Media in the United States has been an outlet for political information. From local news, state legislation, and federal government, newspapers and televised networks work twenty-four hours a day to keep the common American up to date with this information. Yet some information, specifically from the federal level, is sensitive and must not be published for the security of our great country. While this is an unspoken rule, and many news reporters, such as CNN or The Washington Post, understand this and know when and when not to publish articles. Sadly, there are few out there who believe that all political information must be reported, and simply disregard this rule. On December 16, 2005, authors James Risen and Eric Lichtblau of the New York
…show more content…
During the creation of our country, many Founding Fathers, such as Thomas Jefferson, believed in the Lockean ideology of a “social contract”. This contract states that, in exchange for certain rights, a government will protect its people (Patterson 2015, pg 32). And though we may keep some rights, including “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” as it says in our Declaration of Independence, privacy isn 't one of them. While many believe privacy is a natural right, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black disagrees. Specifically, in his dissent of the Griswold v. Connecticut case of 1945, Black says “I like my privacy as the next one, but I am nevertheless compelled to admit that government has a right to invade it unless prohibited by some specific constitutional provision”. Nowhere in the Constitution does it state a specific provision regarding privacy, and therefore isn 't protected as a natural right. Furthermore, if privacy was a natural right protected by the Constitution, then it 's still open to be taken. Political theorist Isaiah Berlin stated in an excerpt from his lecture Two Concepts of Liberty in 1958 that “it remains true that freedom of some must at times, be curtailed to …show more content…
In 1971, this was put to the test in the New York Times v. United States Supreme Court case, and solidified the media’s ability to publish classified information. That being said, this case should be enough evidence to prove the New York Times acted properly. But I disagree, for the Pentagon Papers were in relation to the Vietnam War and why we entered the conflict. At the time of the Papers’ release, this was a past event and held no significant threat to the war efforts. Yet the leakage of the wiretapping program was a program currently active when announced, and proved detrimental to the war effort against terrorism. Releasing this information allowed unknown terrorist insight as to what our federal government was doing to combat them, and gave the enemy a chance to cover their tracks. However, it is not the authors of this articles fault as to not thinking about the effects their article would have, for they were ignorant in their
During the creation of our country, many Founding Fathers, such as Thomas Jefferson, believed in the Lockean ideology of a “social contract”. This contract states that, in exchange for certain rights, a government will protect its people (Patterson 2015, pg 32). And though we may keep some rights, including “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” as it says in our Declaration of Independence, privacy isn 't one of them. While many believe privacy is a natural right, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black disagrees. Specifically, in his dissent of the Griswold v. Connecticut case of 1945, Black says “I like my privacy as the next one, but I am nevertheless compelled to admit that government has a right to invade it unless prohibited by some specific constitutional provision”. Nowhere in the Constitution does it state a specific provision regarding privacy, and therefore isn 't protected as a natural right. Furthermore, if privacy was a natural right protected by the Constitution, then it 's still open to be taken. Political theorist Isaiah Berlin stated in an excerpt from his lecture Two Concepts of Liberty in 1958 that “it remains true that freedom of some must at times, be curtailed to …show more content…
In 1971, this was put to the test in the New York Times v. United States Supreme Court case, and solidified the media’s ability to publish classified information. That being said, this case should be enough evidence to prove the New York Times acted properly. But I disagree, for the Pentagon Papers were in relation to the Vietnam War and why we entered the conflict. At the time of the Papers’ release, this was a past event and held no significant threat to the war efforts. Yet the leakage of the wiretapping program was a program currently active when announced, and proved detrimental to the war effort against terrorism. Releasing this information allowed unknown terrorist insight as to what our federal government was doing to combat them, and gave the enemy a chance to cover their tracks. However, it is not the authors of this articles fault as to not thinking about the effects their article would have, for they were ignorant in their