stay-the-course Commander in Chief —- that what is hands down the biggest story every day in the world will get almost no coverage. No conflict at home = no coverage.
Instead, think of the Bolton confirmation hearing, the Ways and Means Social Security kickoff hearing, and the evening tribute dinner for Tom DeLay (and the conservative movement) as classic Beltway set pieces, complete with (semi-)compelling casts of characters, dramatic arcs, conflicts galore, and pure unadulterated entertainment.
(May 12, 2005)
Poor James Madison must be spinning in his grave.
posted by Diane at 6:50 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home