Lynrd Skynrd likely had it right ...
One of my media colleagues sent a link from Editor and Publisher (E&P) magazine concerning a GOP congressman seeking to bring charges against the New York Times for reporting on the "secret financial-monitoring program used to trace terrorists."
I hadn't seen the E&P story, but I heard the rumble. It's not a surprising move, on either side of the issue.
Prior to Vietnam, much of this stuff was held close to the chest by the military, as well as the press. The Fall of the House of Nixon helped change that -- even though much of America years later sang along with Lynrd Skynrd, "Watergate does not bother me/does your conscience bother you? Tell the truth ..."
In the past 30 years, it's become a different world: Most of the mainstream press sees its responsibility in a different light, as that of a watchdog with varying degrees of political allegiance to one side of the aisle or the other: Watching one side, while ignoring the other. Interestingly enough, while many of us in the media say we're merely looking out of the public interest in reporting a number of stories, a great deal of the public (maybe even a majority) disagrees with our actions. But we'll never secede the ground that we know best; after all, somebody has to know best.
I showed one former military person the E&P story, and we both noted that the lawmaker doesn't have a legal leg to stand on: We haven't had a formal Declaration of War since World War II. Korea was (and remains) a police action, while Vietnam was a "conflict." I believe it was only in the past decade that The AP Stylebook changed its own characterization of the debacle in Southeast Asia to that of the "Vietnam War," while acknowledging both "War" and "conflict" with the Korea action. I'm guessing it's because those who served would say they were both hellish wars and who gives a flip what someone chooses to call it when bullets from an AK-47 are flying your way.
As for all of the recent media and political (is there really a difference?) angst over wiretaps and such, I long ago accepted the fact that the government (and a great number of non-governmental folks) knows what's in my bank account, and would listen in on my calls (and read my e-mail) at will. I guess it's because I'm a child of the Cold War, but to me it's old news.
Grace and peace ...
I hadn't seen the E&P story, but I heard the rumble. It's not a surprising move, on either side of the issue.
Prior to Vietnam, much of this stuff was held close to the chest by the military, as well as the press. The Fall of the House of Nixon helped change that -- even though much of America years later sang along with Lynrd Skynrd, "Watergate does not bother me/does your conscience bother you? Tell the truth ..."
In the past 30 years, it's become a different world: Most of the mainstream press sees its responsibility in a different light, as that of a watchdog with varying degrees of political allegiance to one side of the aisle or the other: Watching one side, while ignoring the other. Interestingly enough, while many of us in the media say we're merely looking out of the public interest in reporting a number of stories, a great deal of the public (maybe even a majority) disagrees with our actions. But we'll never secede the ground that we know best; after all, somebody has to know best.
I showed one former military person the E&P story, and we both noted that the lawmaker doesn't have a legal leg to stand on: We haven't had a formal Declaration of War since World War II. Korea was (and remains) a police action, while Vietnam was a "conflict." I believe it was only in the past decade that The AP Stylebook changed its own characterization of the debacle in Southeast Asia to that of the "Vietnam War," while acknowledging both "War" and "conflict" with the Korea action. I'm guessing it's because those who served would say they were both hellish wars and who gives a flip what someone chooses to call it when bullets from an AK-47 are flying your way.
As for all of the recent media and political (is there really a difference?) angst over wiretaps and such, I long ago accepted the fact that the government (and a great number of non-governmental folks) knows what's in my bank account, and would listen in on my calls (and read my e-mail) at will. I guess it's because I'm a child of the Cold War, but to me it's old news.
Grace and peace ...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home