Freedom of the Press? Not in Justice Scalia’s America
As I write this, I’m sure that the Department of Justice, the US Marshall Service, the Secret Service or all of them are lurking in the background ready to erase and delete anything I write. So, in the event you’re reading this and all of sudden you see the words disappear, don’t worry it’s not your eyesight going. It’s just the federal government taking away your rights. It’s not my imagination or paranoia. It’s a fact.
Imagine, I’m a reporter with a digital recorder taking notes of a speech by Supreme Court Justice Scalia, when all of sudden two agents acting on his behalf demand and take the recorder and erase it all. No, it’s not something out of a Science Fiction novel or my own paranoia. It happened. Well, it didn’t happen to me but it did happen to two reporters taking notes during a presentation by Scalia in Hattiesburg, Miss.
One reporter was from Associated Press the other from the Hattiesburg American newspaper.
Here’s what happened: Scalia was about 35 minutes into his speech at Presbyterian Christian when U.S. Marshal Melanie Rube of the Jackson office confronted the reporters in the front row of the school's gymnasium and demanded they give her the recordings and she then erases everything.
Ok, correct me if I’m wrong but in the 21st Century print journalist use audio recorders to ensure they get accurate quotes. Don’t you think Scalia would want a reporter to quote him accurately? Or maybe he prefers that they misquote him so he can turn around and sue them? Isn’t that what the courts are for, to sue people?
Needless to say but both news services and scores of media outlets were outraged.
"I'm very disappointed that one of the strongest voices for the people of the United States did not speak out in protection of First Amendment rights," said Judith "Skippy" Haik, president and publisher of the Hattiesburg American. "This shouldn't have happened at a speech that he was giving." Ron Haristt, news editor at the Associated Press' Jackson bureau said, "We are upset that a federal officer would prevent one of our reporters from doing our job."
Upset?
They ought to be mad as hell! I’m sure if Ben Franklin were alive he’d be writing letters to the editor drawing political cartoons and probably even starting a newspaper that allows the free flow of information. Imagine a newspaper that’s not controlled by the government. Of course Scalia has since apologized. He wrote a letter of apology to the two reporters and another letter to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. In his letter to the committee, Scalia said the marshal's action "was not taken at my direction; I was as upset as you were."
Scalia carefully avoided saying whether he was aware of the incident while it was happening. Since the two reporters were sitting in the front row of the audience and the marshal was carrying out Scalia's policy of no audio recorders, you'd think it would be pretty hard to miss. The justice said in his letter to the committee that he is changing his policy "so as to permit recording for use of the print media."
Apparently, Scalia must think that 21st Century reporters are still using the same methods as Ben Franklin’s quill and hand press. Scalia told the committee, in "regard to your further suggestion that I direct security personnel not to confiscate recordings -- presumably even those made in violation of clearly announced rules," that he does not direct security personnel, and can only make suggestions. But still he had to have his last dig at the press when he said he hoped the electronic media would continue to respect "my First Amendment right not to speak on radio or television when I do not wish to do so ... " Wait a minute. What's wrong with this picture?
“When agents acting on behalf of Supreme Court justice can, at his request, snatch and destroy information collected by reporters, it is not just thumbing nose at Constitution, it is dangerous step in direction of totalitarianism.” Bob Herbert, NY Times, 4/12/04