Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If you have ever published anything anywhere then you are a journalist [View all]Uncle Joe
(64,709 posts)45. In a world in which 6 mega corporations own 90+% of everything on television, radio and publishing
you don't have a "cantankerous press, an obstinate press, an ubiquitous press" or a "free and unrestrained press" what you have is a monopoly or trust serving as a lap dog for one point of view under the pretense of being a free press.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon_Papers
President Nixon's first reaction to the publication was that since the study embarrassed the Johnson and Kennedy administrations, not his, he should do nothing. However, Kissinger convinced the president that not opposing publication set a negative precedent for future secrets.[5] The administration argued Ellsberg and Russo were guilty of a felony under the Espionage Act of 1917, because they had no authority to publish classified documents.[17] After failing to persuade the Times to voluntarily cease publication on June 14,[5] Attorney General John N. Mitchell and Nixon obtained a federal court injunction forcing the Times to cease publication after three articles.[5] Times publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger said:
(snip)
On June 18, 1971, The Washington Post began publishing its own series of articles based upon the Pentagon Papers;[5] Ellsberg gave portions to editor Ben Bradlee. That day, Assistant U.S. Attorney General William Rehnquist asked the Post to cease publication. After the paper refused, Rehnquist sought an injunction in U.S. district court. Judge Murray Gurfein declined to issue such an injunction, writing that "[t]he security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in the value of our free institutions. A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, an ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know."[20] The government appealed that decision, and on June 26 the Supreme Court agreed to hear it jointly with the New York Times case.[19] Fifteen other newspapers received copies of the study and began publishing it.[5]
(snip)
Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.
Justice Black[21]
Thomas Tedford and Dale Herbeck summarize the reaction of editors and journalists at the time:
As the press rooms of the Times and the Post began to hum to the lifting of the censorship order, the journalists of America pondered with grave concern the fact that for fifteen days the 'free press' of the nation had been prevented from publishing an important document and for their troubles had been given an inconclusive and uninspiring 'burden-of-proof' decision by a sharply divided Supreme Court. There was relief, but no great rejoicing, in the editorial offices of America's publishers and broadcasters.
Tedford and Herbeck, pp. 225226.[22]
(snip)
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
If you have ever published anything anywhere then you are a journalist [View all]
aolwien
Sep 2013
OP
In a world in which 6 mega corporations own 90+% of everything on television, radio and publishing
Uncle Joe
Sep 2013
#45
You become a journalist the same way you become a Democrat: you decide to be one. nt
bemildred
Sep 2013
#42
Seems obvious to me, I don't know where people get the idea you need permission. nt
bemildred
Sep 2013
#44