November/December 2000 | Contents

THE OBLIGATION OF A FREE PRESS:
New Search for Accountability

BY GENEVA OVERHOLSER

Picture this: Henry R. Luce, editor-in-chief of Time, is sitting in a meeting of the Encyclopaedia Britannica board of directors, along with University of Chicago President Robert Hutchins. Luce passes Hutchins a note, saying, "How do I find out about the freedom of the press and what my obligations are?"

That's exactly what happened nearly sixty years ago, according to Stephen Bates's intriguing 1995 study, Realigning Journalism with Democracy: The Hutchins Commission, Its Times, and Ours (find it at www.annenberg.nwu.edu).

Now, imagine Tony Ridder or John Curley -- not to mention Sumner Redstone or Michael Eisner -- passing that note today.

It might be a good time to look back at what was interesting about the Hutchins Commission's work.

Certainly the responsibilities and challenges the commission addressed echo powerfully with us: the importance of free expression as protector of other freedoms. The challenge to media to provide "a service adequate to the needs of the society." The existence of "practices which the society condemns" -- and the worry that these could lead to regulation and control.

Then there's our power to shape opinions and our penchant for the "inflammatory, sensational, and irresponsible." Our arrogance: "The press is not free if those who operate it behave as though their position conferred on them the privilege of being deaf to ideas which the processes of free speech have brought to public attention."

Also familiar are worries over uneven access to media, as well as the persistent, distorting pressures of ownership and marketplace. And press accountability: "Its moral right will be conditioned on its acceptance of this accountability. Its legal right will stand unaltered as its moral duty is performed."

With all these concerns very much with us, people are once again wondering how we can strengthen the press and protect press freedom -- a challenge that's been around ever since the nation's founding. John Adams wrote in 1815: "If there is ever to be an amelioration of the condition of mankind, philosophers, theologians, legislators, politicians, and moralists will find that the regulation of the press is the most difficult, dangerous, and important problem they have to resolve."

The Hutchins Commission recommended "a new and independent agency to appraise and report annually upon the performance of the press." It would compare "the accomplishments of the press with the aspirations which the people have for it" and "educate the people" about the press's role. No such agency resulted, though a National News Council, incorporating some of its ideas, came briefly into being twenty-six years later.

This past summer, Peter Goldmark, c.e.o. of the International Herald Tribune, suggested in an Aspen Institute speech an intriguing variation on the national agency notion. Goldmark proposed that executives of corporations that include media outlets fund "an independent council to track, promote, examine, and defend the independent news function in America and in the world at large.

"Give it teeth, give it a good budget . . . . Probably $5 million a year minimum," he recommended. "Make the grants multi-year. To select the first board and the first c.e.o., put together a nominating committee that is completely independent of your corporate structure and turn them loose."

Goldmark noted, "We have a National Academy of Science. We have National Endowments for . . . you name it, Arts, Democracy, Education, Humanities . . . . But we have no prestigious, national, institutionalized advocate for the independence and vitality of the most distinctive non-governmental tradition in our democracy. And . . . it must of course be created, sustained, and funded outside government." (Excerpt from the speech, page 72.)

I'd add the suggestion that it be tied to a university (could my joining the University of Missouri J-school faculty have something to do with this?). The Pulitzer Board and Columbia University provide a professional/university relationship beneficial to the press. Goldmark's academy could draw strength from a similar relationship.

What would the agency do? The Hutchins report sets out possibilities: Development of common principles. Scrutiny of government actions affecting media. Support for centers of research and criticism. Fostering of public discussion of the press's contributions and responsibilities.

Other recommendations, such as assessment of specific stories, seem less appropriate. Local and perhaps state news councils could strengthen accountability, but a national council is too broad for that.

Discussion there must be, and, increasingly, discussion there is. Goldmark's idea is an intriguing addition.

Geneva Overholser (genevaoh@aol.com), a syndicated columnist for The Washington Post Writers Group, writes regularly for CJR about newspapers. She is a member of the University of Missouri journalism faculty in Washington. Among positions she has held are editorial writer for The New York Times, editor of The Des Moines Register, and ombudsman for The Washington Post. She also served nine years on the Pulitzer Prize board.