Freedom of the Press Although a cherished right of the people, freedom of the press is different from other liberties of the people in that it is both individual and institutional. It applies not just to a single person's right to publish ideas, but also to the right of print and broadcast media to express political views and to cover and publish news. A free press is, therefore, one of the foundations of a democratic society, and as Walter Lippmann, the 20th-century American columnist, wrote, "A free press is not a privilege, but an organic necessity in a great society." Indeed, as society has grown increasingly complex, people rely more and more on newspapers, radio, and television to keep abreast with world news, opinion, and political ideas. One sign of the importance of a free press is that when antidemocratic forces take over a country, their first act is often to muzzle the press. Thomas Jefferson, on the necessity of a free press (1787) The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. * * * * * The origins of freedom of speech and press are nearly alike, because critical utterances about the government, either written or spoken, were subject to punishment under English law. It did not matter whether what had been printed was true; government saw the very fact of the criticism as an evil, since it cast doubt on the integrity and reliability of public officers. Progress toward a truly free press, that is, one in which people could publish their views without fear of government reprisal, was halting, and in the mid-18th century the great English legal commentator, Sir William Blackstone, declared that although liberty of the press was essential to the nature of a free state, it could and should be bounded. Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765) Where blasphemous, immoral, treasonable, schismatical, seditious, or scandalous libels are punished by English law�the liberty of the press, properly understood, is by no means infringed or violated. The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state; but this consists in laying... ... middle of paper ... ...ing capacity of a newspaper or television station, in terms of opinion he or she can shout quite loudly to anyone who wants to listen. Moreover, some individuals have formed Internet news services that provide specialized information instantaneously about politics, weather, the stock market, sports, and fashion. In addition to the print and broadcast media, the world now has a third branch of the press, the on-line service. In terms of the rights of the people, one can argue that there is no such thing as too much news. Across the masthead of many American newspapers are inscribed the words from Scripture, "You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." The Founding Fathers believed that a free press was a necessary protection of the individual from the government. Justice Brandeis saw a free press as providing the information that a person needed to fulfill the obligations of citizenship. Probably in no other area is the nature of a right changing as rapidly as it is in the gathering and dissemination of information by the press, but the task remains the same. The First Amendment's Press Clause continues to be a structural bulwark of democracy and of the people.
“The loss of liberty in general would soon follow the suppression of the liberty of the press; for it is an essential branch of liberty, so perhaps it is the best preservative of the whole.”
In the Supreme Court case of the New York Times Co. vs. United States there is a power struggle. This struggle includes the entities of the individual freedoms against the interests of federal government. It is well known that the first amendment protects the freedom of speech, but to what extent does this freedom exist. There have been instances in which speech has been limited; Schenck vs. United States(1919) was the landmark case which instituted such limitations due to circumstances of “clear and present danger”. Many have noted that the press serves as an overseer which both apprehends and guides national agenda. However, if the federal government possessed the ability to censor the press would the government restrain itself? In the case of the Pentagon Papers the necessities of individual freedoms supersedes the scope of the national government.
Censorship takes on all different shapes and forms: banning of books, television guidelines, laws that curb specific types of speech, and imprisonment or even death for openly speaking. For example, in sixteenth century England, a loyal subject of Henry VII was imprisoned for saying, “I like not the proceedings of this realm. ”1 In earlier times this would have been punishable by death for treason. The need for freedom of speech was first brought up in Massachusetts Body of Liberties in 1641.
As in speech, technology has provided another excuse for government intrusion into the press. The Secret Service can confiscate computers, printers, hard disks, and mail from electronic services they do not consider a press. Entire stores of books and videotapes are seized because of sexually explicit material. The Bill of Rights and the First Amendment exists to protect speech and press that is unpopular. “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Steele).
In the United States, free speech is protected by the First Amendment in which it states, “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion … or abridging the freedom of speech.” Now, nearly 250 years into the future, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were afraid of is starting to happen. Today, our freedom of speech is being threatened through different forces, such as the tyranny of the majority, the protection of the minority, and the stability of the society. Now, colleges and universities in the United States today are also trying to institute a code upon its students that would bar them from exercising their right to speak freely in the name of protecting minorities from getting bullied. This brings us into
...tricted by channel capacity and it can provide diverse audiences at once. Moreover, with the online internet anyone can gather all information they need as well as the social networking in ways that people can interact in real time even from the distance and lay bare to a new perspective of democracy. From that standpoint, the young generation will even consider the difficulty public service broadcasters will face.
Gearon, L. (2006). Freedom of expression and human rights: Historical, literary and political contexts. Brighton [u.a.: Sussex Academic.
In seeking out the news, the press therefore acts as an agent of the public at large. It is the means by which people receive that free flow of... ... middle of paper ... ...responses to the receiver."
... small media reforms (like public journalism) will be enough to reduce the commercial and corporate imperatives driving our existing media systems (Hackett and Zhao, 1998, p. 235). Instead, a fundamental reform of the entire system is needed, together with a wider institutional reform of the very structures the media systems work within, our democracies. This will be a difficult task, due to powerful vested interests benefiting from the status quo, including media, political and economic elites. Reforms will need to be driven by campaigns mobilising public support across the political spectrum, to enable the citizens of the world to have a media system that works to strengthen democratic principles as opposed to undermining them. This task is challenging, but it will become easier once people begin to understand the media’s role in policymaking within our democracies.
The first is the crisis of viability. The chance of success in the journalism in the mainstream is approaching a decline due to the transformations in technologies and new access to multiple sources of information. The second is a crisis in civic adequacy. The contributions of journalism to citizenship and democracy have begun to shift and this shift has caused a question of the relevancy of journalism to democratic processes. In a democratic society journalism plays the role of the government watchdog. The effectiveness of society’s watchdog is now being challenged and in turn alternating the structure of the current democratic society. Many critical theorists of the press during the beginning of the 20th century were concerned with finding appropriate forms of public regulation of the press and journalism to ensure that journalists are writing “news and information about public affairs which sustains and nurtures citizen information, understanding and engagement and thereby a democratic polity” (Cushion and Franklin, 2015: 75) (Dahlgren, Splichal 2016). Journalism is a political entity that influences and informs the public. It is meant to work as a source of public information that helps and does not hinder the general public specifically in political processes. The article
"Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one." This quote by A.J. Liebling illustrates the reality of where the media stands in today's society. Over the past twenty years there has been an increase in power throughout the media with regard to politics. The media's original purpose was to inform the public of the relevant events that occurred around the world. The job of the media is to search out the truth and relay that news to the people. The media has the power to inform the people but often times the stories given to the public are distorted for one reason or another. Using slant and sensationalism, the media has begun to shape our views in society and the process by which we choose our leaders. There was once a time when the government used the media as a medium to influence voters, committees, communities etc. Recently, it has been the presidents of major media outlets that have not only exercised power over the public but also made their presences felt in government and in the halls of congress. When the word democracy is thrown about it usually has to do with the rights or original intentions for a group or organization. The first group intended to be influenced by the media was the informed voter. Political parties along with the government used a variety of media resources to persuade the voter or in effect receive a vote for their cause. Returning to the thought of ?democracy? the question is, what was the original intention of the media with relation to the theme of democracy and the informed voter? To analyze this thought thoroughly one must first grasp an understanding of the basic definition of democracy.
Thirty years ago, if I told you that the primary means of communicating and disseminating information would be a series of interconnected computer networks you would of thought I was watching Star Trek or reading a science fiction novel. In 2010, the future of mass media is upon us today; the Internet. The Internet is and will only grow in the future as the primary means of delivering news, information and entertainment to the vast majority of Americans. Mass media as we know it today will take new shape and form in the next few years with the convergence and migration of three legacy mediums (Television, Radio, Newspaper) into one that is based on the Internet and will replace these mediums forever changing the face of journalism, media and politics. In this paper I will attempt to explain the transition of print media to one of the internet, how the shift to an internet based media environment will impact journalism and mass media, and how this migration will benefit society and forever change the dynamic of news and politics.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau who is a famous Francopphone Genvan philosopher explained that opinions form the society is a law which is beyond the law. That is to say, he thought that public opinion is the most important one among the laws (Rousseau, 1762). As a matter of fact, media can gather opinion of citizens, which means if media is not allowed, then public opinion will not be gathered. Therefore, government cannot listen to the people and know their demands. The situation become worse that government will pay less attention to citizens and even ignore them. Additionally, if media is restricted by the government, officials will choose to filter out those information from public opinion which are harmful to the regime of party. A government which lose the public reaction will never be a representative of all citizens and finally it will be a dictatorship society rather than a democracy
Whereas “unlimited freedom of the press” is guaranteed as a consequence of the right of man to individual liberty, freedom of the press is totally destroyed, because “freedom of the press should not be permitted when it endangers public liberty.” That is to say, therefore: The right of man to liberty ceases to be a right as soon as it comes into conflict with political life, whereas in theory political life is only the guarantee of human rights, the rights of the individual, and therefore must be abandoned as soon as it comes into contradiction with its aim, with these rights of man.” (Marx & Lederer, 1958)
New technology has developed rapidly since the birth of the internet, and it continues to expand and evolve affecting many domains, especially the print media. This essay will investigate the influence and impact of current technology of the electronic media and World Wide Web on print media, and how future developments in technology will affect the future direction of the traditional newspaper. The way in which “Bloggers” have influenced traditional journalism will also be explored and how this has affected the journalism profession. In addition, the negative impacts of how the electronic media is being used as a political forum will also be investigated. Finally, the author will predict the consequences of future developments in this rapidly growing industry and the implications this may have on the direction of print media.