The issues dominating the presidential campaign -- education, big government, taxes -- "all pale" beside First and Fifth Amendment issues that both major party candidates and a complacent public are ignoring, said distinguished journalist Tom Wicker during a lecture Oct. 25 sponsored by the Daniel W. Kops Freedom of the Press Fellowship Program.
|
| R. Laurence Moore, left, Cornell's H.A. Newman Professor of American Studies, opens the program Oct. 25 for journalist Tom Wicker, right, this year's Daniel W. Kops Freedom of the Press lecturer, in Hollis E. Cornell Auditorium of Goldwin Smith Hall. Charles Harrington/University Photography |
During his first visit to Cornell, Wicker discussed the election, campaign finance reform, the Supreme Court, technology, Attica, media mergers and the death of Princess Diana to an almost-capacity audience in Hollis E. Cornell Auditorium of Goldwin Smith Hall.
While neither Al Gore nor George Bush "is in any overt or active way thwarting the First Amendment," Bush's choices for the Supreme Court may be "worrisome" if he were to select candidates as "right wing" as Anthony Scalia and Clarence Thomas, Wicker said, referencing a recent article he wrote for The Nation.
Balancing campaign finance reform with the First Amendment will present problems, Wicker said, noting that he agrees with the Supreme Court decision in Buckley vs. Valeo that there can be no limits on spending one's own money in a campaign. Conceding that this ruling has led to unequal access of candidates to the media, particularly in television ad time, he warned that any attempt to "reshape the First Amendment so that limitations on soft money might be possible" would be wrong.
He singled out the faculty for a warning on subsidized speech, expression that is supported by government agencies like the National Endowment for the Arts. "People who favor government support of the arts should be careful because they may be opening the arts to greater control by the government," he said.
Another First Amendment issue that will be addressed more and more frequently in the future is the growing number of big media mergers and acquisitions. "Does the First Amendment require that access to media should be equalized between those who have assets and those who don't?" he asked. "I favor in the abstract the idea of equal access." But he warned again that trying to make access fair may mean compromising the First Amendment.
Turning to the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees the right to privacy, Wicker warned about the dangers posed by technology. Police agencies are able to pinpoint the locations of cell phones. Some police agencies have heat-seeking devices that allow them to locate grow lights used to grow marijuana. Should they be required to get a warrant? "I don't really believe the public will defend the rights of marijuana growers over the police," Wicker said, bemoaning the way in which civil liberties may become "disposable" when average citizens don't feel threatened. But "these rights are in the Constitution precisely to protect blameless citizens," Wicker said. "It's easy to take those rights for granted, and we do."
Wicker defended the news media against accusations that it regularly violates the Fifth Amendment in its coverage of individuals, particularly in the case of the Clinton impeachment and death of Princess Diana. Public officials become "national role models" and should expect minute scrutiny of every action "except ordinary bedroom details," he said, adding Diana "exploited her position." Watchdog journalism is "the press standing up for the public against corruption," he said, and journalists often agonize over how to conduct "responsible" coverage of many issues. Should The New York Times have published the Pentagon Papers in 1971? Are journalists violating their own mandate to cover the news when they do not disclose the names of rape victims or arrested juveniles? "Every decision is difficult and should be made on its own terms," he said. "The right of privacy seems to be mainly in the eye of the beholder. It is not concrete and inevitable."
During the question-and-answer session, Wicker, who wrote the definitive book on the 1971 Attica prison uprising, was asked about the recent settlement by the state of New York of lawsuits by inmates who were injured during the shattering event. After the police regained control of the prison, many inmates were beaten and treated savagely. That was "a black mark" on the state, Wicker commented, and it "got off light" with an $8 million settlement.
Daniel Kops and his wife, Nancy, the annual lecture program's benefactors, attended Wicker's lecture. A staunch defender of First Amendment rights, Kops said he was in agreement with Wicker's positions.
| Cornell Chronicle Front Page | | Table of Contents | | Cornell News Service Home Page |