Is the "Free Press" an Oxymoron?

Freedom of the press is a cornerstone of what makes the United States unique.  When the Founders included allowing freedom of the press in America, it showed that we not only won the revolution against England, but also against what much of the world stood for at the time.  Before becoming a sovereign nation, England severely restricted the colonial governments attempting to prevent them from publishing anything that could possibly tarnish the English crown.  By endowing our press with freedom, the Founders set us apart and implicitly espouse truth and reflecting the voice of the people.  Even today, many countries, such as India, label themselves as democracies but lack this distinguishable and arguably essential democratic feature.  However, as news has evolved, it begs the question: is the press really free?  Does it really reflect the public will, or do officials have their own agenda as to what becomes news, whether or not it actually benefits society?

In some ways, the press serves as a useful watchdog alerting the public about legitimate and substantial corruption.  For instance, Jeff Gottlieb and Ruben Vives did a service to the public by unveiling financial wrongs committed by members in the city government of Bell, California.  While it did not establish respect for public roles, it did espouse good values and morals and in turn increased the credibility and intent of journalism.

At the same time, I also maintain that the press does a disservice to the public by constantly searching for, and in some cases arguably thriving upon, political gaffes.  During this election season, I am disturbed to find that journalists on both sides of the political spectrum choose to write about almost comically insulting statements, usually taken out of context, that Mitt Romney or Barack Obama have said.  As Basil Smikle aptly states in his article published today in the New York Times entitled “Contradicting a Carefully Built Brand,” the “news outlets and social media play a special role in that they restate negative information with such speed and scope that it can drown out the consistent message that the campaign is trying to convey.”  When the public goes to the voting booth, they should be pondering policies of the different candidates rather than poorly worded lapses of the tongue.

Although the press is certainly free compared to other nations, it does not act as the informative watchdog as often as it purports and is frequently the rather low brow entertainer instead.  Elder Oaks correctly cautions that if the press continues to overly ridicule public officials or make relatively minor statements or scandals dominate in the news, there will be an erosion of trust in our public figures.  It is the responsibility of current and future journalists to stop this self-serving, destructive path which may lead to more columns or writing power for them but leaves society uninformed and cynical.