Freedom of the Press: A Primer and Mission

By DON ROLLINS

“I always saw journalism as a way to make trouble (I hope constructively) without having the limits of authority, and the obligations that went with official jobs.” — Victor Navasky

Its not something constitutional originalists want to discuss in earnest, but the ink had barely dried on the final draft before the signers themselves were having second thoughts. The process had been long and grueling as a splintered cadre of elites argued their way from The Virginia Plan, to the New Jersey Plan, to the Connecticut Compromise that would more or less become the new blueprint for today’s America. (So deep were their differences only 39 of the 55 appointed delegates would even lend their names. And Rhode Island took a pass all together.)

Then came the initial series of Amendments — now 27 in number — that signaled more than just the need for specificity and clarity: The first 10 (Madison’s Bill of Rights, 1791) made it clear neither the Framers nor any other duly called body should not appoint themselves keepers of all truth, for all time. Anything less would amount to one more failed experiment in democracy.

To that end if authentic genius resides nowhere else in the constitution, it exists in those few lines from the First Amendment (a concession to the anti-federalists) as individual freedom within a pluralistic society is given concrete shape. To read that crucial passage is to read a calculated, distilled and steely promise — a promise the nation has over and again failed to keep, yet there it is. A list of inherent freedoms, enshrined in our secular scriptures.

Its a bit cliche to note the five guarantees outlined in the seminal Amendment are fragile, but they are. Its even more cliche when speaking of one in particular: a free country must have a free press. The alternative is power without true accountability.

Holding to account has long been the mission of progressive journalism, starting with the colonial period as emboldened editors and publishers described the plight of those on the economic margins of both the English and colonial economies. This focus on the oppressed soon turned toward the systems that created the disparities among colonists, giving rise to pamphlets, commentaries, papers and books (fiction and non-) that would cast the mold for telling truth to power, populist style.

Subsequently the same arc of truth-telling journalism runs through every period in our history, thoroughly populist and with a clear mission: To responsibly find, formulate and speak the facts in the service of demokratia (Athenian “rule by the people”.)

The mission has never been easy. But as the late former editor of The Nation, Victor Navasky noted in a 2021 interview, Republican-driven claims of fake news, fake elections and fake facts have made populist journalism even more difficult to sustain. Still, even as Navasky cedes Trump has himself complicated responsible reporting, the aged liberal lion gives no ground with a quick rejoinder for journalists to “Ask the questions you’re not supposed to.”

Taken together, these may best the best and worst of times for honest, populist reporting in America. The best because there certainly is no shortage of story lines, and technology has opened wide new populist portals to what Navasky calls “citizen journalism.” The bad news: The cuckoos on the other side have the very same opportunities.

All the more reason to support this and other progressive journalism outlets that embody the First-Amendment free press tradition. All the more reason to help those journalists to ask questions they’re not supposed to.

Postscript: Victor Navasky died in January at 90. His 2021 interview with journalist Florence Graves may be viewed on YouTube,

Don Rollins is a Unitarian Universalist minister in Jackson, Ohio. Email donaldlrollins@ gmail.com.

From The Progressive Populist, March 15, 2023

Populist.com