On The Moral Advantages of a Free Press Being Necessary For the Survival of a Free People

It it not enough for a mode of disseminating information to be free from governmental oversight, or to be nearly completely unfettered by law; it must be inspired, if not wholly instructed by and reliant upon individuals of some intellectual and moral integrity. This integrity, such as I will describe it, is answerable to an authority not contaminated by private interest and the unchecked motivation toward capital gain.

Albert Pike, writer and scholar, once wrote that "When public misfortunes shall be turned to private profit, the press pander to licentiousness, the pulpit ring with political harangues, long prayers to God, eloquently delivered to admiring auditors, be written out for publication, like poems and political speeches; when the uprightness of judges shall be doubted, and the honesty of legislators be a standing jest; then men may come to doubt whether the old days were not better than the new."

The onset of such widespread societal misfortunes can be foreseen in the character of individuals, as though it were a mirror. A discerning eye is capable of looking inward to the perturbations of the soul, and there it will surely find the spark of evil before it is fanned into the consuming flames of total corruption. One may fabricate justifications for one's moral concessions, citing some ephemeral "greater good" as the square against which one's deeds are checked. This is nowhere more apparent than in the field of journalism and in the press.

Those who have said that they will go to any length to report the truth, have almost certainly, unknowingly, conflated what is "true" with a personal identification of what is "right." Personal bias is impossible to eradicate, but it may be recognized and placed in a region adjacent to public discourse where it can do the least harm. The corruption of one's objectivity usually begins with the smallest of concessions, or mistakes. One who reports that it is a "very hot" day, rather than satisfying one's self with a report of the temperature, has committed a crime against the people, a crime which, unpunished by conscience, will spread and infect other sentiments like a cancer.

Who are you to say that it is "very hot"? Who is the reporter if not one who reports what has transpired? The reporter is not a novelist or even an advocate for the people, as he or she may believe him or herself to be. This is going rather too far, and contributes to a self-aggrandizement and egotism that makes a laughing stock of the press. The "people" must be trusted to advocate for themselves, whether they do so or not; whether they make the most advantageous choice for themselves or not; whether they do with the facts what is best, or not, is irrelevant to a good journalist.

A free people, to whatever extent their freedom has previously been established, will only remain so if they are enabled to attain the facts unfiltered through the lens of those in power. As long as that security is real and palpable, then, regardless of whether that privilege is utilized by and for their betterment, they will be protected by its banner-men and women. However, if that trust is eroded, and the sentiment of the people inclines toward cynicism and doubt concerning the press, then it is likely that the press has itself helped to drive the nails into the coffin wherein lies the freedom of the nation.

– Lucas Walsh is the editor of the Cheney Free Press. He can be reach at editor@cheneyfreepress.com for any questions or comments.