Does Freedom Endure?

|-‘Why is showing the injured or dead of the war important? Why has the media become the enemy?’-|

“Maybe I know what I’m doing here! These people are risking their lives for us. I want to see what they’re going through even if they don’t want us to, and I want other people to see it! What do you think they’re doing out there, protecting and defending secrecy? That’s the world of Mao… The world of Stalin, the world of secret police, secret trials, secret… secret deaths. […] You force the Press into the cold, and all you will get is lies and innuendo, and nothing, nothing is worse for a free society than a press that is in service to the military and the politicians. Nothing!”

There was a recent article in the New York Times - “Not To See The Fallen Is No Favor,” by David Carr – which was interesting, as was the backlash against it; notably the WSJ’s Opinion Journal, which asked the question “Why is it so important to show images of hurt and dead Americans?” The WSJ goes off into a conservative la-la land; however, the question is an important one. Why do we even bother with Journalists in the field? What exactly have 143 media workers lost their lives for? Why is the media defined for military supervisors as a “nontraditional” threat, on the same level as drug cartels? Why do soldiers with blogs face the very real possibility of being tried for acts of espionage?

Why is it that the media has to fight for its ability to fulfill its basic function? Why are reporters dying for information and images that are not allowed on TV? Why do our soldiers die without us seeing how or seeing the war they fight?

I can tell you why: 3756 Coalition Fatalities. Three Thousand, Seven Hundred, and Fifty Six men and women who have died in a war we started for reasons that have turned out to not even be the truth. Take a moment. Read that again. 3756 deaths. I don’t know about you, but I can feel that number, right down in my chest, and at the bottom of my stomach where it makes me feel a little sick. It makes me think about all those people with Support our Troops stickers and it makes me realize that they have no idea what’s going on with the troops they supposedly support, otherwise our soldiers would have come back a long time ago.

Why shouldn’t they have? Why do none of us have a good idea of the real situation in Iraq? Because nothing is worse for a war than to have the citizenry see it uncensored. Let us face the truth; the strongest element that worked against the Vietnam war was the television. Back then, when televised media was new, and raw, they broadcasted images of the war - deaths, lives, victories, and defeats - into America’s living rooms. The people saw something in their televisions, something horrible. They stood up and they said, as strong as they could, NO! When that many people spoke, the government had no choice to listen. We left Vietnam.

Today we have something different. Our generation has grown up with the television. For me and my peers we are too used to seeing what is broadcast as a work of fiction. When we see images of the war, they are separated from us, the pane of glass onto which they are projected works as a method of division as well. The impact is lessened. Then that impact is lessened even more because the images that show the war are censored, cut out, in the name of “privacy” and “operational security.”

You know it is a funny thing, but I can think of a few other leaders who censored the presses coverage of wars in order to prevent their full impact from reaching their nation’s citizens. They were all fascists.

Face Facts! These people fight and die for us. It is unjust that we cannot see who they are, or how they died. This war has taken a lot, and I do mean a lot, of lives. This sort of policy, this sort of secrecy, robs us of the impact that our decision as a nation has made on the families and friends of those dying for freedom. Part of that freedom that we value so dearly as to have spent 3756 lives on (thus far) is the freedom of speech, the freedom of expression, the freedom of the press. Yet, instead, they die, and their deaths are used, disgustingly, as an excuse for secrecy. By disrespecting what they died for, we are destroying the very purpose of the fight.

Ashley Gilbertson, a freelance photographer who has been in Iraq seven times to pursue his work, said “They are not letting us cover the reality of war … I think this has got little to do with the families or the soldiers and everything to do with politics.”

Don’t roll over it with bullshit about the “liberal media.” ANY media outlet that is not trying to bring these images to the forefront of the public’s attention is FAILING in its responsibility to the people. As far as I can see, the WSJ’s opinion article, and those who align themselves with its ideas, are outright supporting the abridgement of our basic human rights, of the soldiers’ basic human rights, and of our nation’s most important freedoms.

As our government tries to manage the press’s coverage of the war, it becomes harder to bring the truth, the hard, bloody truth, of the war to us. A difficulty only compacted by the rising danger to journalists, the cost of the war to the media, its journalists, and their resources, and the simple fact that as the number of resources dwindles the price becomes higher and higher for a result that lessens with each governmental censure.

“As the number of reporters there [Iraq] dwindles further and further because of the difficult conditions we work under, the kind of work they are able to publish becomes very important,” said James Glanz, a Baghdad correspondent for the New York Times. “This tiny remaining corps of reporters becomes a greater and greater problem for the military brass because we [the Press] are the only people preventing them from telling the story the way they [the Military] want it told.”

To bring the brutal truth of the war back to the home front is a responsibility of the press that dates far back. It is the reason we know what people sacrificed in the wars previous. It is the reason we know and feel the horrors and atrocities that have been committed around the world, throughout the past. Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. With the government keeping our very recent history from us, is it any surprise that they are making noises about seeking to repeat it? Is it any surprise that it continues, without any real end in sight?

To quote David Carr, “If the government chooses to overmanage the wages of war in Iraq, there is a real danger that when this new generation of veterans, whose ranks grow every day, could come home to a place where their fellow Americans have little idea what they have gone through.”

New York Times – “Not to See the Fallen Is No Favor”
WSJ OpinionJournal – "We Are The Only People Preventing Them From Telling the Story”
Iraq Coalition Casualties
Operation Enduring Freedom Casualties (Afghanistan)

I Love Free Speech…?

I, like any other red-blooded American, am guilty of the most cardinal sin of our democracy. But I'm not taking the blame alone, the rest of you are coming along with me. You too are guilty of the same sin, all of you. But don't worry; I'm going to make the confession for you. Here it comes … are you ready?

I Hate Free Speech.

Oh, I know, you've just winced, or jumped in your seat. Chances are, if you are like me, you're already composing angry replies. You already have your stack of reasons why you and, if you're a kind soul, I am not guilty of this horrendous thing. If you’re the tactical sort, you may be thinking that I'm talking about Them. You know which Them, if you’re a Democrat, They are Republicans. If you’re a conservative, They are liberals. You have numerous examples of why They are guilty of this, but you are not. Chances are, you're right, They are guilty of it. But so are you.

We all have the best of intentions. In our good intentions we know that free speech does not apply in this case. This case is the exception. You don't believe me, I know. But take a moment in your growing angst and think. Have you never thought something like "How could they print that!" or "I wish someone would do something about my biased professor" or (and you may have been thinking this one quite recently) "That speaker is offensive and shouldn't be allowed to speak at my College."

Did I detect a swallow of apprehension?

At some point in our lives everyone is guilty of this. We've all wanted to quash free speech beneath our righteous heel, taking the first decisive step on the road to hell. The irony is that we liberals are the guiltiest of denying free speech. That's not to say that the conservatives don't have a hand in paving over free expression, they do it in the form of ratings and censures, the little bleeps that make the world safe. It is a horrendous and unjust injury. But make no mistake, we liberals are worse. We are far more subtle and, therefore, deadly in our infringements. We censure to seek political correctness. Liberals enact speech codes, we write angry letters, and we call the ultimate fouls: "Bias! Racism!"

It takes a moment of reflection, but our liberal victories these days are far too often found when we kill off free speech. Bias is bad. Racism is wrong. And being offensive, well that just isn't nice! But we cannot remove people just because we find them so. Allow me an appeal to the conservative economist here, free speech is like that famous utopia - the free market - it hurts a bit, it leaves people behind, but in the end it can do more good then bad. Its conflicts work themselves out, if left alone. Legislating against them is only a mistake, and a big one. It is this mistake, compounded through legalities, suits, and funding machinations, that has put us where we are today, the Spin Zone known as the United States.

Liberals are just as guilty as conservatives of the state of the news media today. We have all pushed the news into airing innocuous idiocies or pure stupidities. By seeking to shut the other side up, you've forced them into employing a radical outlet. I want you all to take a step back from your computer and bow your head in repentance. Now, if you are a conservative, repeat after me: "Keith Olbermann is my fault entirely." If you're liberal, intone: "I am wholly responsible for FOX News."

I know, it hurts. But a lesson must be learned: There is only one reason to prevent someone from saying anything – if it will result in immediate deaths. Let Ann Coulter or Howard Stern say what they wish, they'll get their comeuppance when they loose their fans, and when the media itself hangs them. But the only reason they should not speak is because they don't want to. I'll declare it here and now; they may be filth but let them always have an outlet! I, as a liberal, would gladly throw another pie in Coulter's conservative face, but only after she's finished talking. To do anything else would only be to destroy the most important value we, as a country, have – Free Speech.

Next time you see an ad for an offensive speaker, or see an offensive book, or take offense at the language of a TV show, I want you to stop your initial impulse to force legal action on the person, or violence on the medium. I want you to take a deep breath, calm yourself, and remember the following:

I Love Free Speech.