| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| LA Times Op Ed: No 1st Amendment for You! | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 31 2011, 06:38 AM (346 Views) | |
| George K | Oct 31 2011, 06:38 AM Post #1 |
|
Finally
|
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shapiro-tabloids-20110719,0,6426135.story Tabloids don't deserve the 1st Amendment Our respect for freedom of the press shelters their illegal conduct. By Jeffrey Scott Shapiro July 19, 2011 The FBI opened an inquiry late last week into Rupert Murdoch's media empire amid allegations that British reporters tried to access cellphone messages and records of Sept. 11 victims. Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.), among the members of Congress who sought the investigation, wrote to FBI Director Robert Mueller, citing news reports that reporters attempted to obtain phone records of victims through bribery and unauthorized wiretapping. Although these kinds of tactics may come as a shock to the public, I witnessed many of the same tactics while working as a cub reporter for the Globe tabloid in the late 1990s. Some American tabloids do not operate much differently from British ones. Many of the editors who reign over American tabloid newsrooms hail from Britain, where tabloid "journalists" have justified their tactics by deluding themselves that they are avengers for the working class, exposing the decadence of the rich and famous as well as the royal family. As tabloids on both sides of the Atlantic have started covering more serious stories involving crime and politics, however, innocent, ordinary people have joined the ranks of their victims. I observed tabloid reporters and editors prey on the families of murder victims and witnesses by hiring investigators to access their credit card and phone records. My editors sometimes tried to bribe or blackmail government officials for information. The problem isn't Rupert Murdoch. The problem is that the culture of tabloid journalism in both Britain and the United States is deeply tied to criminal acts. Without illegal conduct, tabloids could not preempt the mainstream press, and they would not survive. In 1999, while covering the JonBenet Ramsey murder case in Boulder, Colo., I reported my tabloid editors to the FBI for the attempted extortion of a police detective. My editors had threatened to publish a negative story about his family if he did not illegally leak sealed grand jury evidence. One of my editors also offered tens of thousands of dollars to an expert hired by defense lawyers for a copy of the coveted ransom note. After I testified before a Colorado grand jury, and felony indictments were handed down to a Globe editor and a consultant, the tabloid challenged the case on 1st Amendment grounds before the Colorado Supreme Court and lost. Despite the fact that the ruling gave prosecutors the green light to proceed, agents for the Colorado Bureau of Investigation told me that the local district attorney was concerned about being criticized for prosecuting a media organization. The charges were dropped for a mere $100,000 contribution to a journalism program and an admission from the tabloid that it had acted unethically. Confidentially, the FBI told me, "Every time we get reports of misconduct by the press, we try to do something, but the U.S. attorney's office shuts us down because of the 1st Amendment." A few years later, I decided to go to law school and became a prosecutor in Washington, where I had the job of handling 1st Amendment-related cases against protesters who had been charged with disrupting events at the U.S. Capitol, the White House and national monuments. Although I secured a conviction almost every time, not one protester who asserted a 1st Amendment defense ever served a day in jail, including a demonstrator I convicted who had tried to attack Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in the House of Representatives. "There may be other judges that will send you to jail for this, but not this judge," the jurist told her. The reality, however, was that no other judge would have sent her to jail either. A few months later she was tackled by the U.S. Secret Service after she tried to attack President George W. Bush. Although the law provides us with the tools we need to punish crimes related to free speech, the judicial system is too quick to bow before the 1st Amendment, and as a result we end up shielding criminals who misrepresent themselves as journalists and activists. If Congress truly wants to resolve this issue, it should take a cue from the British Parliament and hold hearings to investigate this systemic problem. This is not just a matter of ineffective prosecution and judicial weakness. The root of the problem is our reluctance as a nation to accept that something can be criminal when it involves expression. Crime is crime. Tabloid journalism uses illegal tactics, and it does not deserve absolute protection from the 1st Amendment. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| Klaus | Oct 31 2011, 06:43 AM Post #2 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
GKSR4. |
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| Mikhailoh | Oct 31 2011, 06:46 AM Post #3 |
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
|
The first amendment does not provide you with a constitutional right to unlawful, corrupt behavior. |
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Oct 31 2011, 07:03 AM Post #4 |
|
MAMIL
|
It seems to me that the 1st amendment gets used to defend practices it was never intended to protect. The kind of scumbaggery that takes place as referenced above should lead to jail terms. The real problem isn't the 1st amendment, I suspect, but the power of the press in political circles. In the UK at least, the Murdoch organisation has insinuated itself into the political establishment to such a level that it appears to be almost invulnerable. As a side note, the kind of self-righteous moralising that regularly takes place on Fox News and elsewhere in the media regarding the ethics and moral behaviour of others really turns my stomach. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| George K | Oct 31 2011, 07:11 AM Post #5 |
|
Finally
|
What about the practice of newspapers publishing things that are supposed to be government secrets? There was a lot of moralizing about the importance of the public's right to know back in the last decade. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Oct 31 2011, 07:13 AM Post #6 |
|
MAMIL
|
If you do that in the UK, you're likely to go to jail for breaking the Official Secrets Act, and rightly so. I don't believe in unfettered freedom of speech. As far as I'm concerned that Wikilieaks guy is a criminal, as well as being a moron. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| George K | Oct 31 2011, 07:17 AM Post #7 |
|
Finally
|
Indeed. The problem is that many journalists, legitimate or not, decide what's OK to divulge and what's not. A law such as you describe would remove ambiguity from such decisions, hopefully. |
|
A guide to GKSR: Click "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08 Nothing is as effective as homeopathy. I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles. - Klaus, 4/29/18 | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Oct 31 2011, 07:23 AM Post #8 |
|
MAMIL
|
The problem with the law, of course, is that it has a tendency to being abused by politicians. It's all about balancing power - at the moment, it seems to me that the Press has too much. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |







4:16 PM Jul 10