The press: 'awesome power, and obligations’

Press, 1 June 1977, Page 16

The press: 'awesome power, and obligations’

Mr Muldoon last week described the free press as an important part of New Zealand’s heritage. He said journalists had a right to bias as individuals, but no such right as journalists.

Other politicians have recently discussed the place of the press in the Free World, among them John B. Connally, former Governor of Texas and Secretary of the American Treasury. Mr Connally believes newspapers and television networks have a responsibility to preserve the society which allows them to work freely. His address, printed here, was given to the Houston Press Club, Texas.

A recent Harris opinion poll indicated that public confidence in the press fell from 26 per cent in 1975 in the United States to 20 per cent in 1976. Confidence in television news declined from 35 per cent to 28 per cent. Since surveys show that confidence in government, big business and organised labour is also low, it may be true that people are simply growing more sceptical and cynical about all institutions. But it is also true, I think, that most people are wary of the power of the press and the potential for abuse. Anyone who feels he has been wronged by the press has never found a way to have the last word with a newspaper or a television camera. There is ageless value in the freedom of the press. Yet this freedom carries with it the dangerous freedom to oppress. That danger worries a growing number of thoughtful zXmericans, including many members of the press. Throughout American history there have been abuses of power in all branches of Government and in business and labour. Mechanisms exist in our political system to deal with these abuses. No real mechanism of this

kind exists for checking possible abuse by the media except the responsible attitude and self-discipline of those in the media. There are petty ways the press can oppress: the misleading or damaging headline, fashioned by some subeditor taking out his bias or anger; the technique of make-up which gives magnified attention to a story; or the quiet but deadly technique of benign neglect or burial of another story. All of these come under the heading of the exercise of “news judgment.” Perhaps they represent nothing more than poor management of a news operation. or the lack of a strong guiding hand over editorial practices. A more serious act of oppression is the growing volume of news reporting on serious subjects by writers and broadcasters with superficial understanding of the issues. The fault may lie with our educational system, with the hiring practices of the media, or with the mere fact that we live in an angry age with less adherence to traditional values. The public has begun lo accept that reporters may or may not be well trained for their responsibilities — may

or may not be well-balanced, open - minded, and intellectually honest, may or may not represent the broad views of the American people, may or may not have sufficient historical perspective to make calculated judgments on the events which they must report to the people. I believe that many Americans resent the smugness demonstrated among some elements in the press to the effect that “it is our job to get to the bottom of everything, no matter who it hurts: We are judge, jury and prosecutor, not merely the recorder of human events.” The free press is part of the great heritage of America. But the free press of today is a far cry from the fragile, endangered species whose perpetuation was guaranteed by the First Amendment. Contrast that struggling, vulnerable voice of early America with the awesome power of the “New York Times,” the “Washington Post,” N.8.C., A.8.C., C. 8.5., “Time” and “Newsweek.” Few would contend that these great communicators are shrinking violets or endangered species. Rather, they should be viewed for what they are: massive business empires built by entrepreneurs under the shelter of our free economic system. They are among the most profitable enterprises in America. They are corporate giants on a profit-making par with the major companies that manufacture automobiles and appliances, produce our steel, mine and refine our oil and gas and other resources, and market the multitude of products for American consumers. The communications industry today is big business — as big as any in America, including some industries

that a lot of people contend should be broken up. The truth is that our nation’s . institution of “the press” in 1977 is an influential power centre equivalent to the Presidency, the Congress, or the Supreme Court. It has been said that the press constitutes the fourth branch of government. It may be more accurate to say that it constitutes the fourth member of our institutional giants, which are big government, big business. big labour and big media. Anyone familiar with publishing and broadcasting, recognises the trend toward concentration of influence in

a few hands. Tills is plainly evident in the growth of the newspaper chains and the decline in competitive news markets. I suggest that the press has an educational role with a candid bias for the preservation of this political system. Were it not for this system, the press itself would be under some form of restraint from the Government, up to and including the chains of intellectual slavery. So the press, which enjoys great privileges in our free society, has a certain responsibility to perpetuate the society in which it flourishes. It is highly unlikely that the press, an integral part of

the free enterprise system, could somehow survive the destruction of that system. We have been falling prey to the notion that free-mar-ket practices are inherently bad and that government regulation is the panacea — the priceless ingredient to keep everyone on the straight and narrow. Will this apply ultimately to the press? This is contrary to a basic commitment of our society to rely as much as possible on individual freedom and individual action. I believe the press is obligated to help the American people understand that commitment, and to understand further that opting in favour of a governmental action as opposed to the free actions of individuals is not a choice without cost. AU of us should have a clear understanding that our nation is not predestined to survive on its own momentum. This house of cards can be brought down with ease. It can be brought down by extreme partisanship that paralyses government; and it can be brought down by public complacency and too much reliance on initiatives other than our own to bring us through critical periods in our history. It may well be brought down by our failure to understand that there has to be a public and private partnership to get the job done for our future freedom and prosperity. The Government must not be a dictator, but rather a working partner. It seems to me that in this age of accountability the press, like all institutions must re-examine its role and responsibility. The free press should — and I think it will — meet its obligations to help preserve this system of freedom in which it has played such a prominent role over two centuries of American life.