Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Temple: Let's raise debate about media

Published April 7, 2007 at midnight

Text size  

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

More stories »
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I wrote last week that one reason we need a federal shield law is that those 45 words of the First Amendment no longer adequately protect journalists from overzealous prosecutors trying to force them to testify about their sources with the threat of jail.

The response by some showed the depth of anger with the press abroad in our land. That anger, I believe, can blind people both to the importance of robust and, yes, sometimes faulty publications and the efforts of most news organizations to address credibility problems.

"You lost the right to protection when you became crusaders instead of reporters," wrote one reader, who signed his e-mail "With disgust."

Whoa! There is nothing in the First Amendment saying the press must be fair or even accurate. While those are qualities many news organizations aspire to - and many readers seek - they are not a requirement. Nor did the authors of the amendment believe they should be. The journalists at the time of the Revolution were no angels. Character assassination and even fabrication were par for the course. So let's not spend our time dwelling in nostalgia for an era that never existed.

Another reader asked for an article on "specific steps being taken and by whom to ensure credibility ensured by news organizations. You (the news media as an institution) must show the public how you are ensuring the truth is being published and a balance of opinions are presented."

Well, first I prefer not to look at the news media as a monolithic group. I don't speak for CNN or Fox News, and they don't speak for me. I think it's best to examine steps to ensure credibility on an organization- by-organization basis.

I would encourage all of you to be skeptical of the news you consume. News isn't gospel. It's not supposed to be taken on faith.

But I can tell you that we at the Rocky Mountain News hold numerous conversations every day in the course of doing our work about whether we handled a story or issue appropriately and about how we should approach the stories we're working on.

We have policies. But the measure of those standards is whether they're practiced. And the only way for that to happen is for them to be part of the daily life of our newsroom, not just words on a page on our Intranet site or in a style book.

Another e-mail said: "Ask yourself who protects the public from a news media out of control - before you ask for special laws to protect reporters who may not verify sources or source statements before going to press e.g. Dan Rather!"

I don't want to go down the Dan Rather hole, but the answer regarding who protects the public from an irresponsible media outlet has become much clearer today with the explosion of voices on the Internet. The ability of the public to police the media and politicians is greater today, I believe, than ever before.

Dan Rather is proof of that. He's no longer anchoring the CBS Evening News. I welcome the greater power citizens have gained. It actually helps make news organizations better. Why? Because journalists hear more quickly, often and directly from their readers and because more voices are heard on the Web, where people don't need to buy ink by the barrel, than was ever possible before.

Not all the critics of the press I heard from were on the right.

"The bigger issue in this country is the censorship and clamps being put on the media by this corrupt, lying, thieving and malignant miss-use of the Constitution administration," one e-mail said. "It's pretty sad when Americans have to seek media sources outside America to get the real non-spun truth."

This writer has a point about the secrecy of our government. But is it really "sad" that individuals can now read publications and view Web sites from around the world to gain a different perspective?

What surprises me is that this letter writer would dispute the incredible diversity of media in this country, including on the left, where he clearly stands.

John Temple can be reached at or by mail at 101 W. Colfax Ave., Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202.