Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University

Words & ReflectionsDissent: Public Opinion, Media ReactionThough dissent is a constitutionally protected right, to engage in it—sometimeseven to report on it—is to risk having one’s patriotism questioned.By Marvin KalbDissent is so crucial to Americandemocracy that its spirit waswritten into the First Amendmentto the U.S. Constitution. Afterassuring citizens of certain other freedoms,such as the “free exercise” ofreligion and “freedom of speech, or ofthe press,” the founding fathers werevery explicit about “the right of thepeople peaceably to assemble, and topetition the government for a redressof grievances.”You may define dissent in many differentways, often depending onwhether it occurs in war or peace, butits essence has always been clear:People in a democracy have an inalienableright to express their dissent, theirdisagreement or disgust with a governmentpolicy, and the government, inresponse, cannot, or should not, takeany step to curtail dissent, even if it istempted to do so. President GeorgeH.W. Bush, aware of hislimitations in this regard,once portrayed himself as“one man” in fierce battlewith a horde of lobbyistson Capitol Hill objectingto an aspect of his Mideastpolicy—they were, infact, “peaceably” assemblingand petitioning theirgovernment. The President,taking advantage ofhis bully pulpit at theWhite House, was tryingto paint the petitioners into an uncomfortablecorner of public opinion, asthough by disagreeing with his policythey were somehow engaging in anunpatriotic action.His son, President George W. Bush,masterfully seized the tragic events ofSeptember 11th to rally the country ina global war against terrorism, and fora time he succeeded, probably beyondhis own wildest expectations. A tidalwave of patriotism swept across theland and much of the mood still remains.It is everywhere and regardedas a welcome relief from the dark skepticismof the Vietnam era. During theseventh-inning stretch at a World Seriesgame, people rise in solemn unityand, with their right hands coveringtheir hearts and American flags flutteringfrom poles, they sing “God BlessAmerica,” and they seem to enjoy everycadence. Radio commercials extol thevirtues of giving your “extra” car toveterans who might need one, and youget a tax deduction to add to the goodfeeling of helping someone in uniform.Bridges are bedecked with flags; trucksand cars sport them on back bumpers.Not since World War II has therebeen such a warm rush of patriotism.Yet not since World War II has dissentseemed so problematic. It’s not thatThe White House is determined tocontrol the message, which means itmust try to exercise more controlover the messengers—a strategic goalthat has been tested by many otheradministrations with results that havealways left much to be desired.there hasn’t been dissent; in recentmonths, since the swift military victoryover Saddam Hussein’s brutal regimein Iraq, dissent has risen throughoutthe land, as a wide range of problemsunexpected in their breadth and depthhas erupted, leading to a slow butsteadily corrosive effect on public supportfor the administration effort. Thedaily casualty reports only compoundthe administration’s problems.Critics who were very reluctant afterSeptember 11th to criticize the President,or his policy, for fear of seemingto be unpatriotic, have now emergedfrom the woodwork, some with fullthroatedcriticism of both. “What wentwrong with the intelligence?,” they ask.“Were we deliberately misled beforethe war about the extent of Iraq’s ‘weaponsof mass destruction’?” “Was therein fact an ‘imminent’ threat, as we hadbeen told?” Simply put, “Were we liedto?”Journalism and the Iraq WarThe administration knows that the postwarreality of Iraq does not make forpleasant reading or viewing, and itdoes raise serious doubts about U.S.policy. In response, President Bushhas led an administrationwide counterattack,playing on awidespread conservativebelief that the media, too“liberal” in its orientation,cannot be trusted to tellthe truth. The Presidentproudly asserts that hedoesn’t read newspapers,acknowledging that hemight occasionally glanceat a headline but “rarely”reads the article. “The bestway to get the news,” heexplained during a lengthyinterview with Fox News, “is from objectivesources. And the most objectivesources I have are people on my staffwho tell me what’s happening in theworld.” He wore a straight face whilemaking this outlandish comment.The President has been unhappyabout news reports from Iraq that oftenhighlight the negative and rarelyaccentuate the positive. “We’re makingNieman Reports / Winter 2003 71