The Value of a Free Press In the United States, the freedom of the press lies enshrined within the Bill of Rights, indicating a recognition of the value of the press's contribution to a free society. It both allows unfettered discussion and argument over issues and it allows unhindered news coverage. While the military typically limits information in wartime, the "fourth estate" of the press provides a check on the government by gauging and shaping public opinion. The latter can be difficult, since the press stands in a powerful position; however, the distinction between pure news and opinion informs this dichotomy. Typically, censorship of the press has come as a result of the press performing its watchdog role too well. In Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and the other totalitarian states to which this century has borne witness, autocrats banned independent media and instead inserted their own propaganda organs in its place. The same powers apply for harm, however, as the ubiquitous media-driven scandals that have rocked the United States have proven. Journalism is a business like any other, where moguls from William Hearst to Rupert Murdoch have realized sensationalism can typically be more profitable than accuracy. The court of public opinion in the area becomes much more difficult as it becomes a closed one where the media, an interested party, serves as the court clerk and the judge. In the controversy that surrounded and followed the last issue of this publication, I became acutely aware of this duality. While my decision to publish centered around my feeling that I had the responsibility to present the issue to the Swarthmore community as a whole, because of the particular opinions expressed in the articles (which I explained expressed individual opinions rather than strictly factual news reporting) some charges of sensationalism were made. At the same time, however, far more people personally thanked me for bringing a harsher scrutiny to the affairs of our government. I recognize, as the editor of another publication commented to me, that The L-Word is a publication within a small community and therefore public figures and personal relationships can become blurred. This criticism is certainly valid. However, I was personally disgusted by the way in which on all sides relatively simple issues became personal and then group vendettas. As soon as any paper loses its ability to report and comment (when comments are labeled as such), it loses its essential purpose. A free press is necessary for scrutiny. At the same time, however, publications should be accountable to their readership, clearly labeling their sources when possible and attributing editorial decisions to those who make them. Publications likewise must be willing to print or otherwise acknowledge feedback they receive, particularly if it calls factual errors to attention. We have done so with this issue and we have printed every letter we received in response to our last issue. The press must remain unfettered not for its own sake, but for its readers and community in general. The press can make public governmental decisions and abuses of power that otherwise would merely become the stuff of unreliable gossip. The press serves to present the actions of those in power accurately and to hold them accountable. These statements are equally valid whether a newspaper covers a college or a country. And I firmly believe that this purpose lies at the center of an expanding number of publications both at Swarthmore and beyond. |
Home | Archives | L-Word by Email | About The L-Word | Staff | Feedback