The fourth estate is getting its mojo back
There is a growing divide between the media and the political world, writes Raymond Snoddy – but newspaper tenacity in the wake of recent scandals shows the true value of a free press…
It is difficult to imagine a time when there has been such a gulf between media and governments in what used to be called “the free world.”
It was symbolised this week by two events in the US – one in New York and the other in Washington.
On Monday the Guardian and The Washington Post were awarded the highest accolade in American journalism, the Pulitzer Prize, for their work on the surveillance activities of the National Security Agency (NSA).
In a way Edward Snowden should have got a Pulitzer prize as well, although he is not a journalist and “merely” leaked, with great care and attention to detail, NSA’s manifest abuses.
By mid-week, in a speech in Washington, the former UK defence secretary Liam Fox was denouncing Snowden as “a self-publicising narcissist” who was guilty of treason.
Fox even went further and suggested that the leaks may have helped President Putin invade the Crimea without producing evidence to support the claim, while also perhaps ignoring the possibility that Putin needed no such help.
Snowden himself was guilty of cowardice and treachery and as for the Guardian the way it handled classified material was “pathetically amateur.”
Its journalists – i.e. the winners of the Pulitzer Prize – were also guilty of discussing sensitive documents in public. You could say that again.
Between the views of Dr Fox, as shared with the American Enterprise Institute, and that of the Pulitzer committee and the journalists of the Guardian and Washington Post, there can never be any meeting of minds.
The political class, or at least many of them, are at loggerheads with the serried ranks of the media over Snowden, leaks and where ultimate public service and responsibility lie.
The battle lines had already been clearly delineated in both the US and the UK before this week’s events. First the Guardian was chosen as newspaper of the year in the British Press awards and then on top there was the George Polk journalism award.
Sides have been taken and most people will be cheering for their side in this particular debate.
A number of other UK newspapers have attacked the Guardian for what it has done and the legendary former Daily Express security correspondent Chapman “Harry” Pincher, in his 100th year, has no doubt about what should happen to Snowden now.
He should be shot as a traitor.
It is difficult, if not actually impossible, to know whether the Snowden leaks have endangered the security of the West or not. You would have imagined that any self-respecting terrorist, never mind President Putin, would suspect, if not actually know, that their phone calls could be intercepted.
What we now know for a fact is that the NSA conducted a dragnet of the phone records of millions of Americans, carried out surveillance of the phone calls of 35 world leaders and gained back-door entry to leading internet companies including Google and Facebook.
As a result President Obama ordered a review into data surveillance and a number of bills advocating reform are already before Congress.
At the very least the Guardian can put on a strong public interest defence of its actions.
We can also surely agree that sending British spooks to oversee the physical destruction of a couple of hard drives in the basement of the Guardian could go straight into a Monty Python sketch.
As for Edward Snowden, the “narcissistic coward”, readers of Luke Harding’s book The Snowden Files will find it difficult to reconcile such a description with either his personality or behaviour.
Harding portrays Snowden as a patriotic, Republican libertarian in love with the US constitution and almost romantic about his notions of America’s role in the world. He became gradually disillusioned with what he saw as an out-of-control NSA and noted how totally ineffective previous attempts at whistleblowing had been.
What Snowden did was carried out with meticulous care and due deliberation and in the full knowledge that such leaks would have a serious negative impact on the rest of his life – most of which could be spent in prison.
If it was only the NSA leaks then the arguments could be wrestled to the ground and then almost everyone could move on.
In the UK, at least, there are a large number of fissures that include Leveson, the recent re-opening of old scars from the MPs expenses scandal including UKIP’s European funding, the sexual predators of Westminster – and who even knew about the activities of Cyril Smith, the Liberal paedophile.
There is no denying that such a catalogue will tend to tar the innocent and the guilty alike and will have the general impact of reducing respect for MPs in the public mind.
There will be the impression that they are all at it, and “it” will have a very broad focus.
What we are actually seeing is the fourth estate beginning to get its mojo back after a loss of confidence caused by an exaggerated sense of economic gloom and the reputational damage caused by illegal phone hacking by the few.
Such tenacity by newspapers – and it is still mainly newspapers – is to be welcomed and will be welcomed by more thoughtful politicians.
Even out-going Culture Secretary Maria Miller and her successor Sajid Javid were both smart enough to avoid endorsing the “press witch hunt” theory of Miller’s departure.
Javid now has the opportunity to go one step further, once he has properly got his feet under the desk, and withdraw or side-line the ill-fated Royal Charter on the press.
If the next general election produces a majority government, which goes ahead with sanctions to back up the Royal Charter that few in the media want, then the row will continue for years and will travel all the way to Europe.
Rows between the media and government are nothing new and editors have gone to jail in this country and may have to do so again.
But it would be good if wiser political heads were to prevail while never forgetting the ancient law that the natural relationship between the press and politicians is the same as between a dog and a lamppost.