صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

most repressive, its least tolerant. George Orwell created for us the model of that government. As we move towards 1984, I urge on you that the best way to avoid 1984 it is by assuring a public informed enough to do so.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. Thank you, Mr. Abrams.

Before we ask you to take questions, I would ask our next panel to join you at the witness table, and perhaps you could remain there and entertain questions when they do.

We cannot help but take note that we begin these hearings in the shadow of the war in Grenada, where restriction of press coverage is seen as illustrative of the problems posed by restrictions of flow of information. This is not a partisan issue. Although it did occur under this administration, it could certainly occur under future administrations. While the events in Grenada are too timely to ignore, I hope they can be viewed in a broader context than our hearings will present.

I would like to present a most distinguished group of individuals: Mr. Edward M. Joyce, president of CBS news, who has had an outstanding career as a news executive and award-winning reporter. He has been with CBS since 1954. Next, John Chancellor, senior commentator for NBC Nightly News and one of the most respected journalists in broadcasting. His 30-year career with NBC has been marked by well-deserved recognition for his outstanding contributions to television news.

Finally, David Brinkley, senior correspondent with ABC news. His name is virtually synonymous with the best of broadcast reporting. During his 40-year career, he has won every major broadcasting award, including 10 Emmys.

Gentlemen, we are most pleased to have the benefit of your testimony this morning. Mr. Joyce, you may proceed.

TESTIMONY OF EDWARD JOYCE, PRESIDENT, CBS NEWS, JOHN CHANCELLOR, SENIOR COMMENTATOR, NBC NEWS, DAVID BRINKLEY, SENIOR CORRESPONDENT, ABC NEWS

Mr. JOYCE. Thank you. I welcome the opportunity to present the views of CBS News on the restrictions imposed on press coverage of Grenada. On October 25, the United States and six Caribbean nations invaded the island of Grenada. On that day the United States introduced a new relationship with the press, a relationship virtually unknown in U.S. history. The press restrictions imposed by our Government on Grenada news coverage prevented the press from gathering and reporting to the public. By denying access as the Government did in Grenada, it also denied to the public the ability to receive information gathered by an independent press. Instead, the American public received only the information the Government wanted it to receive. This is not what a free society is all about.

From the outset, the Government declared that it was not safe for the press to be in a war zone. Thus, at a time when CBS news had more than 2 dozen of its people in war-torn Lebanon, we were told that we could not go to Grenada because the military could not guarantee our safety.

But whatever the rationale, the public, which received firsthand information from the press in Vietnam, in Korea and in World War II, was denied firsthand reporting from Grenada. I submit

that is intolerable. I want to emphasize that the American press is a responsible press. We are not seeking to report military secrets. We are not seeking to jeopardize lives. But those interests could have been protected without resorting to the unprecedented censorship that the President imposed in Grenada.

Last Sunday the military commander of the American task force in Grenada said the decision to keep out the press was his, that it would do no good to protest at higher levels. Indeed, the Secretary of Defense last week said that he would not overrule the military on this issue. Last week a number of us watched his satellite feed in which an Australian journalist told his countrymen, we have just seen the end of 200 years of press freedom in the United States. I hope that the Australian journalist was overreacting. But I am seriously concerned that we may indeed be witnessing the dawn of a new era of censorship, of manipulation of the press, of considering the media the handmaiden of Government to spoon feed the public with Government-approved information.

If the Government is permitted to abrogate the first amendment at will to the detriment of not simply the press but the public as well, I am concerned that such action will be taken again and again and again whenever a government wishes to keep the public in the dark.

I find it ironic that this hearing is taking place 1 month to the day after representatives of some 60 print and broadcast organizations from 25 countries meeting in Talloires, France, condemn attempts to regulate news content. That meeting was arranged, in part, by American press groups, notably the World Press Freedom Committee, and included Third World countries. They were attacking efforts to regulate news content, then largely led by the Soviet Union.

The press has covered virtually every war fought by this country. In its coverage, the press has served as a ratifying factor in reporting to the public what has occurred. Indeed, from World War II to now, more than 125 correspondents have been killed while covering wars in which the United States has been involved. We do not cover wars from hotel rooms far behind the lines of battle. We do not wish to cover wars on the basis of handouts from the Pentagon. One CBS news correspondent was told by two colonels at the Pentagon that, "We learned a lesson from the British in the Falklands." Well, that lesson was censorship. CBS news protested that action in a letter to the Secretary of Defense on October 25. There has been no reply.

On the third day of the invasion, the Pentagon began to release its own film, which clearly represented what the Government wanted the public to see and believe. It may have been an accurate portrayal. Without the presence in Grenada of a free and independent press, America will never really know.

When the press was finally admitted to Grenada, for several days it was compelled to operate in the most limited and restricted fashion. We saw what our Government wanted us to see, when our Government wanted to see it, for as long as our Government deemed appropriate. It was not until the sixth day of the invasion that the press was allowed to cover Grenada in a more meaningful fashion.

We at CBS news are concerned, frustrated, and saddened by the press restrictions of the past week. We are concerned by the repressive actions of the Government toward the press. We are frustrated because we were not able to do the reporting job the public expects of us and we expect of ourselves. And we are saddened to bear witness to this new, unchecked censorship leading to an off-the-record

war.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Complete statement follows:]

PREPARED STATement of Edward M. Joyce, PRESIDENT, CBS NEWS

I welcome the opportunity to present the views of CBS News on the restrictions imposed on press coverage of Grenada.

On October 25, the United States and six Caribbean nations invaded the island of Grenada. On that day, the U.S. introduced a new relationship with the press, a relationship virtually unknown in U.S. history.

The press restrictions imposed by our Government on Grenada coverage prevented the press from gathering and reporting the news to the public. By denying access, as the Government did in Grenada, it also denied to the public the ability to receive information gathered by an independent press. Instead, the American public received only the information the Government wanted it to receive. This is not what a free society is all about.

From the outset, the Government declared that it was not safe for the press to be in a war zone. Thus, at a time when CBS News had more than two dozen of its people in war-torn Lebanon, we were told that we could not go to Grenada because the military could not guarantee our safety. But whatever the rationale, the public-which received first-hand information from the press in Vietnam, in Korea, and in World War II-was denied first-hand reporting from Grenada. I submit that is intolerable.

I want to emphasize that the American press is a responsible press. We are not seeking to report military secrets. We are not seeking to jeopardize lives. But those interests could have been protested without resorting to the unprecedented censorship that the Government imposed in Grenada.

Last Sunday, the military commander of the American task force in Grenada said the decision to keep out the press was his, that it would do no good to protest at higher levels. Indeed, the Secretary of Defense last week said that he would not overrule the military on this issue.

Last week a number of us watched a satellite feed in which an Australian journalist told his countrymen we have just seen the end of 200 years of press freedom in the United States.

I hope that the Australian journalist was overreacting, but I am seriously concerned that we may indeed be witnessing the dawn of a new era of censorship, of manipulation of the press, of considering the media the handmaiden of government to spoon feed the public with Government-approved information. If the Government is permitted to abrogate the first amendment at will, to the detriment of not simply the press but the public as well, I am concerned that such action will be taken again and again, whenever a Government wishes to keep the public in the dark.

I find it ironic that this hearing is taking place 1 month to the day after representatives of some 60 print and broadcast organizations from 25 countries, meeting in Talloires, France, condemned attempts to regulate news content. That meeting was arranged, in part, by American press groups, notably the World Press Freedom Committee, and included third world countries. They were attacking efforts to regulate news content, then largely led by the Soviet Union.

The press has covered literally every war fought by this country. In its coverage, the press has served as a ratifying factor in reporting to the public what has occurred. Indeed, from World War II to now, 125 correspondents have been killed while covering wars in which the U.S. has been involved. We do not cover wars from hotel rooms far behind the lines of battle; we do not wish to cover wars on the basis of hand-outs from the Pentagon.

One CBS News correspondent was told by two colonels at the Pentagon that we learned a lesson from the British in the Falklands. That lesson was censorship. CBS News protested that action in a letter to the Secretary of Defense on October 25. There has been no reply.

On the third day of the invasion, the Pentagon began to release its own fi which clearly represented what the Government wanted the public to see and lieve. It may have been an accurate portrayal. Without the presence in Grenada a free and independent press, America will never really know.

When the press was finally admitted to Grenada, for several days it was co pelled to operate in the most limited and restricted fashion. We saw what our Go ernment wanted us to see, when our Government wanted us to see it, for as long our Government deemed appropriate.

It was not until the sixth day of the invasion that the press was allowed to cove Grenada in a more meaningful fashion.

We at CBS News are concerned, frustrated, and saddened by the press restriction of the past week.

We are concerned by the repressive actions of the Government toward the pres We are frustrated because we were not able to do the reporting job the public ex pects of us and we expect of ourselves.

We are saddened to bear witness to this new, unchecked censorship, leading to a off-the-record war.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. Thank you, Mr. Joyce.

And now John Chancellor.

Mr. CHANCELLOR. Mr. Chairman, I will not take much of your time this morning. I am glad the subcommittee asked me to appear because I think the problem that is being considered today affects one of the basic elements of a free society. It is not only the privilege of the American press to be present at moments of historic importance, it is the responsibility of the press to be there.

The men who died in the invasion of Grenada were representing values in American life. One of those values is the right of the citizenry to know what their Government is doing and to learn that from a free and independent press. That principle of the press as an observer and a critic of the Government was established at the beginning of the United States, and it is the responsibility of all citizens to uphold it.

For the subcommittee's convenience, I have attached two commentaries I wrote on these topics for the NBC Nightly News, although I appear here today as a private citizen and not a representative of the National Broadcasting Co. Thank you. [The complete statement follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN CHANCELLOR, SENIOR COMMENTATOR, NBC NEWS

I am glad the subcommittee asked me to appear at this hearing, because I think the problem that is being considered today affects one of the basic elements of a free society.

It is not only the privilege of the American press to be present at moments of historic importance, it is the responsibility of the press to be there. The men who died in the invasion of Grenada were representing values in American life; one of those values is the right of the citizenry to know what their Government is doing, and to learn that from a free and independent press. That principle, of the press as observer and as critic of the Government, was established at the beginning of the United States. It is the responsibility of all citizens to uphold it.

For the subcommittee's convenience, I have attached two commentaries I wrote for the NBC Nightly News which express my views, although I appear here today as a private citizen and not a representative of the National Broadcasting Co.

Well, there's one thing you can say about the invasion of Grenada; it isn't a living

room war.

There are American troops in combat, fighting with Cubans, putting Russians into custody-and not a single member of the American press allowed to observe. The American Government is doing whatever it wants to in Grenda without any representative of the American public watching what it's doing. No stories in your newspapers or magazines; no pictures in your living room.

When the British went into the Falklands they allowed a few correspondents and cameramen to go along, a small tip of the hat to a free press. But in Grenada, the

Reagan administration has produced a bureaucrat's dream: do anything, no one is watching.

It would have been easy for the Pentagon to take some press people along, with no security risk.

But that's not the way the Reagan administration operates.

It lied to its own White House Press Office about Grenada.

It don't consult the Congress, only informed it, and it ducked the serious parts of the War Powers Act.

This passion for secrecy is no surprise. Earlier this year, again without consulting the Congress, the President put out the most sweeping and dictatorial censorship directive in the history of the American Government. From now on, anyone who reads certain classified documents is subjected to censorship for life. It is so bad that the Senate has come out against it and the House is expected to.

The Secretary of Defense explains American casualties in Grenada by saying, The price of freedom is high.

What freedom? The freedom of the American people to know what their Government is doing?

This administration clearly doesn't believe in that.

It is being said this week that the American government did two good things when it invaded Granada; it beat the commies and kept out the press. The exclusion of the press from the early days of the fighting is being cheered by some people. We are told that the decision to keep the press out was a purely military decision. That is hard to believe. There is a long and honorable tradition of cooperation between the American military and the American press. Never before has the press been excluded from a military operation of this size; the decision to keep the reporters away got into the area of politics. If there is one thing sure about life in America it is that the military doesn't make political decisions on its own.

We are told that the press was kept away from Grenada for its own safety. That, too is hard to believe. Danger is part of the job. The overseas press club says that since 1940, 123 members of the press have died in combat covering American forces. Their safety, or the lack of it, was up to their own news organizations. Journalists in combat zones sign waivers absolving governments from responsbility. The Israelis had me sign one in Lebanon last year. It's the way things work and it's the only way that free and accurate coverage of combat can be guaranteed.

When there's a war on, journalism can be a risky business for journalists.

But no journalism at all is risky for the country. The press, good or bad, and it's both, is a necessary part of the process of democracy.

Every once in a while the press gets it in the neck, which is probably healthy. But the people who are happy that the press was kept off Grenada while the fighting went on ought to ask themselves: do you know where your Government is, and what it's up to? Without the press, you can only put your faith in the official version.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. Thank you, Mr. Chancellor.
And now, Mr. David Brinkley.

Mr. BRINKLEY. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, speaking for ABC News, I would like to thank you for allowing us to appear.

We have been given two reasons for the Defense Department's refusal to allow reporters in Grenada: First, the security of the operation itself; second, safety of the reporters themselves.

As to the first, security could easily have been maintained by the armed services by controlling, as they do control, all means of communication between Grenada and the United States. Beyond that, reporters could have been taken ashore an hour or so after the operation began and when it was no longer a secret.

As for the second point, physical safety of the reporters, every one in our business has always understood there is risk and danger in covering military operations and in the past everyone of us has been willing to sign a statement relieving the military of any responsibility for us. Everyone understood that in Vietnam, where I believe more than 100 journalists were killed and many more injured and no one to my knowledge has ever attempted to blame the

« السابقةمتابعة »