struck. On July 16, 1999, Kennedy Jr., his wife Carolyn, and her sister were
flying over the coast of Massachusetts, when their plane crashed into Martha’s
Vineyard. All three were killed, and their ashes were spread not far from where
the plane went down. (Kennedy, 2000) Within minutes of the news breaking that
John Kennedy Jr.’s plane had disappeared, the media went into overdrive. Within
hours, major networks and 24-hour cable news channels had top anchors in place,
keeping up a steady drumbeat of coverage, pounding on the same few facts amid
great speculation, historical reminiscences, and anecdotes. Tom Rosenstiel,
director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism said that, "In 12
hours of coverage, there were only about 10 minutes’ worth of actual
facts." Stephen Lacy, acting director of Michigan State University’s School
of Journalism in East Lansing said through the coverage of the Kennedy tragedy,
he saw, "a bigger disconnect between the press and the public. It was a bit
of overkill, especially on television." He went on to say that "The
media have not quite realized that overplaying does not help their credibility,
but continues to show examples of the news industry exploiting a tragedy in a
push to stem a 20-year slide in ratings, readers, and credibility." Not
only is the press hurting the public figures by this kind of reporting, it is
also affecting the public. When asked whether or not the Press had too much
freedom in the United States today, 53% of those polled said yes. This
percentage is up from 37% in 1997. (Sabjan, 1999) Paul McMasters of the First
Amendment Center attributes the shift solely on the deeper dissatisfaction that
the public feels towards the media. He believes that the public feels a sense of
being overwhelmed in major stories (like the Kennedy crash) by speculation and
the pervasiveness of news outlets. (Kennedy, 1999) The clash between the public
and the press goes beyond insensitive reporting. The biggest question that faces
the Press in the 90s, is the ongoing confusion regarding what the press’ actual
motives in reporting the news are. Many believe that is the demand for high
ratings on television or newspaper that leads journalists down the wrong path
towards tabloid journalism, instead of reporting truthful, accurate and
important information. Walter Cronkite, a broadcast journalist of the 60s and
70s, known for his coverage of the first man to walk on the moon, and the death
of President John F. Kennedy said in 1998, "instead of these TV magazine
programs offering tough documentaries and background on the issues that affect
all of us, they’re making them into television copies of ‘photoplay’ magazine.
Cronkite goes on to say that "News executives know better, but are helpless
when top management demands an increase in ratings for profit protection. (Levy,
1999, p.61-63) The motives behind newsgathering could be considered by many to
be contrary to what their responsibilities are. Changes in the autonomy3 and
accountability of journalists in the past few years has resulted in questioning
whether journalists are more interested in reporting what is important and
necessary for public information, or personal gain in their field. The classic
example of this is the story of Janet Cooke. Janet Cooke was a well respected
journalist who worked for the Washington Post in the late 70s to 1981. In 1981,
Cooke wrote a gripping story entitled, "Jimmy’s World."
"Jimmy" was an eight year old African American boy, who had become
addicted to heroin due to the constant harassment and abuse from his mother’s
live-in boyfriend. Her story was so well appreciated that it won the Pulitzer
Prize in 1981. Shortly afterwards however, "Jimmy" was revealed as a
falsity. Never was there a Jimmy, as Cooke later admitted to completely making
up the story. Her Pulitzer was taken away, and Janet Cooke was forced to resign
from journalism. Many refer to her as the new model journalist. Now, Not only
are there journalists lying about their information and their stories, but top
media executive decisions are also affecting whether or not the public receives
information that is relevant. With several corporation mergers and
consolidations, clamping down on costs and budgets, regardless of the effect on
the news coverage, can make a company a more attractive take over target, an
advantage to major shareholders in that corporation. Top executives in media
operations often own even larger amounts of stock options, resulting in more
income than their salary. Because of this, they have a personal interest in
their companies’ profit. The more viewers they have, and the more the can
squeeze out of their employees, the richer they will be in the end. (Levy, 1999,
p. 70) This results in focusing on getting ratings rather than truthfulness and
importance. Television programs such as American Journal and Hard Copy are
filled with stories being covered simply for ratings. In the last twenty years,
similar to television and magazines that have strayed toward reporting what will
get ratings rather than good solid news, journalists have done the same. The
goals of more and more journalists have gone from reporting solid and useful
material to whatever will make them the most money. Andrew Kohut, director of
the Pen Research Center for People and the Press says, "The public feels
that journalists are too aggressive in the way they play their watchdog role,
and are doing it not because they are seeking the truth, but to advance their
careers." (Bowes, 1997, p. 124) Whether or not this is the case, the public
cannot deny the fact that without the free press, it would be impossible to
retain an informed populace. That is why many believe the press should be free
to report anything truthful, honest and accurate. Throughout United States
history, the Supreme Court has maintained and guaranteed the right to a free
press. One of the most widely known cases in which this right is secured is in
the case of New York Times Co. v. United States. The Pentagon Papers were
top-secret information. The Papers were a study that detailed government
deceptions about United States policy relating to the Vietnam War. The Papers
were revealed to the New York Times by Daniel Ellsberg, one of the analysts who
helped write and publish the study in 1971. These revealed that the Tonkin Gulf
Resolution, which led to increased U.S. military involvement in Vietnam, had
been formulated months before the corresponding incident took place, and that
President Lyndon Johnson had been committing infantry to Vietnam while telling
the nation that he had no long-range plans for the war. The U.S. government took
the New York Times to court on basis publishing material that challenged
national security. However, the Supreme Court agreed that stopping the
publication violated First Amendment protections. Justice Hugo L. Black
commented on the case saying, "I believe that every moment’s continuance of
the injunctions against these newspapers amounts to a flagrant, indefensible,
and continuing violation of the First Amendment. In the 1992 case of Food Lion
v. American Broadcasting Channel Co. (ABC), two producers from the ABC news
magazine show called "Prime Time Live" went under cover and started
working at Food Lion grocery stores. The two ABC reporters used false resumes to
get jobs at a Food Lion store in North and South Carolina, then secretly
videotaped employees for a story on food-handling practices that accused the
grocery chain of selling rat-gnawed cheese and rotting meat. The report alleged
that Food Lion employees ground out-of-date beef along with new beef, bleached
rank meat to remove its odor and redated products not sold before their
expiration date. In 1992, the jury that found ABC guilty of fraud under a state
law awarded the supermarket chain $5.5 million in punitive damages, but that was
cut to $315,000 by a federal judge. (Associated Press, 1999) This past year, the
charges were reversed, and ABC was found not guilty of the charges brought
against them. ABC intended to benefit the consuming public by letting it know
about Food Lion’s food handling practices," said the opinion by Judge M.
Blane Michael. "And Moreover, ABC was not competing with Food Lion, as it
did not have any actual or potential business relationship with the grocery
chain." The appeals panel affirmed the jury finding that the two ABC
employees who worked for Food Lion–Lynne Dale and Susan Barnett — breached
their duty of loyalty to Food Lion and committed trespass. It upheld nominal
damages of $1 each against them. (Associated Press, 1999) "This is a
victory for the American tradition of investigative journalism. In the end,
after Food Lion spent millions of dollars on legal fees and public relations
offensives, the court ordered ABC News to pay only $2 in damages," said
David Westin, ABC News president. (Associated Press, 1999) In the argument of
the press over emphasizing coverage of public figures, several things must come
into consideration. First and foremost, the press has the right to publish
personal information about a public figure. As Supreme Court Justice Douglas
said, "Such privacy as a person normally has ceases when his life has
ceased to be private." (Leahy, 1991, p.31) The First Amendment was intended
for full freedom of expression for the press. For "a right to engage in
rasping, corrosive, and offensive discussion on all topics of public
interest." (Levy, 1999, p.77) Many believe that the blame for the change in
journalism from honest to tabloid journalism can be placed squarely on the
public. The tabloid television shows have always done well in daytime ratings,
as the public most often views television shows that focus on celebrities
involving sex, crimes, or daily life. Joe Saltzman, a columnist for USA Today,
in an article to the public said: "This is the way you want it. When you
stop embracing celebrity journalism, when it is no longer profitable to publish
pictures of every facet of a celebrities’ daily life, then all of this will end.
And all media will look for something else that you want. To complain about the
way things are, is simply to add more hypocrisy to the stench already
surrounding us." (Hamill, 1998, p.175) In order for the media and the
public to coexist on better terms, certain things must occur. Journalists must
try to follow codes of ethics that have been implied on them. By personally
following the ethics that the American Society of Newspaper Editors have
written, the public will once again begin to trust the press as truth seeking
and honest. Journalists must also remain focused on the important issues that
effect the American people. Issues involving political issues and votes in
congress, not just what a political figure did on the weekend. Journalists
should shy away from reporting consensual crimes. Consensual crimes corrupt our
free press. Because committing a consensual crime is breaking the law, and since
breaking the law is news, reporters are often sent out looking for drug busts,
hookers, or stories on who is sleeping with whom and whether or not they’re
married to someone else. (McWilliams, 1999) As George Bernard Shaw, winner of
the Nobel prize for literature commented, "You’d think America was
populated solely by naked women and cinema stars." (McWilliams, 1999) The
press not only cheapens itself by playing tattletale and reporting the
consensual exploits of others; it also "eats it’s young" by reporting
on the consensual activities of its own. An example of this involves an
attractive female "reporter" who invited Larry King up to her hotel
room, which happened to have a barrage of hidden cameras. Time went on and on,
Mr. King did not make a single improper move. But, as dull and unimportant as it
was, they aired the tape anyway. (McWilliams, 1999) News like this benefits no
one, and should have no place in journalism. The public, just like the press,
has to adapt and change as well if the press is expected to change the way they
report information, and what kind of information they report. The public can no
longer maintain such a high appreciation for obtaining information regarding the
personal lives of those with very public lives. If this occurs, horrible
tragedies like the death of Princess Diana could possibly be avoided in the
future. The press will always report events that occur in the lives of public
figures, but if the public as a whole loses its insatiable curiosity regarding
these public figures, the press will begin to look elsewhere for stories that
hold the public’s interest. Over the course of the 20th century the Supreme
Court has breathed life into the text of the First Amendment by upholding the
right of the press to pursue its mission, no matter how detestable that might
seem to those in power. The courts have imposed some limits on liberty, and some
questions remain as to how far this liberty will extend to new media and to some
of the more aggressive efforts employed by journalists to obtain the news.
Still, as Justice Stewart wrote in the Pentagon Papers case, "without an
informed and free press there cannot be an enlightened people." The U.S.
Supreme Court has yet to address many of the important issues raised by
surreptitious newsgathering. And the issue at hand may be much larger than the
pure legality of journalistic methods and behavior. The face of journalism
itself is changing to accommodate new technology, global events, and the
complicated needs and interests of the viewer. In the case of Food Lion, many
argue that "the prime time magazines are under enormous pressure to tell
clear, simple stories, with victims and villains, preferably illustrated with
eye-catching video," (Gunther, 1998) The challenge facing the courts then,
is to ensure that investigative journalism can continue to produce hard-hitting
stories that expose wrongdoing, while avoiding the litigation that redirects
blame to the journalists. Like most legal issues, the balance is unstable, but
the public can only be best served once the question of the media and
constitutional protection have been put to rest. The freedom of the press will
remain as one of the most important freedoms in our country. So as a country, it
should be of utmost importance to hold on to that freedom, with the press and
public attempting to work together to maintain liberty. Andrew Hamilton said it
best in a speech he gave on August 4, 1735: Power may justly be compared to a
great river; while keeping its bounds, it is both beautiful and useful, but when
it overflows its banks, it is then too impetuous to be stemmed; it bears down
all before it, and brings destruction and desolation wherever it comes. If,
then, this be the nature of power, let us at least do our duty as a country, and
like wise men who value freedom, use our utmost care to support liberty, the
only bulwark against lawless power, which, in all ages has sacrificed the blood
of the best men that ever lived.
d39
Associated Press. "Federal appeals court reverses fraud verdict against
ABC in Food Lion case." available [online] http://www.gocarolinas.com/news/carolinas/1999/10/20/food_lion.html,
February 18, 2000. This article, and this case in general was extremely helpful,
containing valueable information regarding a case that strongly supported the
arguement that the press should not be regulated. Bowes, Kay. Journalism Ethics
Columbus Publications. 1997. Encarta Online Delux. "Andrew Hamilton on Free
Speech and Press." available [online] www.Encarta.com. January 8, 2000.
FindLaw Constitution. "Invasion of Privacy." available [online]
http://caselaw.nndraw.com/data/Constitution/amendment01/19.html, January 12,
2000. Gunther, Marc. "The Lion’s Share." American Journalism Review,
March 1997. Hamill, Pete. News is a Verb. Ballantine Publishing Group. 1997.
Holland, Keating. Poll: Strong majority do not want Clinton removed from office.
available http://cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/01/11/poll/, January 26, 2000.
20 Infoplease.com. "Kenneth Starr." available [online] http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0767291.html.
February 16, 2000. Iggers, Jeremy. Good News, Bad News. Westview Press. 1998
This book played a vital part in my researc paper, supplying most of my basis
for the codes of ethics journalists must follow. Isikof, Michael. and Thomas,
Evan. "The President and the intern." Newsweek 2 Feb.1998. Kennedy,
Bruce. "JFK Jr.: Reluctant Crown Prince or America’s "Royal
Family." available [online] http://cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/kennedy/stories/jfk.profile/index.html,
Februrary 20, 2000. Levy, Beth. Bonilla, Denise M. The Power of the Press. H.W.
Wilson Company. New York, 1999. McWilliams, Walter. "Consensual Crimes
Corrupt the Freedom of the Press." available [online] http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/amt/212.htm.
Sabjan, Kathryn. "Tabloid Journalism." [online] available http://www.an.psu.edu/cgk4/kls5.html,
December 20, 1999. Schwartz, Bernard. Freedom of the Press. Facts on file
Publishing. 1992. This book was also very important to my paper, as it had an
incredible amount of facts regarding the history of the Freedom of the Press. 21
Wilson, Mike. "Freedom of the Press: How far does it go?" Cobblestone.
January 1999. Proquest. January 20, 2000.