Press freedom and security are integral to democracy
Speaking truth to power has never been more challenging and necessary than it is today
From Winnipeg Free Press:
Free society benefits from a free press. No human institution is perfect, and news media outlets do make mistakes, but without them, there’s no one holding those in power to account.
May 3 was World Press Freedom Day, which honours journalists and remembers those killed while pursuing the truth. That was sharply illustrated with news this past week that 10 journalists were among the 29 dead in twin bombing attacks in Afghanistan.
After the first bombing in Kabul, journalists rushed to the scene, where nine of them were killed by the second suicide bomber. In a separate attack in the eastern Khost province, a reporter for the BBC’s Afghan service was shot dead.
Reporters Without Borders called it the deadliest attack targeting reporters since the U.S.-led invasion that overthrew the Taliban in 2001. In Kabul, among the dead were an Agence France-Presse photographer and two reporters for the Afghan branch of Radio Free Europe, as well as a cameraman for the local Tolo TV station. Even local journalism has its risks. It may be unfair to compare the conditions of reporters working in war-torn countries with those working in Canada and the United States, but in a very real sense, local news is what can have the greatest effect.
Voters depend on accurate information about who is running for office, what the incumbents have done with their time in power and who may be opposing them. In the heat of an election cycle, promises and verbal attacks fly thick and fast. Voters depend on context to make sense of who is likely to do what with the reins of power, and that isn’t conveyable in a sound bite. It takes years of paying attention to solid news coverage.
Speaking truth to power has become a hotter topic in North America in recent years. We’re only one U.S. election cycle on since “fake news” used to mean satirical news programs such as “The Daily Show” and “This Hour Has 22 Minutes.” In the Donald Trump era, the term has instead become a club for elected officials to wield against reporting they don’t like.
Think about that for a minute. Whether or not you agree with the politician in question on any other issue, do you think they should be declaring whether what you read, listen to or watch is fake? How long, then, before you hear the equivalent of the Marx Brothers’ broadside: “Who you gonna believe: me, or your lyin’ eyes?” That way lies authoritarianism.
Of course, in a free society, citizens are welcome to do the work themselves. They can attend council meetings, legislative sessions and make inquiries for information. They’re also free to demand a rigorous reporting from the media of those and other events that constitute a functioning democracy. But we should all remember that much of that work will never see print or get airtime, because getting the story means chasing down a lot of dead ends, weighing conflicting accounts or information and doing the work that, for some, would be convenient to ignore. That kind of pursuit is a full-time job.
No, Canada isn’t Afghanistan. Getting the story may not mean risking one’s life. But for Canadians and others to have a clear idea of what’s going on here, and create an honest picture of our society, that work needs to be done.
Otherwise, we may find ourselves further from democracy than we’d like.
Do you think a politician should be declaring whether what you read, listen to or watch is fake? How long, then, before you hear the equivalent of the Marx Brothers’ broadside: “Who you gonna believe: me, or your lyin’ eyes?”