Thursday, February 1, 2007

A victory (perhaps temporary) for Freedom of Information

Aloha everyone,

As you might know if you've been following the news, two charges against Lt. Ehren Watada, the Honolulu native who is standing trial for his refusal to obey orders to fight in Iraq, have been dropped. This might take a couple years off whatever sentence the military decides to give him, but the decision revolved around a larger issue, and that is whether or not the military and the federal government have the right to force private journalists to disclose sources or information. Sarah Olson, a freelance journalist from Oakland, and Greg Kakesako from the Honolulu Star-Bulletin were sent subpoenas in December, stating that if they did not make available their interviews with Watada, they could face felony contempt of court charges, which carry a sentence of up to six months in prison.
Fortunately, the journalist community responded to this threat with widespread outrage, and editorials were written, petitions were signed and protests were held to such a degree that the Army was pressured to make the decision to drop the charges, which would drop the journalists' subpoenas as well.
The question is, how long will this victory last? Will the Federal Government eventually decide that the media needs to be an open resource and passes a law that forces journalists to disclose information in criminal trials? Our victory, and the media response this time is heartening, but will journalists continue to function as a coherent community with decisive clout?

2 comments:

Nathan Serota said...

While there is no doubt that these decisions concerning the Lieutenant are a victory for the freedom of choice both for military personnel and for journalists, there are again arguments for both sides of this debate.
First there is the Liuetenant who, bless his heart for not wanting to fight in this horrendously botched war, did make an obligation to the armed forces when he joined. His job is as being a soldier, a fuly functioning killing machine whose service is defined by obedience. Sure, his protest against the war is an great political protest against this Vietnamesque conflict, but he was not forced into joining the armed forces, it was his decision, and he should burden the responsibility of that choice.
Second, it always bothers me when the government flexes its legal muscle against individual journalists because they can't obtain information that we can. All of these frivelous lawsuits against reporters need to have some basis to be pursued so adamantly. What I mean is that the information that the journalist compiled from their unidentified source need to be of the highest importance, let's say for the purpose of national security, for the government to pursue them in litigation. A case such as this appears to me as though the information gathering agencies of the US are taking shortcuts to try and get info that they need, instead of pursuing it themselves. They have to remember that journalists are independent entities, for the most part, and that we serve the government through objectivity not through broadcasting an agenda.

monfort said...

While reading this blog I was discussing the Watada situation with a friend. I agree with Nathan that he made the choice to join the military and became an officer and a leader. Now what he was being sent to fight for is, in my opinion, a horrible and unjust war. I am not for the war in Iraq but I am for our troops and their lives. My friend pointed out that he left his troops in the dust. He was their leader and he did not join them. It disrupts the dynamics of the squad. Now the troop will be under new leadership where they will have to build a whole new dynamic with a new leader in a war zone. This is unfair. Even if you don't agree with the government you are fighting under maybe then you should at least be in battle to fight and protect the soldier next to you.
Now the whole idea of the government threatening journalists to reveal their sources sickens me. If the journalists can get a story or a source then the government should have the means to do so as well. They're the government!