October 21, 24, 2009

Censoring Cable News

White House officials Anita Dunn, David Axelrod, and Rahm Emanuel have not only claimed that the Fox News Network is not a news organization, but that it should not be treated as one (NYTimes via AP, Yahoo via AP, Fox News).

This is certainly the mark of an "open and transparent administration" (MSNBC). Everyone knows that open, fair, and democratic administrations defame, discredit, and encourage the rivals of people who disagree with the administration.

Kidding aside, this looks like a disturbing ploy by a president to hamper or halt a media organization. This is something that Pres. Bush did not do, despite all the insinuations that were made about "embedded reporters" and classified information at the White House, and Patriot Act paranoia.

Blacklisting, censorship, and stifling the competition - why is it so wrong when religious people ("The Crucible") or Republicans (Sen. McCarthy) or robber baron capitalists (trust funds of the 19th century) do it, but it is not wrong for a Democratic president to engage in tactics that are similar, if not the same?

Why should the White House, whatever party controls it, be allowed to defame an entire media organization because of its opinion pieces? If we were to judge news organizations from any era, from ours to the time of William Randolph Hearst, by their editorial pieces, we should find them all biased one way or another.

The natural response to this argument is that the biases displayed plainly in a newspaper's editorial page or a cable network's talk show hosts will be more subtly inserted into the news organization's ordinary reporting. I generally agree with this argument, but I respect the First Amendment and the right of the American people to to speak and publish their political opinions. I further respect people's decisions about what media they will read and watch and listen to. If they wish to listen to views that agree with their own, or views that disagree with their own, or a mix, then they are free to do so, because we do not have governments or citizens interfering with people's ability to speak and to listen.

The danger of even rhetoric, and let us not forget that this rhetoric is from the highest level of executive authority in our government, that attempts to discredit a media organization is that it teeters dangerously close to a government organization dismantling a media organization. That would be a violation of the First Amendment, and a severe blow to our way of life. Whatever anyone thinks about the Fox News Network, we should ask ourselves if we would like our favorite news network to be cursorily dismissed by officials of the President. If the President's staff can work against one news organization, they can work against them all. This is one of the main reasons that historically, our government officials have not uttered overmuch against reporters or their networks, no matter how troublesome they may be. The freedom of the American people to say and hear the truth of what is happening in the nation and the world is at stake if we lose freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

We do not need White House officials, or officials from any level of government, to tell us when any news organization is being biased, and we certainly do not need them to tell us what organizations are or are not news organizations. We elected Pres. Obama, and all of our elected leaders, in order to help us lead our nation. We, the people of the United States, shall also choose, with our attention and our pocketbooks, our news organizations and our reporters.