 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« Looking Tough | Main | Bryson To Address Illegal Immigration Policy, Unlike Gov. Pass-The-Buck Bredesen » June 26, 2006The Freedom of the Arrogant PressAfter reading New York Times editor Bill Keller's lame defense of the NYT's decision to undercut the war on terror by exposing yet another program designed to fight the terrorists, University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds gives him a brief refresher course on the true meaning of the First Amendment.... A deeper error is Keller's characterization of freedom of the press as an institutional privilege, an error that is a manifestation of the hubris that has marked the NYT of late. Keller writes: "It's an unusual and powerful thing, this freedom that our founders gave to the press. . . . The power that has been given us is not something to be taken lightly."When elite-media big shots like Bill Keller talk about the First Amendment as a special freedom that belongs to the media, rather than a general freedom that belongs to all Americans, they simultaneously show their arrogance and their ignorance. More here from Austin Bay. And Heather MacDonald says the NYT is a national security threat. Her article is a must-read. Now that the Times has blown the cover on this terror-tracking initiative, sophisticated terrorists will figure out how to evade it, according to the Treasury's top counterterrorism official, Stuart Levey, speaking to the Wall Street Journal. The lifeblood of international terrorism--cash--will once again flow undetected.And it's all thanks to Bill Keller. Update: Glenn Reynolds has links to more criticism of the NYT for compromising national security and increasing the danger for our troops as well as for, well, everyone in America. Update: Katherine Coble is smarter than Bill Keller. Posted in Journalism & Media
Comments
Taking the NYT's definition of freedom of the press at face value, let me then ask--what did they have to gain by telling this story? What do their readers (other than terrorists) have to gain by reading this story? Posted by: Katherine Coble at June 26, 2006 10:04 AMActually, the reason for publishing this article sounds pretty solid. Me, I'm a great believer the proclaimation that "the truth will set you free." But, I just can't remember who said that, can you? Posted by: kevin barbieux at June 26, 2006 11:57 AMStripped of all the BS, Keller and McManus justify their decisions to publish the story on the following calculus: 1) The federal government is running a secret program, Therefore -- given the "obvious" (to them, as sufferers from acute BDS) potential for abuse, the public interest requires publication. It is that simple. Their basic position is that all secret programs should be leaked as long as Bush is president. Go back and read Keller's letter and the McManus interview and see if you can find any other rational argument they offer. Stripped of all the BS, that's it. Posted by: stan at June 26, 2006 1:47 PMKevin, let's not prooftext. Quite obviously there are times that telling the "truth" is not always the best of ideas. Lest you think I'm advocating lying--far from it. I merely think that truth and knowledge are a responsibility. There are truths we all know that we don't trumpet. For example, I know Aunt B's real name and her home address. But I don't tell that "truth" because--apart from setting her 'free'--it could damage her and her livelihood. I also know my Debit Card number and PIN, yet I don't share that "truth" with the world, for obvious reasons. Posted by: Katherine Coble at June 26, 2006 3:00 PMAgain this is much hype on both sides over nothing. The NYT was wanting to sensationalize a "secret" program of financial spying that was not secret. The fed has been collecting financial data for years supposedly for the drug war. Although I'm sure the IRS had access as well. It was initially called "know your neighbor". At any time the fed can issue a subpoena indefinitely for financial transaction records. Some banks are doing it voluntarily to suck up to the fed. Bush knows that. But he is using this hype to accuse the NYT of being treasonous and unpatriotic. Did you know when you apply for college assistance it states on the form that all of your financial information may be shared among the different agencies of the fed? By signing the form you are agreeing to let the fed capture and pass around your personal financial information. That gives me a warm fuzzy after the VA lost my info to a thief. Scooter Libby is a dribble compared to the major personal info leaks coming from these agencies. Posted by: Rick Forman at June 27, 2006 10:30 AMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
