The Free Press Is Under Fire – The Atlantic
Why a Free Press Matters
Journalists have been keeping a check on power since the creation of the First
Amendment. Now they’re being tested.
By Dan Rather and Elliot Kirschner
Mark Peterson / Redux
AUGUST 16, 2018
About the authors: Dan Rather is a former Anchor and Managing Editor of the CBS Evening News, founder
of News and Guts, and author of What Unites Us: Reflections on Patriotism. Elliot Kirschner is an Emmy-
award-winning news and documentary producer and co-author of What Unites Us: Reflections on Patriotism.
nguoi sang lap dan chu
AMERICA ’ S FOUNDING FATHERS , after breaking free from monarchical
subjugation, were determined to construct a government of checks and balances
lien bang
on absolute concentrated power. So they created a federal system that
differentiated between state and national control, as well as three branches of
government with distinct powers and responsibilities that had to answer to one
another. But, not satisfied that that was enough, they added 10 the build of rights
amendments to the
Constitution. And in the very first of those amendments, they established what has
become an insurance policy for the continued health of the republic: a free press.
As a working journalist, I know I have a stake in this concept. But as a grandfather
who wants to see his grandchildren live in a country at least as free as the one I
have enjoyed, a free press is even more relevant now than ever.
The Free Press Is Under Fire – The Atlantic
The role of the press is to ask hard questions and refuse to be prevented, haunted, stop
deterred even when
someone powerful claims, “Nothing to see here.” At first uy glance,
tin
it might seem as
lam mat on dinh lam suy yeu
if the press is a destabilizing force: It can undermine the credibility of our elected
officials and ultimately our confidence in government. It can drive down stock
strengthen
prices and embolden our nation’s critics and enemies. It can uncover inconvenient
truths and stir divisions within our society. But our Founders understood that
trach nhiem
long-term accountability is more important than short-term stability. Where would
America be without the muckrakers of the progressive era, like Ida Tarbell, who
uncovered the perfidy and immorality of the Standard Oil monopoly under John
lau nam goc
ho so
D. Rockefeller; without The New York Times’ publication of the Pentagon Papers,
which exposed the lies around the Vietnam War; without the dogged work
of The Boston Globe in documenting sexual abuse within the Catholic Church?
Because of the press, powerful institutions were held accountable for their actions,
and we became a stronger nation.
The institution of a free press in America is presently in a state of crisis greater
than I have ever seen in my lifetime, and perhaps in any moment in this nation’s
history. The winds of instability howl from many directions: a sustained attack on
press freedom from those in political power, crumbling business models, rapidly
changing technologies, and some self-inflicted wounds. This is a test, not only for
those of us who work in journalism, but also for the nation as a whole.
The most immediate threat comes from the dangerous political moment in which
we find ourselves. We have seen individual journalists and some of our best press
institutions singled out for attack by the highest of elected officials for reporting
truths that the powerful would rather remain hidden; for pointing out lies as lies;
careful examination
and for questioning motivations that deserve scrutiny. It would be easy to fill this
essay, and indeed entire volumes, with examples of these recent outrages against
the press and to call out the chief culprits in these assaults on our constitutional
freedoms. I suspect much scholarship in the future will be dedicated to just such
topics. But I am less interested in naming names than in explaining the larger
forces at play, which have been years, if not decades, in the making.
Of course there has always been friction between those in power and the
journalists tasked with covering them. George Washington complained that the
press treated him unfairly, and I imagine every president since then has felt
nhiem ki
similarly at some point in his tenure in office. But if you wish to serve as a public
official in the United States, you agree to subject yourself and your actions to
scrutiny. And for most of my early life and career, I had a sense that politicians,
quy uoc ngam
especially those at the national level, understood this compact. Even as they tried
to hide things or shift attention away from scandal, they knew they could not
tach roi
afford to disengage from the press.
