James Wilson & Freedom of the Press

“…in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice…and secure the blessings of liberty…

The founders and framers of the United States Constitution created a document that addressed their specific concerns, beliefs, and fears in the formation of what was called the grand experiment – democratic self-rule. The freedom of speech and of the press were amongst their greatest concerns, for they had seen and experienced first hand the effects of those rights being trampled upon or abridged in such a way as to render them completely impotent. The right of a free people to express themselves and to have their views disseminated amongst each other in their letters and in their public press was considered so precious that those rights  were specifically written to encompass all known manners of speech and the media of the day without exception. There is no other recognition of ‘the press’ anywhere else within the Constitution, save the specific language in the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law …abridging the freedom or speech, or of the press….

Our founding fathers were not setting out a type of carte blanche precedent for what they understood as ‘the press’; their respect for the inherent responsibilities of both free speech and a free press were neatly encapsulated within a letter written by James Wilson of Pennsylvania, one of the few men who were seated and voted on both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutional Convention that established and enacted the United States Constitution, to William Findley, dated December 1^st, 1787:

“…what is meant by the liberty of the press is that there should be no antecedent restraint upon it; but that every author is responsible when he attacks the security or welfare of the government or the safety, character and property of the individual.”

The founding fathers might be perplexed, confused and perhaps mildly disgusted at the nature of what is today considered acceptable journalistic content and presentation.

To wit:

A recent nationally televised Republican presidential primary debate began with the moderator inquiring a candidate about the claims of marital distress made by that candidate’s ex-wife in an interview recorded for another network. The defense made by the moderator was that the quotes attributed to the ex-wife were’ out there’ being discussed and that the topic had ‘gone viral on the internet”

Is this the state of ‘the press’ in a discussion that may involve the future president of the United States? It has become acceptable professional form to quote something that has been posted on the internet. The internet has no filters, no fact-checking credentials. ‘The press’ used to accept its responsibility in securing multiple confirming sources for their published stories, but now the mere fact that it has appeared in print on a website somewhere that has not been properly vetted is the new standard for ‘the press’.

This is absurd.

There is an old adage that states that if you repeat something often enough, and if it winds up in print, the average consumer will accept it as fact. The American electorate should not stoop to the level of an average consumer. As the freest people the world has ever known, the American people should accept the corresponding responsibility and demand that any information disseminated during an election campaign be treated to the multiple source fact check process. The network television media has to apply to the government for their broadcast licenses’: should not the factual presentation of information be a requirement to attain and maintain that license?

The line has also blurred between that of newscaster and commentator. There seems to be none of the former and far too many of the latter. Commentators feel free to inject their personal views in presenting news information and then hide behind the claim that they are ‘commentators’, even those who present their views on networks with the word ‘news’ in their identifying titles.

This is not a diatribe against the internet, or a tirade against the weakness of the press, but rather a call to the patriotic heart that beats within all Americans. The internet is not an entity of facts; it should not be restricted or regulated because of that fact. It should be considered nothing more than an electronic soapbox and as such any information should be fact checked by the individual consumer. The internet is free speech; government regulation of any type is a dangerous trek towards a tyrannical state.

The twenty-four hour cable news cycle has mandated that product is more essential to profit than accuracy. The American people must self regulate their diet on any single outlet of news and information. A free people should be able to flex their constitutional muscle at will, but as James Wilson reminds us – “every author is responsible when he attacks the security or welfare of the government or the safety, character and property of the individual”.

The founders and the framers might not have foreseen the internet and cable news, but they understood the responsibility that comes with the rights to free speech and a free unregulated press.

The American people must remain vigilant to these responsibilities, or as certain as history has shown us, they can be removed easily by such an apathetic populace.