Freedom of the Press

If you haven't heard, the world has been shaken by the wikileaks release of a ton of secret government documents relating to foreign relations and policy.  Some people are angry at wikileaks and some people are happy with them.  Some people think that governments should be allowed to hide information from regular civilians especially if that information is related to national security or may incite terrorism against certain targets.  Others believe that information should be freely shared and, by implication, that a good foreign policy will be enough to prevent hatred and terrorism against nations.

The constitution of the United States acknowledges the freedom of the press from government interference.  The press is an institution that publishes information that people find interesting.  As it happens, people like to know what their governments are doing especially when their government is doing things they don't like.  If the "press" is any organization that mass distributes information, then wikileaks qualifies as the "press".  Now the United States government is trying to keep wikileaks from distributing this information.  In simple terms that means that the government is restricting the freedom of the press.

The real question is whether or not the press should really be free.  Hardcore civil libertarians would say yes, the press should be free at all costs.  On the other end of the political spectrum, dictators would say no, the press should not be free.  Most people's political views fall somewhere in between these two extremes.  Many people make excuses why the press shouldn't be free on the grounds that national security is more important, that privacy must be protected, or that the an exception should be made for their own political party.  Most people believe that some information is of a nature that should not be published.  Examples would be someone's social security number, or codes to launch nuclear missiles.  Or in the case of wikileaks, communication between various government officials and diplomats.

Perhaps the deeper issue is the lies and half-truths and violence of which the world is full.  What about codes for nuclear missiles?  Maybe we are worried about the wrong things.  Maybe nuclear missiles shouldn't exist in the first place.  Then we wouldn't be worried about the codes for them being published.  Maybe people shouldn't be issued a social security number that if it falls into the wrong hands will destroy a person's life.  Maybe government officials and politicians should be respectful to their enemies even in private communication.  Maybe we should take Thomas Jefferson's advice and have a foreign policy that is friendly to all nations and avoid entangling alliances that necessitate lies and covert violence.

If governments want to use a system of violence and lies, let them.  But don't be angry when the truth comes to light.  Don't blame the messenger.  Take a good look at the system of which you are a part and decide if the lies and violence are worth it.  We can't change the world, but we can choose whether or not we will participate in the system.