Nelson Evening Mail TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1944 THE USE AND ABUSE OF CENSORSHIP

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 79, 15 August 1944, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1944 THE USE AND ABUSE OF CENSORSHIP

FROM the Parliamentary debate on censorship and from the court judgment in the Billens case the people will obtain some indication, though not a full impression, of the lengths to which Press censorship has been pushed in New Zealand on the pretext of security. If this were a domestic issue between the newspapers and the Government and/or the Director of Publicity it would scarcely be a suitable subject for public comment, but of course the whole question strikes wider and deeper than that. The people themselves are a more important party than either of the other two, for they have the right to full and unbiased reports on current affairs except when the information is unsuitable for printing, confidential, or withheld in war time for reasons of national security.

As recipients of directives from the Director of Publicity, the newspapers have felt that the bounds of legitimate censorship on the score of security have been over-step-lowed to say so specifically. It is true, though not from the angle the Prime Minister expressed it, that editorial staffs of newspapers are constantly called on to judge whether certain matter is fit to print. That is done both in peace and war in accordance with the canons of good taste and relevance, but no editor would assume the right to suppress reports of such questions as were mentioned recently before the courts. Mr Fraser claims censorship is entitled to exercise that power and it is clear that the censor in many cases is the Prime Minister himself and not Mr J. T. Paul. Both Britain and Australia have come to see that one of the best methods is to let the newspapers act as their own censors and to throw the onus on them of not violating security. Surely the war has reached a stage where that can be done in New Zealand unless there is a desire to keep control of the censorship weapon for political purposes. In the course of his judgment in the case which went to the Court of Appeal Mr Justice Johnston thought it relevant to refer to the opinion of competent observers that the unpreparedness of France was clue to the excessive use of censorship. Mr Sumner Welles, a former American

Assistant Secretary for State, has told how, during his peace mission to Europe in 1940, Mr Chamberlain spoke bitterly of being cruelly deceived about the facts of the European situation, adding that the experience made clearer than ever the truth of President Roosevelt's dictum that one of the essentials to a lasting peace is freedom of information. What conscienceless Nazi censorship has to answer for in providing cover for a world menace to be built up within the Third Reich is only too patent now. The same applies to warmongering Japan. Remembering all this, the United States is one of the leaders in a movement to ensure that, in the post-war settlement, one of the cardinal points shall be free reporting of news and unrestricted circulation of it from country to country. If that comes to pass the nations will be able to obtain much franker impressions about one another than has been possible in the past and there will be less chance of secrecy cloaking the existence of hot-beds in which dictators can flour-

In British countries one of the most salutary influences for generations has come from the right of free speech, free assembly and the untrammelled right of the Press to inform accurately and criticise temperately. Compulsory censorship is a restraint on the exercise of those rights and can never be palatable in a democracy except to those seeking to wield clandestine powers. In war it is justifiable in preventing the leakage of useful information to the enemy. If it over-steps the bounds of that requirement then a powerful instrument has got into the hands of those who are abusing it. The unhealthy reaction not Only strikes at the freedom of the newspapers but, through them, impinges on the democratic rights of the people.