You should love press freedom, even if you hate the press
David McCraw first heard about the value of press freedom from his parents.
Both World War II veterans, they lived in Monticello, Ill., which in McCraw’s youth had about 4,000 residents. McCraw said everyone in town knew about the state’s reputation for corruption. Four of the seven governors between 1961 and 2009 went to prison.
His parents told McCraw that only the press gave the public a chance to hound such scoundrels and bring them to justice. McCraw became a First Amendment attorney. Since 2002, he has represented The New York Times, where he is deputy general counsel.
McCraw spoke Monday before the Forum Club of the Palm Beaches. He is promoting his book “Truth in Our Times: Inside the Fight for Press Freedom in the Age of Alternative Facts.”
At this point, fans of President Trump might be ready to stop reading. Here’s someone from the “failing” New York Times, part of the “fake news” cabal that is the “enemy of the people.” He’s citing Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway’s infamous euphemism for the president’s refusal to tell the truth.
Yet McCraw believes that press freedom isn’t a “liberal value.” He has criticized “my side” for using that term, even though the traditional meaning of “liberal” applies to values of a free society. Former President George W. Bush hoped to establish a “liberal democracy” in Iraq.
As McCraw sees it, press freedom is an “American value.” No country allows such unfettered reporting, stemming from the landmark First Amendment case in 1964 that involved the Times.
L.B. Sullivan, the police commissioner in Montgomery, Ala., sued for libel after the paper ran an ad in which allies of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., criticized him. Some of the statements in the ad were false.
A jury awarded Sullivan $500,000 and the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the award. So the Times appealed to the Supreme Court. In a unanimous decision, the court found that news organizations could libel a public figure only if they knowingly published false information — what Associate Justice William Brennan called “actual malice.”
To understand how “American” that court considered press freedom, presidents of both parties had appointed the justices who decided the case. William Rogers, who would become secretary of state under Richard Nixon, filed a friend of the court brief on behalf of The Washington Post. The paper’s reporting brought down Nixon.
McCraw recounted how every president — no matter his party — has come to dislike the press. He noted that the Times sued the Obama administration 30 times to obtain information. Times staffers rightly got cranky when Obama used his people to “cover” White House events.
Like so much else, however, press freedom has become a partisan issue. Since Trump took office, support among Democrats has climbed. Among Republicans, it has plummeted. Trump has responded to the Times’ reporting about him with attacks — not credible denials.
In August 2018, 26 percent of respondents to an AP/Ipsos poll agreed with this statement: “The president should have authority to close news outlets engaged in bad behavior.” McCraw also noted that foreign countries no longer fear taking action against American reporters. The Times used Ireland to get a reporter out of Egypt after the American embassy declined to help.
McCraw said press freedom isn’t just about law. It’s about “hearts and minds.” If Americans don’t believe that the First Amendment matters, not only reporters are in trouble. The country is in trouble.
As McCraw acknowledged, news organizations make mistakes. It’s inevitable. But credible news organizations issue corrections and run rebuttals. “You don’t see that on Twitter.”
Americans on both sides can find plenty of “reporting” that affirms their beliefs — even if it’s not accurate. Trump’s tirades have persuaded some Americans that there’s no point in supporting a “corrupt” press.
McCraw, though, remains optimistic that the trend will shift. It may take a while, starting with today’s young people.
Still, “We aren’t at zero,” McCraw said. Many Americans understand that a free press separates democracies from dictatorships. “And we don’t need everybody.”
He’s right. It’s like vaccinations. Inoculate enough people, and you prevent the outbreak of a disease. Inoculate enough people with an appreciation of the First Amendment, and you prevent an outbreak of tyranny.