The press is a large part of the media. It's my main source for current events.
So, my question is...does the press, with all its freedom and rights, have a responsibility to the government and national security? Or does it have a responsibility to expose all truth to the public. How far can they go? Where is the line drawn?
Defense Secretary Gates says that those documents revealed by WikiLeaks thankfully didn't result in much endangerment of national security. But, the names of the Afghanistan civilians involved with the United States military were revealed. So, who's at fault? Isn't it the government's fault for not being able to keep a better handle on such secrets? The government is responsible for protection of such top-secret information, but it somehow was released to WikiLeaks, and thus to the public.
But when you think about it, is WikiLeaks also at fault? Knowing that what they published could potentially halt the progress of national security in the Middle East and perhaps knowing that this information was classified, did they have a responsibility to the greater good - the protection of the people? Freedom is great. Laws are enforced to ensure equal rights. But at what point does freedom have to be regulated?
About Me
- Ashtyn
- Ithaca, New York, United States
- In the state of California where 45% of registered voters are registered as Democrats and 20% of voters are registered as Independent, I tend to lean towards the Conservative side of things. I like logical arguments. I like to make a statement. I want to set trends, not follow them. I like politics. Enough said? I am currently a Government Major, French Minor, Law & Society Minor, in my freshman year at Cornell University. I am a member of Alpha Chi Omega sorority, President of the Junior Panhellenic Council, AXO Sisterhood Chair, and a member of the Roosevelt Insitute policy think tank.
1 comments:
I think we really walk a fine line when trying to figure out the border between the press and the right to free speech. Sure, it's a right guaranteed in our First Amendment. But does that mean neo-Nazi's can run around worshipping Hitler? What about those who are ruining funerals of deceased soldiers simply because the United States is overall tolerant of gays?
I think that both were at fault in this case. Yes, the government should have kept much, MUCH tighter hold on such sensitive information. Information that could have legit consequences if revealed to the general public all over the world.
And sure, Wikileaks has the right to free speech. Technically they're allowed to share whatever opinions or documents they want. And perhaps Americans have the right to know. But was it REALLY necessary for us to learn all about our Afghani aids? Nobody really gained anything from the revelation of this sensitive information.
So... I guess I feel that Wikileaks should take down those documents. Damage has already been done, but they can still act. And for the future, the media should evaluate 1. is it the truth? too often we see news that's exaggerated just to get attention and 2. does the public really NEED to know about it? Especially if it's sensitive information.
Freedom is wonderful until people start abusing it. Then you can't blame the government for stepping in and start taking away until none is left for anyone.
Post a Comment