The New York Times and When Not To Publish

 The New York Times and When Not To Publish

The PR Verdict: C (Distinctly OK) for The New York Times. (Pictured: Times editor Jill Abramson.)

When does The New York Times decide it won’t publish something on the grounds that it might impinge on national security? It’s a question the paper of record has had to address recently. An angry Congress wants clarification, as do some readers. What to say?

The controversy stems from recent articles published in the NY TImes about President Obama’s “kill list,” as well as the U.S. government’s computer virus warfare against Iran.  Obama’s critics claim the information came directly from the White House in order to bolster the President’s tough image on national security. Obama’s PR says this is dead wrong and that the President is intent on cracking down on staff leaking classified information.

The Times‘s defense? It always consults with government officials prior to publication. The paper confirms that government officials had not asked the paper to spike the two stories in question, and it rejects any suggestion that national security was endangered. “No story about details of government secrets has come near to demonstrably hurting the national security in decades and decades,” is the official quote. Case closed for The New York Times (for the moment).

The PR Verdict: C (Distinctly OK) for The New York Times, whose response still keeps the decision to publish or not in the realm of a high level of discretion. Something more objective might help the debate.

PR Takeaway: Freedom of speech and public interest rest on a continuum of interest and competing concerns. The Times has chosen to portray the issues as relatively straightforward – dangerous to release, or not? Why not talk about the issue as a long continuum with transparency at one end and secrecy on the other. List and weigh factors that might have a bearing on publication. Think of it as a point system; it will undoubtedly be imperfect, but it would change the debate from a discretion-based decision to something more independent and apolitical.

To read more, click here.

Is The New York Times releasing information that could compromise national security, or exercising the freedom of press? Give us your PR Verdict, below.

share save 171 16 The New York Times and When Not To Publish

What is Your PR Verdict?

  1. Jennifer B. says:

    We have a rating problem; perhaps grade inflation? A “C” grade for the caliber of NYT professionals and The PR Verdict readers is interpreted as an F. And indeed an F is appropriate to the NYT’s decision to print this, for both reasons of national security and also for not respecting highly confidential information. Why is this information useful or newsworthy?

    Not only is this dangerous material for our servicemen abroad; it’s an international embarassment which clearly will be gobbled up by salivating Repulicans who, dare I say, are also an international embarrassment.

  2. Paul Marrone says:

    This is a tough one to really judge and in all fairness will always require a case-by-case exercise of discretion by media. The facts and information will be hard to fit within an overarching policy on when or not to publish. Almost gets into the Supreme Court thinking on pornography – know it when they see it. Scoring system or other “brightline tests” would lead to endless public debates and interrrogation of media when they maybe be exercising sound and wise judgement. Alas, an imperfect world.

Trackbacks

  1. BizSugar.com says:

    The New York Times and When Not To Publish…

    The PR Verdict: C (Distinctly OK) for The New York Times, whose response still keeps the decision to publish or not in the realm of a high level of discretion. Something more objective might help the debate….

Speak Your Mind

*


nine − = 3

CommentLuv badge