The argument over whether the U.S. Treasury Department should be tracking Americans’ overseas banking transactions or whether newspapers should have revealed the program has been off the mark.
Newspapers — notably the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the Los Angeles Times — ignited the firestorm recently when they reported that the Bush administration, in waging the War on Terrorism, has been tracking millions of overseas banking transactions for nearly five years.
One side of the argument, understandably, questions whether Big Brother should be meddling in citizens’ personal lives. Critics of the press argue that editors jeopardized the security of the United States during wartime. The critics further contend that perhaps the freedom of the press should be restricted.
My take, from the perspective of a veteran newspaper editor, is that the argument should not be confined to one issue. The onus for protecting confidential information lies on government, not on journalists.
Most Americans instinctively fear a government that pries into their personal lives. As it is, there is precious little privacy remaining in a world shrunk by the omnipresence of electronic gadgetry.
Likewise, editors, when they learn of such a program, have an ethical responsibility to consider informing the public of its existence. The right to exercise freedom of the press carries with it serious responsibilities. Editors, not unlike other citizens, should be held accountable for their actions.
But what torments me is the media’s inanity and inaction. Do they know a war is going on?
Americans, rather than hyperventilating over the latest clash between the press and the government, should consider the media’s overall track record in reporting the War on Terrorism. Has it been accurate? Has it been fair? Has it been balanced?
Most objective observers, I think, would say that all except the Wall Street Journal have failed on all three counts. Their reporting and editorials harp on alleged weaknesses, poor decisions, and failures of the U.S. war effort. Over the years, they have questioned the nation’s decision to go to war and the length and conduct of the conflict. They frequently have been proven wrong.
In a twisted way, journalists have enthused over waging their own personal war against the United States and blithely jeopardizing the security of all Americans. Concomitantly, they have protected the identities and “sensibilities” of an enemy that resides furtively, and sometimes brazenly, within our nation’s borders
Editors across the land, not just those of big media, also have demonstrated a curious unwillingness to publish anything that could offend Muslims, although Islamic law ruthlessly punishes anyone not of the faith. For instance, only a few months ago, all but a few U.S. newspapers refused to re-publish European cartoons that mildly parodied jihad and Muhammad.
Likewise, through their inaction, editors—perhaps by inexcusable ignorance but probably by design—have failed the public by forgoing investigative reporting of the Web of Terrorism that has ensnared cities, universities, nonprofit organizations, and businesses across America.
The existence of terrorist cells and their proliferation has been extensively reported by numerous intrepid authors. Among them are Stephen Emerson, in his “American Jihad;” Harvey Kushner and Bart Davis in “Holy War on the Home Front: The Secret Islamic Terror Network in the United States;”Lt. Gen. (Ret.) McInerny in “Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror;” and Tony Blankley in “The West’s Last Chance.”
The authors identified the cells involved, their locations, the names of their leaders, and many other incriminating details. Yet, the media remain asleep at the wheel. Here, we have a target-rich opportunity to practice “civic journalism” at its highest order, and editors fall to their knees.
I pray that journalists re-examine their priorities soon and focus on the real enemy. The fundamentalist Muslim enemy uses subterfuge and cynically exercises freedoms found only in a democracy to undermine those very freedoms.
A little balance in news coverage would assuage media critics who could legitimately ask, “Why isn’t comprehensive investigative news about terrorism likewise ‘fit to print’?
Richard C. Wagner is the editor of Carolina Journal.