The media and national security

Published June 20, 2005 - The media and national security

Abuses of our 1st amendment rights to freedom of speech and freedom of the press have led to increased hatred of the United States across the globe. The belief of many that “everyone has the right to know everything” is causing great harm to this country and is directly contributing to the threat against Americans everywhere.

The public’s right to know and the media’s right to free press should not take priority over national security. In our government and in our military, all information is identified for classification. The determination for classifying information is based on the type of damage it could cause to the U.S. or its allies. Classification designations include “Top Secret, Secret, and Confidential”. Information not meeting one of these categories is typically considered “Unclassified”. For the purpose of this article, I will focus on the top two levels of classified information.

Information may be classified “Top Secret'' if its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to our national security. This classification is typically used with the utmost restraint. Examples of “exceptionally grave damage” include armed hostilities against the U.S. or its allies; disruption of foreign relations vitally affecting the national security; the compromise of vital national defense plans or complex crypto-logic and communications intelligence systems; the revelation of sensitive intelligence operations; and the disclosure of scientific or technological developments vital to national security.

Information may be classified “Secret'' if its unauthorized disclosure could reasonably be expected to cause serious damage to our national security. This classification is to be used sparingly. Examples of “serious damage'' include disruption of foreign relations significantly affecting the national security; significant impairment of a program or policy directly related to the national security; revelation of significant military plans or intelligence operations; and compromise of significant scientific or technological developments relating to national security.

Although these classifications do not extend into the private sector, the press should consider the result of their actions prior to releasing “newsworthy” information. Having the right to publish a story does not make it right to publish a story. There can be no question as to the extent of the damage caused by the release of the Abu-Grhaib prisoner abuse photos.

The person(s) who leaked them to CBS and the producers of CBS who were responsible for the release of those photos are all traitors to the U.S. as far as I am concerned. The damage caused by those photos has in fact been exceptionally grave. CBS could have and should have entered into a confidentiality agreement with the U.S. government to investigate the abuse at Abu Grhaib. They could have secured exclusive rights to publish stories on the investigation and the courts martial of the guilty without ever broadcasting one photo. Instead, they chose to bring shame upon this country and harm upon our citizens.

Newsweek’s recent publication of Quran abuse in Guantanamo Bay is another example of how some in the media are bent on causing damage to the U.S. Newsweek could have taken a more sensible approach to dealing with the information they received. Instead, they exercised their right to be insensitive to the national security of this country. Their selfish greed led to riots and uprisings against the U.S. across the Arab world, resulting in the deaths of many and increased violence against Americans abroad.

Whatever happened to the good old days, when the television networks played the National Anthem at the beginning and the end of their broadcast days? There used to be a great sense of patriotism in the American media. When did it become so popular for our own media to attack, tear down and even destroy the reputation of this country?

Protecting national security should be the responsibility of every American. Individuals and organizations who come across sensitive information should consider the consequences before they choose a course of action. The media needs to get over its anti-Americanism and get back to responsible journalism. They need to get back to reporting the news and away from trying to make the news.

Comments

[Alan Helvig]

Thanks for your comments Berd. I always appreciate feedback, whether positive or negative.

First: There is a huge difference between the News Media and one who publishes an editorial. My articles, while based on facts, are still simply my opinions. They cannot and should not be compared to NEWS articles published by the News Media, which should be factual and unbiased.

Second: We are seriously lacking integrity in the American media. The bulk of our News Media has an extreme left-wing agenda, as evidenced by their repeated attacks on the current administration and the GOP, while taking it easy on the left and the Dems. They are quick to publish accusations against those on the right on the front page, while their retractions usually end up on page 19 or deeper in their paper. They love using words like conspiracy and cover-up, even though there is usually no proof to support their claims. The media has a responsibility to be completely truthful when publishing news stories. The NEWS is supposed to be factual, not speculative. The problem today is that we can't always tell which is which.

Third: The government is responsible for classifying information which could cause harm to the U.S., our troops, and/or our allies. It is not the perogative of some operator or some editor to decide if information should be declassified and published in the media. People with access to classified information have to go through an extensive screening process to ensure they can be trusted with safeguarding classified material. They also sign statements of understanding regarding the consequences of releasing classified information to anyone without a proper clearance. Anyone who leaks classified information to the press is a traitor and should be tried for espionage. Editors and publishers in the media who knowingly publish classified information should also face criminal prosecution. Life is about choices and consequences. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time! Whether you understand it or not; whether you believe it or not; and whether you agree with it or not, classified information must be kept out of the press and violators must be prosecuted. Failure to keep our secrets classified will bring about the downfall of this great country.

[berd neldins]

An addendum to my previous post about Mr. Helvig's "The Media and National Security" editorial.

I wanted to address separately from my comments above another related aspect. This isn't meant personally. However, since your role as a newspaper columnist gives you the ability to reach many ears, there are separate issues to address there.

You are in effect saying "MY form of media expression is okay and righteous. But that darned 'treasonous' kind is not".

Looked at from another viewpoint though, YOU are far more likely the one to be leaking erroneous irresponsible information into the public ear.

As a public "voice" with a column, you have a responsibility (yes, even in "Op-Ed" land) to have a reasonable grasp of the pertinent facts before dashing off your latest diatribe. And that requires some serious digging, digesting and editing before "launching" it into the public sphere and, when I read such things as this, it becomes evident that that process has been wholly circumvented in this particular column of yours.

Each and every one of us needs to exercise due care when expressing ourselves in a public forum. To just rally-round the latest Administration "hype-n-gripe" without doing further investigation is irresponsible and dangerous.

You have, by virtue of having your column, the ability to influence your readers. As such, it's critical that they be presented a reasonably reasoned view.

We all need to exercise restraint, reason, intelligence and compassion whenever we place our views before the public eye. I assume that as part of the news media yourself, you have at least some appreciation for the immense importance/value of a free press. (Yes, the very same "free press" that allows you to express such empty platitudes and erroneous assumptions as you've presented here).

What you choose to descibe as the danger of "treasonous leaks" may in fact, eventually prove to some of the keys to our salvation. On the other hand, your own misguided and ill-informed assumptions/opinions may be far more detrimental in the big scheme of things by leading/diverting the parade of concerned citizens away from the REAL issues of importance we're facing.

Perhaps something to think about before writing your next column.

[berd neldins]

let's be serious for a moment here instead of just lighting pointless fires. no one (repeat: NO ONE) is claiming that the right to a free press is more important than national security.

Secondly, it's darn sure not our "abuse of first amendment/free speech rights" that's jeopardizing our security nor is that the reason the world hates the US. Our executive branch is solely ahd wholly responsible for that and, at the same time, solely and wholly unwilling to accept any responsibility for their actions. And anytime the press manages to uncover some of their underhanded, illegal "stunts", they scream treason. It's simply a matter of them not liking being caught with their fingers in the wrong pies and their hands stuck in the wrong cookie jars.

Surely we must realize by now that it's pellucidly clear that their actions are most-often not in our best "national security" interests. Their own "hidden" agenda is the only thing many of these actions are meant to "secure". As long as we don't know what their actions are, they can continue to wreak havoc.

Thirdly, no one's claiming the innate right to "need to know everything". and the sad truth beyond that is that, in most cases, we find out way too little, way too late for any sane, intelligent patriotic soul to be able to do anything practical about it.

A serious dialogue on these subjects would be welcome and, is in fact greatly needed. On the other hand, a half-baked, mean-spirited diatribe such as the one you've presented here, is pointless and only serves to ignite more pointless posturing instead of seriously addressing the issues in a constructive way.

And Finally, what you refer to as treasonous leaks are neither treasonous nor of any "real" consequence. The fact that a few previously unknown details about things that everyone already knew about were published has absolutely NO impact on the matters of concern. They unequivocally have ZERO impact on our national security. Their ONLY impact is on the administration' members who don't want their citizens to know what illegal/ignorant/self-serving shenanigans they're getting away with.

Based on what little we've managed to know so far, the prudent course is to support the dissemination of MORE not less information. To ask better, more pointed questions as citizens of the formerly great country is absolutely critical to our future.We need factual information to do so.

Let's not forget that in a mere 30 months, this administration will be gone, and "off the hook" while meanwhile, running off with the spoils of their actions. Our next Democratic administration and Congress will be left to clean up the dirty diapers. The war in Irag will still be going on. The current $ deficit will appear puny against what it will be at that time. The war on terrorism will finally need to be undertaken seriously and, the monkeys that perpetrated all of this ugliness in the first place will be "scot free" and in a position to then point the finger at whoever is unfotunate enough to then be in charge.

We cannot continue with such short-sighted myopia of the ilk demonstrated in your editorial without paying serious and dangerously devastating consequences. To do so is irresponsible folly. It's our duty as citizens to take a much closer look and ask much tougher questions. And to demand both answers AND results from the people actually running the show (such as Cheney, David Addington & his minions).

Otherwise our continued blindness will instead become our downfall so please let's not further take us off-track with errant distractionary screeds such as the above. If we do, make no mistake; it's you and I that will then ultimately pay the price.