"Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press."
First Amendment
Guest Seminar
The First Amendment protects freedom of the press as a distinct right and thereby guarantees a unique and important role for the news media in the system of checks and balances. The relationship between public officials and the press is one of continuing struggle over the control of news -- its content and how it is selected, framed, and understood.
The news media are a central influence on the public agenda - on "what happens" in democratic societies - and on the policy process. In a world where information is more abundant, more complex, and no longer bound by time, distance, or borders, the media are a powerful force in shaping what we know and how we form opinions.
The media are not monolithic. Print, broadcast, and Internet journalists, editors, and owners have different interests. Many news organizations compete for the same viewers, listeners, and readers. Others reach niche audiences. Incentives and professional standards vary widely. Television, radio, print, newswires, and photojournalism have different operational requirements. These are merging on the Internet where news is available in text, video streaming, and real audio.
Journalists and strategists alike sense that fundamental changes are at hand in the news-politics relationship. The 24-hour news cycle, global news in real time, declining interest in national and international news, generational differences in news habits, global media, concentration of media ownership, changes in the political process, non-state actors, Internet growth, lightweight satellite phones and video uplinks, and converging digitized print, audio, and video media are shaping a new communications environment. These changes call for a new vocabulary and new ways of thinking.
Technology and the post-Cold War news environment are transforming news consumption. More Americans still get their news from television than any other source, but who watches and what they watch are changing. Cable news -- CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, and Fox - now draws 40% of American viewers according to 1998 Pew Research Center surveys. The audience for nightly TV network news (non-cable) has dropped to 38%, down from 60% in 1993. There is a striking increase in audiences for Internet news with 36 million Americans going on-line for news in 1998, up from 11 million in 1996.
Waning interest in national and international news is matched by growing interest in local news - a trend that maintains audiences for newspapers and local TV news. Overall, researchers find wide variation in news habits, with age the biggest determining factor in attention to news. Younger Americans are drawn to the Internet and multiple information sources, but increasingly they are less interested in news. Demographic trends and greater diversity in news consumption raise questions for the future of the mass audience.
Audiences for cable news spike during a crisis. CNN is "on" all day at national security agencies. CNN's broadcasts permit foreign leaders and publics to monitor evolving events -- and U.S. policy makers' reactions to them -- in real time. Debate on the "CNN effect" turns on the extent to which television determines the national security agenda and influences government responses to crises. Proponents underscore the emotional nature of television images, saying they generate overwhelming pressure for "action" by policy makers. Others suggest the CNN effect may have been exaggerated. Televised images can be a factor in policy, but media overall are part of a complex interactive process where interests and leadership shape outcomes more than pictures.
The Internet, the convergence of television and computers, and sharp drops in the price of market entry are giving rise to specialized niche media. Websites that provide audio and video on demand will be tomorrow's sources of tailored news and information for many. Most large newspapers have Internet editions with different audiences and news judgment requirements driven by 24-hour deadlines. More bandwidth, falling telecommunications costs, and hundreds of choices will put a premium on trust in the source, consistently reliable content, and technical excellence.
A new generation of smaller, lightweight technologies is also transforming news gathering. Journalists with satellite phones, portable cameras, and satellite up-link equipment will be able to cover the news and transmit live video images from anywhere on earth without the restraints of camera crews and expensive logistical considerations.
Concentration of media ownership is influencing news content and journalistic practices. In many cases, news is only a small part of the overall mix of corporate goods and services. Some journalists view this as "new news" -- news that is more sensational, profit driven, and given to inexpensive, polarizing arguments. They worry about the impact on good sourcing, standards of proof, and journalistic ethics. Some see a blurring of the line between journalists as observers and journalists as celebrity actors. Today, "who is a journalist?" is a serious question.
For the strategist, these trends create multiple challenges. The ability of political and military leaders to implement national security policies depends on their success in explaining and justifying these policies to the American people and to foreign publics. The cooperation or opposition of publics will influence whether governments support or oppose diplomatic initiatives and military actions. As decision-makers seek to gain support for policies, the media can be an ally or an adversary.
Informing the press about national security policy is a complex, delicate, and vital task. White House, State and Defense Department briefings are immediately available to foreign publics and governments. Misunderstandings and miscalculations that arise from mistakes in explaining -- or failing to explain -- policies can have disastrous consequences. Encounters with the press corps can also provide excellent opportunities to signal new policies or restate existing policies.
National security leaders have powerful new means to shape messages and actions in ways that serve their interests. It is important to understand how communications strategies can be used to influence outcomes. Strategic information planning, credible messages, public opinion surveys and media analysis, logistics and operations, and interagency coordination are critical elements in effective national security communications. An understanding of news cycles, real-time communication, media relations, and how information networks function is essential.
The readings assess the role of the news media in a democratic society and the forces changing relations between the media and national security decision-makers.
Topic Objectives
- To understand the role of the news media in a democratic society and in influencing national security decisions and policy implementation.
- To assess changes in the environment in which the news media, national security decision-makers, and the public interact.
- To appreciate the relationship between the news media and military and foreign affairs professionals.
Questions for Consideration
- How are technologies, globalization, ownership patterns, changes in the political process, and post-Cold War news habits affecting the news media and journalism?
- What is the appropriate role of the news media in a democratic society? Should the media just report the news? Is it possible to report without some interpretation? Do the media have an obligation to analyze information and provide context? Should journalists be advocates, pressuring those in authority to do "the right thing?" Are journalists increasingly influential political actors?
- Do television images determine national security decisions? Does emotional television coverage of crises lead inevitably to an outcry to "do something" or have viewers become hardened to humanitarian disasters? Has the "CNN effect" been exaggerated?
- Does it matter that few journalists have had military or diplomatic service? Is this perhaps preferable, a little outdated knowledge being dangerous? Or has a valuable empathy factor been lost? Given contrasting professional obligations, what can the media, the military, and civilian professionals do to create trust and build dialogue?
- What should strategists know about media culture, 24 hour news cycles, filing times and other operational requirements of print, television, magazine, and on-line media?
- Is there a public right to know? Who determines when that right applies and how far it extends? What if the press is given classified information by the President, the DCI, the Secretary of State or Defense, or the National Security Advisor? Are leaks ever justified? If so, when?
- Should the First Amendment be amended to restrict the freedom of the media?
Required Readings
* Warren P. Strobel, "The CNN Effect," American Journalism Review (May 1996), pp. 33-37. (Reprint)
* Thomas E. Patterson, "Political Roles of the Journalist," in Doris Graber, Denis McQuail and Pippa Norris, The Politics of News, the News of Politics (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1988), pp.17-32. (Reprint)
* Jarol B. Manheim, "The News Shapers: Strategic Communication as a Third Force in News Making," in Doris Graber, Denis McQuail and Pippa Norris, The Politics of News, The News of Politics (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1998), pp.94-109. (Reprint)
* Linton Weeks, "From the War in Kosovo, A Fusillade of E-Motion," The Washington Post, April 10, 1999. (Reprint)
* Rone Tempest, "Reporters Far Afield Tap Into Technology," Los Angeles Times, June 20, 1998. (Reprint)
* "Can the News Media Be Trusted" and "News Media Education: Smart and Smarter or Dumb and Dumber?" America's Team (Nashville: The Freedom Forum First Amendment Center), pp. 63-78. (Reprint)
* "Arresting Images," The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, April 6, 1999. (Reprint)
* "The Pentagon and the Press," The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, April 14, 1999. (Reprint)
* Robert J. Samuelson, "The End of News," The Washington Post, June 18, 1999. (Reprint)
 |
 |
 |