In light of the release of the inhumane pictures by the press, I would like to pose the question of whether or not the press has taken their freedom to present information to the public too far. There are many instances where the press has released information that should be kept private, whether political or otherwise. However, this most recent event has gone too far. I feel that there are certain events the public simply should not know about. Before the press releases information to the public, especially in matters pertaining to national security, the question should be asked of what good will releasing the information do. In this case, those pictures can do no good to the public. Ask yourself, do you feel more informed by looking at the pictures all over the papers, rather than just hearing their have been terrible acts committed by U.S. soldiers.
Freedom of the Press is for the purpose of providing a watchdog function over the government. The government was covering nothing up in this matter, having announced the investigation in Jan.
In closing, I would like to say that the press was wrong in publishing the photographs which have brought the American cause into question. Sorry for the long post, but this is a real issue that must be looked at, because the photograps should have never been released.
Bob
"In closing, I would like to say that the press was wrong in publishing the photographs which have brought the American cause into question. "
Is the American cause denying torture of civilian prisoners and not admitting to the world of a huge mistake? It happened, pure and simple, now own up.
Try watching a little Al Jazeera -that is one f’d up network. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING is off limits in the “death and gore” department. No wonder they hate us over there…
Tibbs,
the comment I made has nothing to do with hiding anything from the world. The world knew because of information the U.S. government released that there were cases of prisoner abuse beyond comprehension. That information was released, and out in the open. There was and still is an investigation of the incident going on, and in due time the information would have been released.
In wartime especially, the American public does not know, nor should we know every detail. This is what my point is. Freedom is not disappearing by not knowing every detail of what happens. We as the American public were notified that there was a problem, and it was being taken care of. That is all we need to know. If that is all that was released, the country would not be trying to dig itself out of a hole, a hole that was created needlessly by the press.
A similar story can be likened to a year ago when several imbedded reporters released information about key coordinates. Why does the public need to know this information. The answer: We don’t
I am not trying to say that the freedom of the press should be limited, but I am saying that the press should use a little bit of sense and think of the consequences of releasing certain information and or photo’s simply for the sake of a story.
Just think about it,
Bob
If the press hadnt realeased the pictures the torture and humiliation would continue. We are there to liberate and help those people. It is wrong to torture them. The press helped that stop.
That is not really true. These photos are months old. The abuses were reported within the chain of command in January. They were immediately made public and the appropriate investigations initiated. The facts surrounding the photos was also public at that time. Releasing these photos does no one any good.
Having said that, I don’t see any policy that could prevent such a release that would also do more good than harm.
I used to think that we had to put up with pornography and the gross use of the public airwaves and the like as the price we had to pay in order to protect the sacred First Amendment right of political free speech. Then we got a 5-4 decision upholding campaign finance reform. Now I can hand out group sex videos to school kids, but I will do hard time in a federal prison if I buy a TV ad and say “My name is Art Franke. I have a wife and two wonderful children. George Bush is good man that I trust to watch out for me and my family. I think you should trust him too. Please vote for him in November.”
Tell me what is wrong with this situation.
Try watching a little Al Jazeera -that is one f’d up network. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING is off limits in the “death and gore” department. No wonder they hate us over there…
John A,
How right you are about that.
And as far as accuracy is concerned, they will take anything and put their twisted spin on it. It is more propaganda then news. Much of the time, more lies than truth. More the voice of radical fundamentalism than the voice of the Islamic world.
Certainly the mouthpiece for Osamma bin Laden and al-Qaeda.
I stand corrected: satire is not dead, after all.
You *are *being satirical, right?
You either have freedom of the press, or you do not. It’s not something that has flavors or shades of grey. There is no such thing as a partial restriction, no matter what some may believe or what those with itineraries want to tell you. You cannot depend on someone else to tell you what you can/can’t or should/shouldn’t see. What if we hadn’t been allowed to see the photos of Bull Connor releasing dogs and waterhoses on civil rights protestors in Alabama? MLK and Gandhi both knew how powerful images could be as a weapon in civil disobediance. What if we hadn’t been able to see the photo of the Vietnamese general executing a man in the street? Or the girl runing naked and crying from her napalmed village? Or the images of the protestors in China a few years ago (Particularly the one of the man facing off against the tank). Or Robert Capa’s photos of the Spanish Civil War or the invasion of Normandy? These are examples of images that have, at the least, educated us to make hopefully better decisions, and at the most, shaped history. Freedom of the press has been a vital factor in so many events.
I do not want the solders’ job in Iraq to be any more dangerous. On the contrary. We are walking on a tightrope over there and the Bush administration has taken for granted any bit of leverage it ever had with the Iraqi people. I am voting this November. And I want to know what’s going on, in its goriest and most shameful detail.
P2Kman,
Should the pictures of the burnt/dragged bodies of four Americans not be shown to the public too? If you were the one to oversee which pictures get released or not, what will your criteria be?
I don’t think the problem lies within any pictures (no matter how gruesome they are), it lies within the people who look at the pictures and make an illogical judgement. For example, some people are afraid to go into the water because of a shark attack while they still drive cars (even though there is a higher chance of dying while driving a car). If this is truly an isolated case, people in the United States shouldn’t be too worked up about it because it just a fraction of the entire army present in Iraq (and the military is fixing the problem). However, if people do, then you have a bigger problem than just releasing the pictures, you have a problem in educating the society about statistics.
I believe pictures should be released, and the conclusions of the pictures be made by the people themselves. Pictures of the “big picture”, including accomplishments and downfalls. From people’s arms getting blown off to the United States building a new school for the Iraqi children. If someone worked for me, I would want to know of their accomplishments and errors, not just accomplishments, and not just errors; both. Thus, if the society can only handle pictures that are good for the morale of the United States, you have a far bigger problem than just the war in Iraq…
Wei
“In doing so they have endangered the lives of US soldiers and citizens.”
“They have also compromised the national security interests of the USA.”
this isn’t the press’ fault. the lives became endangered and interests compromised the second those soldiers starting jamming broomsticks in exit only areas and thinking that it would be a great time for a tourist photo op…
“A similar story can be likened to a year ago when several imbedded reporters released information about key coordinates” it was one, and it was Geraldo Riveria, and i dont think he qualifies as a reporter. I thought after the whole Al Capone vault thing he became a professional ass.
No soldier was charged with anything until the photos came out. There was no public outcry until the photos came out. If prisoners are being tortured or humiliated, and we do nothing about it, then we are no better than saddam. You say an investigation was underway, nothing was happening, seems pretty cut and dry, yet months go by without charges. The military is an organization that moves quickly, if i were a soldier and punched out an officer, and they had photos of it, how long would it take for me to be punished? i would say under a week. This was taking months, which suggests to me that they were trying to sweep this under the carpet. And so the public needed to step in, and force the military to take action. Pictures are necessary because they are more powerful. Kennedy had countless breifs on Vietnam, and a veritable army of advisors instructing him as to the course of action, but it was a photo, of a monk setting himself on fire, to which he is said to have responded, “My God, has it come to this?” that made him change America’s role in Vietnam. The government only responds to the collective screams of the people, and people can only be rallied by only drastic measures. Words are not enough, we as a species are very visual, and thus pictures are a necessity to bringing forth any kind of change. I dont see what you dont like about those pictures. Because of those photos, bad soldiers (and yes, those were bad soldiers, tainting the good reputation of those who give their lives for their country), are going to be punished, and in the world’s eyes, we go from a nation that turns the other way on torture, to one that does not tolerate it. You dont like it, dont buy the magazines, but in my opinion, the photos forced the military to change for the better while the article alone was ignored by most.
“In doing so they have endangered the lives of US soldiers and citizens. In addition they have compromised the accused due process of the law by releasing these photos and biased the story to their liking. They have also compromised the national security interests of the USA.”
How bout the soldiers who disgraced their units compromised the national security interests of the USA? Its sorta like saying to a rape victim, “well, you did order the lobster…” The photos wouldnt exist if these soldiers werent such a disgrace to their country. Wearing a US soldier’s uniform while doing that is akin to rubbing the flag in shit. When they did that, pictures or no, they stained the American name in the international community. You wanna know why they hate us? THIS is why. Shoving broomsticks up someone’s ass gives one of their relatives a great reason to strap a bomb on their back and kill some soldiers.