"Freedom" of the Press

The First Amendment to our Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press." Although the First Amendment specifically mentions only the federal Congress, this provision now protects the press from interference at all levels of government. That is the theory and myth.

The reality is that the First Amendment does not prevent the media from political and governmental “influence” or financial control by mega corporations. So is our press “free?” Aside from a few courageous journalists associated with the Independent Press Association http://www.indypress.org/site/index.html our media reflects corporate interests and content that reflects the intense desire of reports to keep their channels open to those with political influence. The result is an obsessive focus on “human interest stories” and an absence of in-depth investigatory reporting. Hence we have learned more about Dick Chaney’s “accident” quail hunting than we ever did about his role in engineering the war in Iraq, lying about the WMD that we knew Iraq no longer retained. How many Americans have any idea about the WMD we supplied to Saddam for his war against Iran? No wonder we were worried. The media, government and corporate policy makers can count on the memory loss factor of a majority of our citizens.

Perhaps it is appropriate that many persons get their “news” on the Comedy Channel’s Daily Show from Jon Stewart, or with the satire of Andy Borowitz. Rapidly decreasing newspaper subscriptions are resulting in more pink slips for news editors, leaving the “news” in the hands of young, underpaid, less experienced “reporters.” The result is that our news is without the context provided by those who have traveled broadly and have some experience with other cultures. So we have both “sound bites” and “word bites” taken from the wire services.

Today (02-19-06) the St. Petersburg Times http://www.sptimes.com ran an ad defining its “independence” as “freedom from control or influence of another or others.” Yes, this paper is one of the few that is not controlled by a for profit corporation but rather the Poynter Institute, a non profit organization http://www.poynter.org/ Yet the readers of this “independent” paper will not find editorials about Florida’s great sugar subsidy or concerns about current development issues when they involve downtown property owned by the Institute. Just what are the Institute’s financial interests and how do they influence the paper’s editorial policies.

What prompted all this was the flack over the satiric cartoons about Muhammad that ran in Denmark and prompted a violent response from conservative Muslims and a defensive salute to the “free press” flag in the West. Both responses are off target. The former reflect an internal struggle within Islam itself and the latter a misunderstanding of what needs to be “free” about the free press. Yes, images are powerful, more so than words. Thus cartoonists need to be very well informed; they are super-journalists. Satire is easy; insight is difficult. I can hardly wait to see how The New Yorker deals with the cartoon issue.

merle