Should freedom of the press be restricted?

Question

The press routinely posts stories regarding people accused of a crime but not convicted. This frequently destroys lives (e.g., the Duke Lacrosse team case, the Olympics bomb scare in Atlanta that resulted in strong accusations and eventual acquittal of an innocent man whose life was ruined, etc.) of innocent victims. The tabloids frequently destroy reputations based on conjecture, frequently delving into people's private lives even when asked to step away.

Do these press actions call for a review of the concept of responsible journalism or is this acceptable press behavior?

Lawsuits do not deter the press since they are filed infrequently. The question is: Does the press have a right to publish a story about an innocent citizen, destroy his/her reputation and yet remain above question?

Answer 1

I don't know how restricting the Freedom of the press and attacking the 1st Amendment will solve anything... It seems that our government would use this for their own political gain.(Kinda like the Fairness Doctrine). I noticed how the Duke La Cross team was plastered all over the media and practically tried and convicted by the press due to the showmanship of Sharpton and friends.... I think if a crime can be labeled as a hate crime or race crime then they are relentless in their pursuit to attack .Makes for lots of ratings... BUT only in some cases..... you know, rich white kids and poor African American victims..... Maybe that's why a crime of rape, torture,sodomy , murder and dismemberment was not mentioned when the victims were two young white kids ,Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian ....
http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/0507/0301_channon_christian.html

How one would go about fixing this bias and destructive media , I don't know... Not unless people used the Internet , or adds,whatever to bring the journalist to task. In a nation of people were celebrity worship and attacking whats unpopular at the time is more important than facts, the truth will never matter.... sad

Answer 2

Yes it should be but how and who is going to do it? A lot of the news have no more value than cheap back biting. In other examples the press sticks up for one part of the society and ignores the rest and calls it freedom of press although they know darn well, that they are cheating.
It´s actually such a power tool, that whoever holds it, wants to use it for his own purpose. So anyone who would have the right to judge what the press should report could misuse that one day.
If you only write decent stuff and wait until the truth is known before you report anything than you will loose readers.
People are interested in action, bad stuff, violence and sex.
So long as it´s money that rules the World, the papers will write what people want to read and not what they should or the truth.

Answer 3

Once you start restricting the freedom of the press, you are on the road to totalitarianism.

The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press. You would have to have a constitutional amendment in order to counter that strong prohibition and that will not happen.

Lawsuits are the only effective means of countering false, baseless stories in the press. There will always be stories that hurt someone unfairly because criminal accusations, whether the persons are guilty or not, are news.

Answer 4

No. The "freedom" of the press should not be restricted.
You may think it unfair that people are convicted in the court of public opinion, but reporting the news is reporting the news.

Irresponsible journalism has a penalty. It's libel and there are avenues to correct situations where one has been misrepresented or lied about. Curtailing "freedom" as a means of making a "kindler gentler" world is not an option.

To paraphrase a very wise quote:
Anyone who would accept reduced freedoms for safety of any kind (safety from being offended, safety from "terror" attacks) deserves neither safety or freedom.

Giving up freedom is not a solution.

Answer 5

This is probable one of the best Questions I've seen on here in a long time. Does our freedom of speech (press) take precedence over wrong full accusations (slander)?
You can not restrict the press, it is a slippery slope to controlling it which happens in countries like Russia, & Chiana. But I do think the reporters & editor or (producer), should be held accountable or liable when presumptions are made before a true & accurate happening of events has come out.

Answer 6

The words "freedom" and "restricted" don't go together. The press is formed to aware the public of what is happening. The public has the right to know what is happening in their government and who is convicted of doing something wrong. Sometimes the press can get too nosey on some things, but the majority of the time the public needs to know what is happening out there in order to defend themselves against anything that may be happening in society.

Answer 7

You raise some interesting points. However, merely reporting that someone has been taken to court on charges of [enter charge] should be allowed, in my view, even if that disrupts or even outright harms the defendant. Now, if a newspaper or other media state or imply that the person is guilty, and it's subsequently revealed that he or she is innocent, THAT is unacceptable, and should be severely punished. But restricting the right to provide neutral and dispassionate information on the grounds that it might hurt somebody seems to me like a very slippery slope indeed. I would instead focus on punishing those who spread misinformation more severely, particularly if character assassination appears to be at play...

Answer 8

"W" frequently says he hates the truth

But I like free speech. England has some kind of law the prevents the press from trying someone on the headlines.

Like Scott Peterson, Jay Leno convicted him long before the trial ever started. Guilty or not the practice needs some adjustment.

Answer 9

Actually to blame the press for the DuKe situation is wrong. Blame the prosecuter for creating a situation that drug those student's name through the mud. He is getting charged and will never work as a lawyer ever again. Hopefully he gets jail time. But it wasn't the presses fault.

Answer 10

We have very strict innocent-til-proven guilty laws, which keep it fair. When someone is arrested or charged falsley, it is not the fault of the press for reporting it, it is the fault of the police or the courts.