Fall 2001 Human Rights Magazine

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, have forced this country into a soul-searching reconsideration of its safety and security. For many Americans, the tragic events also brought an intense new focus on civil liberties and the durability of individual rights in times of national emergency. Deep in the thicket has been the news media, never more present than in recent weeks, exercising its own constitutional freedom of the press to keep the camera focused on the nation's introspection. In this issue of Human Rights, we pause to reflect on the rights and role of the news media. We examine the "circle of rights"-the rights of the news media and the news media's relationship to the rights of others.

What more powerful image could there be of society's interaction with the news media than the video footage of the two planes hitting the World Trade Center? Can you even count how many times you have seen it? The news media had the power to keep that image before the American people and in a sense to create the catharsis that went with the image. And the news media had an unfettered right to broadcast that video whenever it chose, to gather more videos from different angles, to buy footage from other photographers, and to interview experts to look for insights and nuances in the footage. Yet the media also had and exercised the power to decide to stop showing the videos after a few days and to end the nation's almost hypnotic fascination with the pictures; that decision would help the nation move on to the difficult task ahead of responding to terrorism.

Commentators on the role of the media have argued for years about the power of the news media to influence the national agenda by focusing public attention on an issue. And lawyers who represent the media have long advocated the need for vigorous protection of the media's ability to gather news. But isn't there a relationship between these sets of circumstances? Consider how the civil rights movement of the 1960s would have fared without the news media making coverage of the issue a priority. Consider whether the news media could have made coverage of the civil rights movement a priority without the expanded First Amendment protection that the Supreme Court provided. Thus, through the media's influence on issues of national debate, the civil rights of Americans are inextricably linked with the rights of the news media.

In one sense, the Supreme Court has recognized this "circle of rights." The Court has often said that the news media's right of access to information exists because the media serve as "the eyes and ears of the public." That is, the news media shape the ability of the American democracy to hold government accountable. In this issue, we go beyond this watchdog role and examine the media's rights and the media's impact on rights, as well as the impact of the increased emphasis on conglomerate ownership of news media organizations; if the news business becomes more business and less news, will that alter the circle of rights?

There has never been a more critical time to examine these issues. In the aftermath of the September 11 attack, the media have been the critical lifeline for information about the assault on our liberty and about the significant reexamination of our civil liberties. With this thirst for information has come debate about the media's role in covering the current and ongoing military conflict. And so, the circle of rights goes on.

Stephen J. Wermiel
Special Issue Editor

As published in Human Rights, Fall 2001, Vol. 28, No. 4, p.2.