Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University

Words & Reflections
ness and the danger of secrecy in our
democratic society. “Democracies die
behind closed doors. A government
operating in the shadow of secrecy
stands in complete opposition to the
society envisioned by the framers of
our Constitution …. When the government
begins closing doors, it selectively
controls information rightfully
belonging to the people. Selective information
is misinformation.”
Judge Keith’s opinion was not only
a rebuke to the Bush administration
but also a clarion call to journalists to
ask hard, probing questions in a time
of national crisis. Murrey Marder, retired
diplomatic correspondent of The
Washington Post, has been the guiding
force and benefactor in the development
of the Nieman Foundation’s
Watchdog Journalism Project. Marder
believes the press is by no means penetrating
enough, vigorous enough,
public-spirited enough, or courageous
enough about reporting and analyzing
the performance of those in power,
whether it be elected or appointed,
whether it be in corporate boards,
union halls or professional offices.
Marder’s premise about the press
came from his own experience during
the cold war in which, he believes, the
nation paid a heavy price for secrecy
and deception used to justify military
actions and for a pliant press willing to
censor itself or lacking the will to challenge
the official version of events. The
tragedy of this lack of will was borne
out in the sweeping revelations of the
Pentagon Papers, which disclosed the
flawed thinking of the U.S. government
that led us into the Vietnam War.
Watchdog journalism begins with a
state of mind: accepting responsibility
as a surrogate for the public. It includes
investigative reporting, but it is
by no means limited to that. This state
of mind should affect reportorial behavior
in coverage of the presidency,
the nation’s corporations, and the town
council.
The terrorist attacks found the American
press lacking adequate experience
or preparation. A decade of diminishing
international coverage meant that
the press had not sufficiently educated
itself nor informed the nation about
the hostility coalescing in parts of the
Arab world that would destroy our
perception of homeland invincibility.
In these times, our nation needs an
activist, searching, challenging press
that will ask hard, probing questions.
Asking Questions About the
Iraq Situation
The developing story about a possible
attack on Iraq provides a current example
to help us understand the questions
the press should be asking. What
we know about this situation is, in
large measure, what the Bush administration
wants us to know. We have read
stories telling of leaked battle scenarios.
We are well informed about the coalition-building
and the diplomatic efforts
to win the support of allies and
the U.N. Security Council. We are familiar
with the failure of Congress to
effectively debate our emerging Iraqi
strategy and the struggle of the Democrats
to challenge the President without
seeming to be unpatriotic.
But what are the questions the press
is not asking? Some were suggested in
a recent New York Times op-ed piece
by Nicholas Kristof, who wondered
about the consequences of a Shiite
Muslim uprising in cities beyond
Baghdad and whether they would lead
to battles between Shiite rebels and
the Iraqi army, leading perhaps to a
civil war. Questions we need to think
through, Kristoff was saying, center on
what will we do on the morning after
Saddam Hussein is toppled. Do we
send in troops to try to seize the mortars
and machine guns from the warring
factions? What will America do if
there is a civil war? Or if the Iranians
seek to capitalize on an unstable Iraq?
In the north, what would America’s
response be if the Kurds attempt to
take advantage of the chaos to seek
independence? What if the Turkish
Army intervenes in Kurdistan? And, finally,
how will Iraq be governed after
Saddam?
There may be no answers just now
to these questions. But the press must
raise them and examine them and inform
our citizens about America’s capacity
and preparedness for responding
to the range of consequences that
could emerge from a military attempt
to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Asking
the questions will force the administration
to respond. It will inform our
citizens about the risks and uncertainties
of acting as the administration appears
to want to act. And it will ultimately
help shape the debate and the
range of options the President is able
to pursue.
Each of us in the news media has an
important role to play in pressing for
openness and access and for breaking
down the barriers of secrecy that have
been imposed in the name of national
security. The burden of proof must
always be on the government to show
beyond doubt where national security
interests justify any exemptions to official
accountability and transparency in
the use of power.
Those of you who are working with
images—the maps, the photographs,
the pictures from outer space—all are
part of this important effort to call for
more access, more openness, more
accountability.
I hope you will keep this obligation
in your cross hairs as you explore the
many fascinating and important skills
and techniques of your craft here this
weekend. ■
The “Mapping the News” conference,
held from September 27-29 at American
University, provided a forum for
discussion among journalists and
those who work in government,
industry and nongovernmental
organizations about ways to deepen
understanding of a place—its culture,
demographics, geography and
history—and how this process can
make telling of news stories more
vivid, engaging and understandable.
Many of the conference sessions
focused on ways to use tools—such
as geographic information systems
and satellite imagery—to assist in
gathering valuable information.
Giles@fas.harvard.edu
Nieman Reports / Winter 2002 99