and controlling them achieves nothing in the long run. In fact, it merely delays the development of a more professional media. Meles had offered a simple explanation for his government’s actions. “Our journalists are not professional like those in the United States and Western Europe,” he told me. “They do not know how to report the news accurately. We must set guidelines for them until they learn how to do their jobs.” If he were alive today, Meles would probably be railing against “fake news.” Over more than three decades of fighting for a worldwide free press, and as an early chairman of the Committee to Protect Journalists, I have heard arguments like Meles’ many times. Journalists, officials in emerging democracies often insist, must be constrained by the state until they are able to carry out their work responsibly. But rather than accelerating the development of a credible free press, this approach impedes it. After my meeting with Meles, I began seeking historical evidence for his claim that insufficiently professional journalism justified suppression of the press; that way, I could counter his argument on my next trip. I found one precedent in early U.S. history. In fact, Meles’ words were eerily similar to arguments made in the 18th century by U.S. President John Adams and his Federalists, who denounced a free and enthusiastic press that disseminated criticism – both accurate and inaccurate – of the new country’s politicians. Arguing that an unrestrained press threatened America’s future, Adams succeeded
temporarily in stifling journalists in 1798, when he signed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which authorized imprisoning and fining journalists who “write, print, utter, or publish any false, scandalous and malicious writing” against the government. Twenty newspaper editors were subsequently jailed. But Thomas Jefferson and his Democratic- Republicans pushed back against the Federalists, both in Congress and the courts. And, fortunately for U.S. journalists, Jefferson was elected president in 1800. Within two years, the alien and sedition laws either expired or were repealed. That opened the way for the American press to experiment, thereby developing – over more than two centuries – a culture of deep and accurate reporting, including consistent fact-checking. There’s no shortcut to a vibrant free press; it takes a long period of trial and professional journalism to develop. Politicians must trust the process – and maintain a thick skin. There’s no shortcut to a vibrant free press; it takes a long period of trial and error for the norms and institutions of professional journalism to develop. Politicians must trust the process – and maintain a thick skin. While repressive media laws may benefit leaders in the short run, in the long run, they stunt the development of a country’s press. error for the norms and institutions of
By Josh Friedman
American Consequences
73
Made with FlippingBook Learn more on our blog