The balance between security and liberty continues to be tested.
The Independent reports today that Members of Parliament in the United Kingdom are considering unprecedented and legally binding powers to ban the media from reporting matters of national security, under proposals being discussed in Whitehall.
I bring this to our attention because trends started elsewhere, and often in this country, tend to spread. Sometimes like wildfire. Othertimes, insidiously, slowly, but steadily. This is one of those that I think will spread. Not sure how fast or slowly, but spread nonetheless.
Invariably it seems that bad situations create bad law. And, in this case, I think the media’s abandonment of any balance between the public’s right to know and the media’s obligation to not necessarily publish everything it knows, is going to create an environment for this kind of censorship.
In other words, both the government and media are wrong. Government is overreacting and the media is failing to strike a balance.
Case in point from the United Kingdom: an Islamist plot to kidnap and murder a British serviceman in 2007, during which reporters were tipped off about the imminent arrest of suspects in Birmingham, a security operation known as “Gamble”. The staff in the office of the then home secretary, John Reid, and the local police were among those accused of being responsible – charges they denied. An investigation by Scotland Yard failed to find the source of the leak.
So, ostensibly someone leaks information and the press runs with it. Of course, the leakers later deny the leak and the press is left holding the bag for reporting on information that wasn’t necessary to publish immediately. 
Where do we draw the line? Seems to me that both sides need to figure out a way to reach a compromise without resorting to the draconian measures being considered in Great Britain. The media needs to recognize its responsibility in issues of national security; and, the government needs to be more open to the media and strike more “off the record” agreements.
What do you think?
