Donâ•Žt Be Co-Opted by the Folks Who Brought Us Vietnam, Grenada, And
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law CUA Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions Faculty Scholarship 1985 Don’t be Co-opted by the Folks who Brought us Vietnam, Grenada, and the Iranian Rescue Fiasco Harvey L. Zuckman The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/scholar Part of the Communications Law Commons Recommended Citation Harvey L. Zuckman, Don’t be Co-opted by the Folks who Brought us Vietnam, Grenada, and the Iranian Rescue Fiasco, COMM. LAW., Winter 1985, at 15. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions by an authorized administrator of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Don't Be Co-opted by the Folks Who Brought Us Vietnam, Grenada, and the Iranian Rescue Fiasco BY HARVEY L. ZUCKMAN After much negotiation with the position taken by James Madison to American Newspaper Publishers that taken by the Defense Depart- Association and the American ment, ANPA, and ASNE. Madison Society of Newspaper Editors, the wrote, "A popular government, Pentagon recently announced press without popular information, or the pool arrangements for the coverage means of acquiring it, is but a Pro- of future military operations and logue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or per- ground rules for release of informa- haps both. Knowledge will forever tion during such operations. As an- govern ignorance: and a people nounced by the Pentagon the basic who mean to be their own gover- principle is to be the maximum nors, must arm themselves with the release of information possible. power which knowledge gives." But let's refrain from dancing Only a press free to report all the in the streets-at least until the but politically it was lost' because news, including that of the govern- next Grenada-type operation com- of the impact of the news media on ment's military operations (though mences. The Pentagon's "ground the public. Make no mistake, the obviously not information that rules" contain more booby traps for press has few if any friends at the jeopardizes lives and immediate or the press and the public than the en- Pentagon because of the skeptical future military actions), can pro- tire Vietnam War. Call it what you approach taken by journalists in re- vide the people with the Madison- will, there is licensing and censor- porting military operations in Viet- ian power to stop unwise wars. ship in these "ground rules." Only nam. As UPI reported, the admiral I can only hope that individual accredited journalists may report in charge of the Grenada invasion journalists and news organizations on military operations and they candidly stated that journalists will ignore the Pentagon's heavy- may report only "releasable infor- were barred from that operation be- handed attempt to restrict the flow mation," with releasable informa- cause many of his fellow officers of information to the American tion defined and provided by-you harbored a strong dislike of the public and exhibit the same enter- guessed it-the Pentagon. Accredi- media. prise in getting out the news during tation is lost if the ground rules are If I were a cynical fellow, I might the next armed conflict that they violated. even conclude that journalists were displayed in Vietnam. The releasable information list totally barred from Grenada in or- does not include estimates of ene- der to make the new ground rules my strength (the issue at the center look good to elements of the Ameri- of the Westmoreland case) and the can press establishment. But then "information not releasable" list my more rational self takes control prohibits, for instance, reporting and I realize that the Pentagon plan- cancelled operations. In other ners are simply incapable of such words, the American people are not Machiavellian cunning. to be told of such things as Iranian The fact remains that major ele- hostage rescue fiascos. After all, ments of the press establishment look at the political fallout on the did acquiesce in these restrictive Carter administration from that and antidemocratic rules. And inept military operation. that's a pity. If the press had played And isn't that what the reporter- by these ground rules during the less Grenada operation, the Sidle Vietnam conflict, this nation might Harvey L. Zuchman is director of the Commission, and the new accredi- still be looking for the "light at the Institute for Communications Law tation and release of information end of the tunnel" and wasting its Studies of the Catholic University ground rules are all about? Lieu- precious young men and material School of Law. He is also editor of tenant General Daniel 0. Graham wealth in search of elusive military Communications Lawyer and wants may have stated it best when he victory. it made abundantly clear that his said from the witness stand in Since we live in a democratic views are not those of the Institute, the the Westmoreland-CBS trial, "My society, where hard, not compro- Catholic University ofAmerica, or the view has never changed that mili- mised, information is the necessary ABA Forum Committee on Communi- tarily we won [the Vietnam War] coin of the realm, I much prefer the cations Law. CUREN BIBIOGAPH For material published from April 1984 to January 1985. Compiled by the research staff of the Catholic University School of Law Library in cooperationwith the editors of the Media Law Reporter of the Bureau of NationalAffairs. radio formats: legal and struc- BOOKS, MONOGRAPHS, tural issues. By T.L. Glasser. 28 AND REPORTS SELECTED ARTICLES J. Broadcast. 127-142 (1984). Competition and diversity among Broadcast Deregulation. Congres- Access to pre-trial documents under radio formats: a 1984 response. sional Digest, v. 63, April 1984. the First Amendment. Note, 84 By E.G. Krasnow and W.E. Ken- pp. 98-128. Colum. L. Rev. 1813 (November nard. 28 J. Broadcast. 143-145 1984). (1984). Broadcast Fairness, By F. Rowan. New York: Longman, 1984. (Long- Activism v. restraint: The D.C. Cir- Competition and diversity among man series in public communica- cuit, the FCC and the Supreme radio formats: a rejoinder. By tion.) $29.95. L.C. 83-19998. Court. By J.H. Pennybacker. 28 T.L. Glasser. 28J. Broadcast. 147 J. Broadcast. 149 (1984). (1984). Documents of American Broadcast- After Metromedia: sign controls and The constitutionality of expanding ing. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Pren- the First Amendment. Note, 28 prepublication review of govern- tice-Hall, 1984. 501 p. St. Louis U.L.J. 171 (1984). ment employees' speech. By Libel and Privacy. By B. Sanford. Antitrust law-signal-penetration or M.L. Charlson. 72 Calif. L. Rev. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovan- station-location: the scope of the 962 (1984). ovich, 1985. 900 p. National Football League's televi- Copyright, free speech, and the sion blackout antitrust exemption. visual arts. 93 Yale L.J. 1565. Media Abuses: Rights and Remedies: Case note. WTWV v. National (1984). A Guide to Legal Remedies. Wash- FootballLeague, 678 F.2d 142 (11 th ington, D.C.: Media Institute, Copyrighting personal letters, dia- Cir. 1982). By R.L. Waldman. 6 W. ries, and memorabilia: a review 1983. 103 p. $25.00. L.C. 83- New Eng. L. Rev. 877-895 (1984). 62176. and a suggestion. By R.C. Hau- A "better" market place approach hart. 13 U. Balt. L. Rev. 215 (1984). to broadcast regulation. Note, Media Law. By Galvin. Occidental, 36 Courts, statutes and administrative Fed. Com. Cal.: Nolo Press, 1984. 256 p. L.. 27-68 (1984). agency jurisdiction: a considera- $14.95 pa. Cable television franchising with- tion of limits on judicial creativ- out antitrust immunity: the after- ity. By J. Mallamud. 35 S.C.L. Media Law: The Rights ofJournalists math of Boulder. By P.S. Ryerson. Rev. 191-293 11984). and Broadcasters. By G. Robert- 16 Urb. Law. 387-422 (1984). DBS, the FCC, and the prospects son and A. Nicol. London: Oyez Candidates and the new technolo- for diversity and consumer sover- Longman Publishing, Ltd., 1984. gies: should political broadcast- eignty in broadcasting. Note, 4 448 p. ca $53.25. ing rules apply? By B.D. Swill- Computer L.J. 551-72 (1984). inger, 49 Mo. L. Rev. 85-101 DBS under FCC and international Misregulating Television: Network (1984). Dominance and the FCC.Chicago: regulation. Note, 37 Vand. L. Rev. Carter-Mondale: affirming the af- 67-144(1984). University of Chicago Press, firmative right of access to broad- 1984. ca $19.00 L.C. 84-8738. Descendibility of the right of publi- cast media. By M. Johnson. 6 city, 1983 S. Ill. U. L.J. 547. Com. & L. 47-64 (1984). Electrifying the First Amendment. Press Law in Modern Democracies: Cellular communications service: A Comparative Study. By P. La By M.S. Nadel. 5 Cardozo L. Rev. Lal-lav. New York: wireline delivery or delay? Note, 531-46 (1984). Longman, 72 Geo. L.J. 1183-210 (1984). 1984. (Annenberg/Longman com- Enjoining obscenity as a public munication books.) $39.95. L.C. Children's television: deregulating nuisance and the prior restraint 83-19595. the underregulated. Pt. I. 8J.Juv. doctrine, 84 Colum. L. Rev. 1616 L. 1-11 11984). (1984). Satellite and Cable: International Protection. By S. Mosteshar and S. Choice of law in right of publicity. General public figures since Gertz Bates. London: Oyez Longman By R.C. Cray. 31 U.C.L.A. L. Rev. v. Welch, 58 St.