The Voice of the People:

An Argument for the Potential of a Free Press in the United States

Anna Louise Neil

Senior Seminar

March 4th, 2019

1
 Neil 2

Introduction

Great minds founded the United States on the overarching principle of freedom.

Throughout the establishment of this nation, freedom remained at the forefront of the hearts and

minds of those who would eventually call themselves Americans. Even after the Constitution

defended the freedoms of American citizens, the people recognized the urgency embedded in

continuing to guard their liberties. From the American Revolution, to the Civil War, to the

Women’s Suffrage Movement, to the Civil Rights Movement, Americans fought for their

freedoms. Many recognize the freedom of expression as the most important liberty to protect.

The Constitution outlines this principle in the First Amendment, expressing citizens’ rights to

speech, religion, assembly, petition, and the press.

When one considers the freedom of the press, independence from the government often

comes to mind; however the media experiences other sources of restriction beyond a formal

government establishment. Often, the political party system in the United States limits the

freedom of the press. The partisan bias recognized in the media since its founding in America

leads to neither diverse nor objective journalism and shapes the view of this entity. Often,

feelings of distrust and skepticism surface when one thinks of the press. This comes from a

history of media misuse. Over time, the nature of the press evolved from an outlet which relays

information with integrity to an outlet which many use for political gain. While the visionaries

intended the press to act as a check on the leadership of the United States and a source to spread

important and accurate information, political parties and the government often misuse their

resources. Therefore, can the American press exist as a free entity? Using historical,
 Neil 3

psychological, and philosophical information about the press, hope for this establishment

surfaces. ​American press can exist as a free entity.​ In order for this freedom to become a reality

however, the press must exist separate from government control, unattached from partisan bias,

and as an entity aimed at constructive work which embodies unfailing integrity1.

First, this paper examines the history of the American Press in order to understand its

modern condition. This section covers the first published colonial newspaper, the Sedition Act,

the Jacksonian Press, the age of muckraking journalism, and the major accomplishments of

investigative journalism. Through these events, this paper examines both positive and negative

past of the American press in order to understand how to improve its future. Second, this paper

utilizes the principles of psychology to explain why most citizens do not trust the media. This

section covers topics such as political distrust and press believability. By understanding the

psychological reasons for why citizens fail to find the press credible, one discovers solutions to

enhancing press integrity and quality. Third, this paper studies the philosophies behind a truly

free press. This section uses figures such as John Milton and John Locke to understand the

original concept of the ideal press at the beginning of the modern world. These sections not only

cover the facts of the historical, psychological, and philosophical past of American journalism,

but also how these elements relate to the free press today, an outlet of integrity.

After gathering information from the historical, psychological, and philosophical

analyses of this topic, this paper presents solutions about how to achieve press freedom. These

solutions come once again from focusing on a separation from government control and partisan

1
​Unfailing Integrity exists as the highest moral standard of the free press. The Thales Academy Luddy Outcomes
define Unfailing Integrity as that which “compels a person to follow a strong code of ethics with honesty in all
situations.”
 Neil 4

bias, as well as from making an effort towards constructive content and unfailing integrity.2 The

media serves as one of the most important instigators of change in the United States and the

world. By understanding its strengths and weaknesses, journalists and consumers can alter the

press to embody its ideal state of progress.

History of the Press: America’s First Newspaper

On the twenty-fourth of April, 1704, the media persona of the New World emerged. On

this day, writers in Boston, Massachusetts published the first newspaper in the thirteen colonies,

edited by John Campbell and named ​The Boston News-Letter.​ Campbell said very little in the

contents of the half sheet article however, as the British government approved each copy under

restrictive standards. In the book entitled ​Literary Influences in Colonial Newspapers:

1704-1750,​ the author describes the first paper as follows.

The Boston News-Letter ​of Monday, April 24, 1704, is indeed, a pitiful enough affair. Half a sheet of “pot”
paper, the first page filled with stale news about the Pretender and his Popish emissaries in Scotland,
extracted from the back numbers of the London ​Flying Post,​ and ​The London Gazette​, the second with a
few marine notices and Boston scrap-gatherings- that is all.3

In this, the author describes the newspaper as a lifeless and irrelevant literary work which failed

to update the public in a timely manner. The piece exceeded the limits of bias, controlled solely

by the voice of the single-minded government, not the diversified people. The government not

only violated the integrity behind the piece, but released content neither informative nor

beneficial for the people to spend their time reading. An excerpt from the newsletter itself reads:

The Jacobites, he says, do all they can to persuade the Nation that their pretended King is a Protestant in his
Heart, tho' he dares not declare it while under the Power of France, that he is acquainted with the Mistakes
of his Father's Government, will govern to more according to Law, and endear himself to his Subjects.4

2
​Unfailing Integrity, a Luddy Outcome.
3
​Cook, ​Literary Influences in Colonial Newspapers​, 8.
4
​Campbell, ​The Boston News-Letter,​ 2.
 Neil 5

This excerpt exhibits undeniable European influence. Because the British governor demanded

that he approve all papers, the news exemplified the spirit of Europe, not the New World

colonies. From this small section, the main focus of ​The Boston News-Letter​ summarizes into

three words: religion, European relations, and the nature of monarchy. Predictably, the first press

in the New World seemed to act as an extension of the king’s control from hundreds of miles

away rather than a reflection of freedom. The colonial settlers left Europe in search of religious

and social liberty, but the first media outlet detailed these topics in a biased light. In this way, the

journalistic voice of the people in early 18th century America remained nonexist, as the press

refused to represent the cares and beliefs of the colonists. The first newspaper in Boston stands

as the earliest example of the biased media under the government. A biased media historically

has failed to uphold the integrity and duties of the outlet itself, stifling the voices of the people

and breeding a tyrannical government.

History of the Press: The Sedition Act

Many deem the Sedition Act of 1798 the first important event of United States press

history. With the Napoleonic Wars brewing in Europe in 1789, British ships began raiding

American ships and impressing Americans sailors whom the British claimed as subjects of

England. The British carried out this action to injure the foreign commerce of their European

enemy, France. At the time, France and the United States remained allies after the French aided

the colonies in the American Revolution. The Jay Treaty of 1795 gave favorable concessions to

Great Britain and slowed this country’s hated policy of impressment, but upset France on the

basis of betrayal. John Adams, now President of the United States, called Elbridge Geny and
 Neil 6

John Marshall to the position as Ambassador to France, in addition to Charles Cotesworth

Pinckney. The men sought to settle the tension between the United States and France, but

conditions only worsened. France insisted on large sums of money from the United States before

they considered any compromise. This appalled John Adams and Congress, who countered this

request with a trade embargo and strong military action.

While the Federalists gained a great hatred for France under John Adams, Republicans

gained a greater hatred for the attitude of the Federalists ​in regards to​ the French. They believed

that a disliking for the French meant a liking for the British, as France and England opposed one

another at the time. The Republicans voiced their disapproval of the actions of the Federal

Government towards the French by writing passionate and critical press articles. These opinion

pieces led to the creation of the Sedition Act of 1798 by the Federalists, legislation which

punished the authors of censorious journalistic content towards the government. The act

remained in effect until March 3rd, 1801, when Thomas Jefferson refused its renewal under his

Presidency. In his First Inaugural Address, he refuted the Sedition Act, writing the following.

During the contest of opinion through which we have past, the animation of discusions (sic) and of
exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely, and to
speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced
according to the rules of the constitution all will of course arrange themselves under the will of the law, and
unite in common efforts for the common good.5

In this quote, Jefferson comments on the previous existence of the Sedition Act and the

restrictions which it placed on free thought. Jefferson clearly defines this freedom of thought and

expression as something which includes both speech and writing. He implies that the very

principles of the Constitution render the Sedition Act unjust. While Jefferson's words on the

abolishment of the Sedition Act of 1798 encompass a major event in the advancement of press

5
​Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, 1.
 Neil 7

rights, his most powerful words from his First Inaugural Address read, “We are all republicans:

we are all federalists.”6 Here, Jefferson refuses to appeal to a partisan motive, but simply reminds

citizens that, when individuals overlook differences, they unite under their American identity.

Partisan conflict often restricts press freedom the most, as this fuels disagreement, bias, and

dishonesty. When the press looks at issues as simply American, integrity and ultimate freedom

advances, but this notion disappears with the Presidency of the infamous Andrew Jackson.

History of the Press: The Jacksonian Era

With the inauguration of Andrew Jackson in 1829, the press did not exist as an outlet

to voice political injustice such as during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. Instead,

newspapers acted as a weapon for political parties to use against their opponents, restricting

freedom and relinquishing unfailing integrity.7 Andrew Jackson, the seventh President of the

United States, grew up in a log cabin, nestled somewhere between North and South Carolina.

Jackson acted not as an agreeable individual, but rather a challenger. In the book entitled ​What

Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848​, the author describes the nature

of this woodsman and politician as, “Quick to sense a criticism or slight, he never apologized,

never forgave, and never shrank from violence. His towering rages became notorious.”8 This

analysis of Jackson paints a picture of a dominant, fierce, and hostile individual, who happened

to serve as President of the United States.

The press under Andrew Jackson also exhibited the authoritative and domineering

6
​Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, 1.
7
​Unfailing Integrity, a Luddy Outcome.
8
Howe, ​What Hath God Wrought,​ 329.
 Neil 8

persona of the “Napoleon of the Woods.” The ​United States Telegraph​ acted as Jackson’s party

organ, with its editor Duff Green. During the presidential race of John Quincy Adams and

Andrew Jackson, Jacksonian influence already contaminated the press. In the book entitled ​What

Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848​, the quote below describes the

manipulating actions of Editor Green on behalf of Jackson.

Green was deliberately prodding office holders (customs and land officers, U.S. attorneys and marshals,
postmasters and others) to declare for Jackson, on the premise that if Adams won, it would not matter
whom they had supported, but if Jackson won, they faced dismissal unless they had endorsed him.9

In other words, Andrew Jackson used the press to intimidate politicians into supporting him in

his presidential campaign of 1828. This plan worked for Jackson, as America elected him

President and he started his term in the following year. Jackson’s election stands as a gross

example of the manipulation of the press and the stifling of its reputation as a nonpartisan

resource. This source also mentions Amos Kendall, first highlighting his thoughts as a

Jacksonian journalist by stating, “Now, the pro-Jackson journalist Amos Kendall could not help

observing [that] what the Old Hero’s supporters really wanted was ‘the privilege of availing

themselves of the very abuses with which we charge our adversities.’”10 Through this quote, one

of his supporters confirms the intimidating nature of Jackson. The followers of Andrew Jackson

received protection from his hostility, which most likely exists now as a major reason for the

President’s appeal to the press.

Amos Kendall acted as another major figure of the press during Andrew Jackson's

Presidency. By the late 1830s, Kendall served as the Postmaster General under Jackson, the

official who oversees the United States Postal Service, and thus the distribution of newspapers

9
​Howe, ​What Hath God Wrought,​ 331.
10
​Ibid., 331.
 Neil 9

during this period. During Kendall’s time in this position, a major slave revolt known as Turner’s

Uprising occurred in 1831 in ​Southampton County, Virginia. This rebellion resulted in the deaths

of 55 to 65 civilians. After this event, abolitionists in the North churned out pamphlets and

newsletters at a blistering rate. Journalists like William Lloyd Garrison and Elizur Wright hoped

to convince moderate southerners to join the movement towards emancipation.

In response to the northern newspaper articles which reached southern post offices in

bulk, Andrew Jackson instructed Amos Kendall to refuse the sending of the articles. In the book

entitled ​What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848​, the author states

Jackson’s thoughts on the ​matter​ as follows, “Old Hickory concurred, calling the abolitionists

‘monsters’ guilty of stirring up ‘the horrors of a servile war,’ who deserved ‘to atone for this

wicked attempt with their lives.’”11 Through these actions, Andrew Jackson and Amos Kendall

not only threatened the abolitionist movement, but the freedom of the press, filtering its content

based solely on partisan opinions. Overall, the Jacksonian Press serves as yet another example of

a media controlled by a political party. The rule of Andrew Jackson over the media produced

biased stories and crushed the credibility and integrity of the press, leaving its freedom

nonexistent in Jacksonian America.

History of the Press: Muckraking Journalism

Muckraking journalism receives credit as one of the most important press movements in

the history of America. This movement worked to systematically discredit wealthy businessmen

or uncover exploitative business practices during the Progressive Era. This era of United States

history occurred primarily between 1890 and 1920 and prospered as a time of social, political,

11
​Howe, ​What Hath God Wrought,​ 429.
 Neil 10

and economic reform. Socially, a major population boom, a lack of both education and child

protection, and increasing poverty fueled the muckraking movement. Progressive men and

women fought for women’s rights, the rights of the impoverished, and the rights of minorities in

America’s booming cities. Muckraking often highlighted each of the issues described above

through magazines such as ​The New Republic​,​ McClure’s​, and ​The National.​ The book ​Public

Journalism and Political Knowledge​ summarizes muckraking journalists as “intent on using

exposure and revelation as a means of shocking and educating their audiences and urging its

members to relevant action.”12 Though this quote, one understands muckraking as a form of

journalism which seeks to spark change through the exposure of injustice. It represents the nature

of a truly free press through its focus on conveying accurate information, full of integrity. This

style of writing eventually formed investigative journalism, an outlet used to solve problems and

address the wrongs of society and the government as well.

History of the Press: Investigative Journalism

Investigative journalism stemmed from the success of muckraking journalism as another

critical outlet for change. This field experienced some of its greatest successes in America during

the 1970s. Two of the most famous cases solved through investigative journalism remain the

Watergate Scandal and the Pentagon Papers.

Investigative journalism played an important role in solving the Watergate Scandal.

History credits Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, two journalists from the ​Washington Post

who covered this case in depth, as those who gained enough information to justify the

12
​Eksterowicz and Roberts, ​Public Journalism and Political Knowledge,​ 7.
 Neil 11

resignation of President Nixon. One of their most famous sources took the anonymous name

“Deep Throat,” recognized today as Mark Felt, former FBI agent and Associate Director.

The Watergate Scandal began on June 17th, 1972, when citizens reported a burglary in

Washington, District of Columbia. Reports stated that several men broke into the Office of the

Democratic National Committee, housed in the Watergate Building. In short, Richard Nixon's

Committee to Reelect the President wiretapped the phone lines of the Watergate and stole

classified documents. Authorities caught the criminals when they re-entered the building in an

attempt to fix their poor wiretapping job. Nixon denied any involvement in the break ins and

continued on to re-election. Later, the press claimed that Nixon committed other offenses. The

media stated that the President manipulated the CIA and recorded conversations within the Oval

Office to cover up his involvement in the burglary. On August 5th, 1974, authorities confirmed

Nixon’s involvement in the case, leading to his resignation three days later.

Woodward and Bernstein largely solved this case, but received little praise at first. Many

supporters of Nixon and the Republican Party perceived the media’s work as negative, because it

caused a popular President to resign. In response to this reaction, an article entitled ​The Impact of

Watergate on the Public’s Trust in People and Confidence in the Mass Media​ states, “It is now

clear that a significant portion of the public responds to media revelations such as Watergate by

transforming their pleasure or displeasure at the news content into biased evaluations of the

competency and fairness of the messengers of the content.”13 This quote affirms that the public

tends to think of the media positively if it supports their beliefs, yet negatively if it refutes them.

In this way, while the work of Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward played an instrumental role in

13
​Zimmer, ​The Impact of Watergate on the Public’s Trust in People and Confidence in the Mass Media,​ 749.
 Neil 12

revealing the truth of a major case in the 1970s, the public responded without praise because of

its tendency to consider the media in regards to one's own preferences.

The release of the Pentagon Papers remains another notable accomplishment of

investigative journalism in 1970s America. This ordeal began in 1971, but found its roots in a

long history of military secrets. The United States involvement in the Vietnam War remained the

largest American controversy of the 1960s and 1970s. Daniel Ellsberg, a strategic analyst for

both the Department of Defense and the RAND Corporation, believed that the war only harmed

the United States. While Elisburg worked on his infamous ​“Report of the Office of the Secretary

of Defense Vietnam Task Force” for the Department of Defense from 1967 to 1969, he found

incriminating evidence about United States involvement with Vietnam. In order to shine truth on

the offenses he discovered, Elisburg gave classified information to the press, specifically the

New York Times​ and the ​Washington Post.​

The classified information found suggested that the United States participated in

more military involvement with Vietnam than citizens knew of over the past twenty years. The

New York Times​ published this information first under the title the ​Pentagon Papers.​ At the time,

President Nixon became alarmed by the publishings, claiming that they sought to “limit the

President’s ability to guard national security.” The​ Times​ thus received a restraining order in

1971, but the ​Washington Post​ avoided restrictions surrounding the publication of the story.

Katherine Fran of the ​Post​ decided to expose the content of the ​Pentagon Papers​, landing the

two newspapers in trial due to story inconsistencies. In the end, the ​Washington Post​ published

the papers under their First Amendment right regarding the freedom of the press.

The public often overlooks the importance of the release of the ​Pentagon Papers;​
 Neil 13

however, this event exemplifies unfailing integrity14 from the media. The book entitled ​The

Pentagon Papers: A Discussion e​ xplains the importance of the press in this instance by stating

that, “It is axiomatic with us that a free people can remain free only if it is enlightened and

informed. It is axiomatic with us, as well, that a free press is essential to the creation and

maintenance of an enlightened and informed people.”15 This quote explains how a free nation

develops through understanding the truth, which the media yields. Therefore, without an honest

press to guide the people, the obtainment of national freedom remains impossible. In regards to

the ​Pentagon Papers ​in particular, this source states that “a press which obtains access to a

record revealing so massive a gap between what our executive leadership knew and what it led

the nation to believe on so vital a matter as war and peace would be subversive of our democracy

if it did not bring that record to public attention.”16 In this, the release of classified information

from the press remains justified as an action which furthered democracy and integrity in the

United States, the elements which the free press must embody. Overall, investigative journalism

exhibits the ideal American media: a free press which, above all other standards, seeks to uphold

its integrity and justice.

While the history of American journalism includes both government and partisan control

over the press, its positive eras such as that of muckraking and investigative journalism highlight

the potential for a free press to exist in America. Each major event of press history teaches the

learner more about how to achieve an unbiased and just media. While the first newspaper in

Boston, the Sedition Act, and the Jacksonian Era promote a press hindered by the control of the

government or the party system, the journalism of the Progressive Era and the 1970s gives

14
​Unfailing Integrity, a Luddy Outcome.
15
​McGovern and Roche, ​The Pentagon Papers​, 174.
16
​Ibid., 174.
 Neil 14

Americans an idea of the potential future of the media. If one values the history of the press in

America and attempts to learn from it, integrity and freedom in this outlet can prevail.

The Current Reputation of the Press: Negativity and the Media

While this paper has already examined the historical events surrounding the corruption

of the press, the psychological issues relating to this topic remain unrecognized. To begin this

analysis, one must understand the current popular opinion of the media. Typically, the public

views the press in a negative light. However, what causes this pessimistic reaction? In the book

Negativity in Democratic Politics: Causes and Consequences​, author Stuart N. Soroka argues

that the negativity does not lie in the opinion of the public, but in the content of the news. When

speaking of the book ​Out of Order,​ by ​Thomas Patterson​, Soroka describes the media as

“sensationalist and negative in their orientation towards politics.”17 In this, the first argument

made claims that the media often reports negative information in relation to ​politics​. He goes on

to explain this point further by stating, “Patterson portrays the biases in media reports not just as

a consequence of heightened attention to negative information, but rather as a product of an

increasingly hostile relationship between journalists and politicians.”18 Here, the author refrains

from claiming that journalists purposefully search for negative information alone, but instead

argues that a broken relationship with politicians often leads to the portrayal of these people and

their work as negative.

An increasingly negative relationship between politicians and journalists stemmed from

the Watergate Scandal in the 1970s. To summarize once again, President Nixon allowed for

17
​Soroka, ​Negativity in Democratic Politics,​ 73.
18
​Ibid., 73.
 Neil 15

some of his staff to break into the Democratic National Committee to wiretap the phone lines of

the Watergate Building and steal classified documents. Journalists from the ​New York Times​ and

Washington Post​ eventually gained information about these crimes and reported on them.

Throughout this case, President Nixon and the press opposed one another, as journalists worked

to impeach Nixon. After the journalists on the case investigated the actions of the President and

led to his resignation, an untrusting and negative relationship between journalists and politicians

became instinctive. The problem however does not lie with politicians just as it does not lie with

the people. The press holds the blame for the negative response it receives.

In addition to negative relations between politicians and journalists, the media provides

innately negative information, which signals a negative reaction from the public. Soroka names

this negative content “problem frames,”19 which journalists use to invoke fear in the reader.

Through problem frames, readers become enthralled in the content at hand, but end up forming a

pessimistic outlook on the discussed topics because of the nature of this literature. Soroka, when

continuing to discuss Patterson’s book, states, “Like Patterson, Farnsworth and Lichter point

towards public cynicism and disengagement as likely bi-products of negativity in media

content.”20 This quote further describes the disapproval of the public towards the media as an

effect rather than a cause of the negativity in the press.

“Problem frames,” or negative pieces of media content, come from several topics that

journalists tend to frequently discuss. As stated previously, politics and campaigns act as one of

these topics, which many attribute to the Watergate Scandal. Soroka reiterates this point by

stating, “Negativity in political news is a consequence of a particularly vicious relationship

19
​Soroka, ​Negativity in Democratic Politics,​ 74.
20
​Ibid., 73.
 Neil 16

between journalists and politicians in the post-Watergate American context.”21 Since this

historical scandal, when journalists report on a campaign process, negative content follows.

However, in regards to the time between 1988 and 2004, Soroka also cited that “those areas over

which candidates have more control such as interviews, speeches, and ads are more positive than

are regular news stories.”22 This once again points to an issue with the way journalists write and

how they relate information to the public. When the media covers political issues, it seeks to

make the information “more contentious and more interesting”23 rather than true and objective.

Crime acts as another source of negative media content. Journalists specifically aim to

cover violent crime. While violent crime occasionally acts as positive topic to cover if for the

sake of justice, the morbid nature of the subject often outweighs the positive. Soroka points out

the phrase “if it bleeds, it leads” as one used to describe the draw to hostile news content.24

Journalists reported on violent stories roughy 32% of the time between 2005 and 2009, while

they reported on nonviolent stories roughly 68% of the time. In regards to how many violent

crimes in comparison to non violent crimes occurred during these four years, the percentages

stand at roughly 13% to 87%.25 This statistic shows that the percentage of violent crimes reported

on remains greater than the amount that actually occurs, while the percentage of nonviolent

crimes reported on remains less than what actually occurs. The numbers show that journalists

report on more extreme crime than necessary, painting an unnecessarily negative picture in the

United States. To summarize, Soroka states that, “In each case, there is roughly twice as much

21
​Soroka, ​Negativity in Democratic Politics,​ 93.
22
​Ibid., 73.
23
​Ibid., 74.
24
​Ibid., 76.
25
​Ibid., 79.
 Neil 17

negative information in the news as there is in reality.”26 Overall, while crime reporting presents

different issues than political journalism, it still encourages the inclusion of negative stories in

the media, regardless of whether they accurately represent society. The excessive pessimism in

the United States news cycle hinders the constructive work of the press and thus its ability to act

freely, making this attitude targetable in order to improve this institution.

The Current Reputation of the Press: Credibility and the Media

Apart from negativity, credibility also shapes the public opinion of the press. The

public should judge this component of the media on a source by source basis, which would result

in fair assessments of this establishment. In the journal article entitled ​Biased Press or Biased

Public? Attitudes Toward Media Coverage of Social Groups,​ the writer mentions credibility per

source as follows: “Credibility is not a trait that people ascribe consistently to a channel but,

rather, a highly situational assessment (Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz 1969; Chaffee 1982).”27 This

representation of credibility allows for the overall accuracy of content to exist independently

from the political affiliations of a news organization. Using this definition, readers may judge the

credibility of the press on a story-by-story basis, rather than based on the journalist and his or her

political ideas alone. This stifles political bias because of the importance placed on the unfailing

integrity28 of each account.

While this paper described the ideal analysis of media content above, one cannot forget

the reality of press distrust in America. In the book entitled ​Don’t Shoot the Messenger: How

Our Growing Hatred of the Media Threatens Free Speech for All of Us​, the author describes the

26
​Soroka, ​Negativity in Democratic Politics,​ 93.
27
​Gunther, ​Biased Press or Biased Public?​, 149.
28
​Unfailing Integrity, a Luddy Outcome.
 Neil 18

“canyon of distrust” into which the public often falls. The book states that, “A canyon of

disbelief and distrust has developed between the public and the news media. Deep, complex, and

so contradictory as to be airless at times, this gorge has widened at an accelerating rate during the

last decade.”29 In this quote, the author addresses the distressing reality that the public recently

descended into distrust towards the media. Current circumstances encapsulate the word

“disbelief,” which implies the loss of perceived credibility.

The book argues that many court cases over the years created this canyon. The famous

case ​New York Times Co. v. Sullivan ​discusses press credibility. The ​New York Times​ published

an ad about Martin Luther King Jr. during the 1970s. The ad aimed to persuade readers to donate

to the cause of the civil rights leader, under the assumption of unfair police treatment. L.B.

Sullivan, the commissioner of public safety in Montgomery, Alabama at the time, challenged the

ad. He saw it as his duty to point out the false information in its content. After the ​Times

continued to promote the information under Sullivan’s charges, he filed under libel action. When

Sullivan received $500,000.00 from the state because of his accusation, the ​Times​ appealed the

case and it eventually landed in the Supreme Court.

In the end, the ​Times ​won the case and coined the term “actual malice.” The case decided

that libel information existed under the knowledge of false information spreading. Because

Sullivan failed to prove that the ​Times ​knew of the spreading of false content, he lost his case.

Regardless of the awareness of the ​Times,​ they failed to produce an article deemed credible. In

this, the believability of the press declined after this Supreme Court hearing. Credibility remains

a major issue with the freedom of the American press today, as a truly free press exists as a

29
​Sanford, ​Don’t Shoot the Messenger​, 11.
 Neil 19

source which exhibits unfailing integrity.30 From this analysis of credibility, one better

understands the importance of judging news sources separate from political affiliation, as well as

the necessity of publishing truthful content.

The current opinions of the public towards the media in regards to negativity and

credibility remain relevant for the obtainment of a free press. In regards to this topic, two

improvements emerge. First, the media must produce stories which highlight major issues in the

country, but do not seek to relate negative information simply for a higher profit. Second, the

public must gadge the credibility of the press based on a story’s accuracy, rather than its political

affiliation. From a psychological perspective, these steps can help to promote an American press

with a constructive mindset and integrity.

The Founding Philosophies of the American Press

The philosophical origins of the ideal press in the United States remain relevant in its

improvement towards freedom. The depiction of the media in the New World stemmed partly

from the philosophies of liberty conscious individuals in England, rather than from early

Americans alone. As the two most prominent British examples, John Milton and John Locke

influenced the minds of the Founding Fathers and thus the First Amendment. John Milton, a

renowned philosopher, lived from 1608 to 1674, primarily in London. Milton wrote poetry,

prose, and philosophical content. ​Paradise Lost,​ ​Lycidas,​ and ​Areopagitica ​remain some of his

most famous works. As some of the earliest literature on this topic, the libertarian work

Areopagitica​ focuses on the importance of the freedom of the press. In this book, Milton

30
​Unfailing Integrity, a Luddy Outcome.
 Neil 20

famously quotes that, “Who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; but he who

destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were, in the eye.”31 Milton

thus argues that the destruction of literary works leads to the destruction of reason in society. By

this, Milton supports the freedom of the press, as both a literary outlet and as an essential

protection against the obliteration of reason in society.

John Locke, another British influencer of the Founding Fathers, lived from 1632 to 1704.

Locke wrote the famous works ​The Second Treatise on Civil Government​, ​Some Thoughts

Concerning Education,​ and ​An Essay Concerning Human Understanding.​ ​An Essay Concerning

Human Understanding f​ ocuses on the role and power of the government, human reason, and the

place of personal opinions. In this work, Locke states that

… to maintain peace and the common offices of humanity and friendship in the diversity of opinions… We
should do well to commiserate our mutual ignorance, and endeavor to remove it in all the gentle and fair
ways of information, and not instantly treat others ill as obstinate and perverse because they will not
renounce their own and receive our opinions, or at least those we would force upon them, when it is more
probable that we are no less obstinate in not embracing some of theirs.32

In this quote, Locke promotes the tolerance of opinions not one's own, saying that pure ignorance

comes from considering only one opinion worthy of publicizing. Through this material, Locke

argues for the freedom of expression and ultimately that of the press by refusing to allow only

certain content to receive public attention. Locke’s philosophy set the precedent for the First

Amendment and the importance of an unbiased media.

When studying Milton, we recognize that, while he produced groundbreaking content

when it comes to the freedom of speech and of the press, he failed to extend freedom

unconditionally. In the book entitled ​Emergence of a Free Press​, the author supports this point

31
​Milton, ​Areopagitica​, varying.
32
​Locke, ​An Essay Concerning Human Understanding,​ 314.
 Neil 21

about Milton by stating,“He might cry out, ‘Give ​me ​liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely

according to conscience, above all liberties,’ but this use of the personal pronoun is significant,

for his well-advertised tolerance did not extend to the thought that he hated.”33 From this quote,

one understands how, while the work of Milton and many others of his time laid the foundations

for the concept of a free press in America, it did not embody this model, as it failed to include all

speech content. The ideas of John Locke followed that of Milton’s, yet focused more on the

expression of all, progressing closer to the philosophies of the Founding Fathers. Therefore, by

the composition of the First Amendment, the idea of the freedom of the press extended to look

more like how it exists today, shaped by the progression of philosophical ideas in England.

The Bill of Rights, written by James Madison in 1789, exists to protect the rights of the

people under the United States Constitution. The philosophies of British thinkers such as John

Milton and John Locke shaped this document greatly, yet Madison took the idea of the freedom

of the press in America farther than the British. When establishing press rights, Madison stated

that the “security of the freedom of the press requires that it should be exempt not only from

previous restraint by the executive as in Great Britain, but from legislative restraint also.”34

Through this statement, he far surpasses the ideas of Milton to refrain from the destruction of

some content, as well as those of Locke, to promote all information through the press, but instead

builds on these philosophies to include true press expression as free of ​government​ restriction as

well. In summary, many philosophies shaped the idea of the free press in America, yet freedom

does not simply include a lack of government or partisan restriction. This institution today must

33
​Levy, ​Emergence of a Free Press,​ 93-94.
34
​Madison, exact source unknown.
 Neil 22

seek a media free from both individual and collective control, one which exposes injustices when

necessary and represents the sincere voices of the people.

The Achievement of a Free Press in America

From the historical, psychological, and philosophical perspectives through which this

paper analyzed the press and its function, three principle requirements for the achievement of a

free press in America emerge. The press must exist separate from government control,

unattached from partisan bias, and as an entity aimed at constructive work which embodies

integrity. First, the press must exist separate from government control. When reviewing the

history of newspapers in America, the ​Boston News-Letter ​remains the earliest reliable record. At

the time of its publication in 1704, the king of England controlled the press in the English

colonies. This formula produced a restricted and lifeless media, focused on the affairs of England

at the time, unable to represent the ideas of the colonists. Later on, Americans passed the

Sedition Act in 1798 after gaining independence. This act restricted the Republican Party from

voicing its disapproval of the French and limited the press through government control. These

two early and major examples of the restriction of journalists by the American government

justify the statement that the press cannot truly act as a free and unbiased power without

separation between its work and that of the government.

In order to prevent government control over the American press, society must study the

ideas of James Madison and continuously implement them. James Madison, the author of the Bill

of Rights, included the freedom of the press in the First Amendment. He argued that this freedom

not only extended to separation from executive power, which previously referred to England, but
 Neil 23

also the legislator. In this, in order to consider the press truly free and unhindered in the United

States, it must remain a check on the power of the executive ​and ​of Congress and work to hold

the political figures in America accountable. While one easily distinguishes these action steps,

the same individual may overlook them as well, as their simplicity generates forgetfulness.

Second, the press must exist unattached from partisan bias. Partisan bias remains a

major issue of press restriction in America, beginning with the Jacksonian Era in the early to mid

19th century. Andrew Jackson, the “Napoleon of the Woods,” used the media as a resource based

not on integrity, but rather on political gain. The editor of the ​United States Telegraph,​ Duff

Green, intimidated politicians into supporting Jackson before his presidency through the use of

the paper. After Jackson’s election, Amos Kendall, the Postmaster General, blocked the sending

of abolitionist pamphlets, as Jackson and his party did not support this movement. The actions of

journalists under Andrew Jackson limited the true freedom of the press, molding this power into

a product of party bias. As a result, the public only read one political opinion during this time,

crushing a diverse community of thinkers.

John Locke and John Milton advocated against what consumers now recognize as a

partisan media. First, Milton argued that one should never destroy literary content, believing that

this would destroy reason in society. While Milton did not support the freedom of written content

as much as Locke, his ideas helped to lay the foundations of arguments against media bias.

Second, Locke supported idea diversity in communities, specifically stating that one should work

to “maintain peace and the common offices of humanity and friendship in the diversity of

opinions.”35 In this, Locke valued the presence of multiple schools of thought in the community,

35
​Locke, ​An Essay Concerning Human Understanding,​ 314.
 Neil 24

in order to increase understanding and positive change. He said that friendship should stem from

diversity, not conflict. The American press must use the philosophies of Locke to support a

media which considers the ideas of Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and others to represent

the whole picture of the United States, instead of the biases of one party.

Finally, the press must exist as an entity aimed towards constructive work which

embodies integrity. Speaking in more modern terms, negativity consumes often the content of

the media in the United States. This negativity raises concerns without finding solutions, instead

of inspiring constructive change. The pessimistic nature of the media remains not however the

result of common skepticism, but rather as a problem which the press caused and the press can

correct. First, journalists and politicians foster a hostile relationship with one another, the press

working to find breaches of integrity within the political system, politicians working to condemn

the press as the enemy of the people. In addition, journalists often report on crises and categorize

them as “interesting,” such as crime and scandals. The negative content produced by journalists

predictably evokes a negative response from the public, thus transforming the media from source

of truth and integrity to an entertainer, hungry for a story that sells.

Instead of writing negative stories that simply sell, journalists must refocus their work on

stories which reveal the truth, with integrity. Muckraking journalism and investigative

journalism both exemplify this reputation, as these types of writing from the 20th century

focused on accurately revealing the corruptions of the government and working to make the

political and social atmosphere of America a better place. They also earned a reputation of

credibility, causing the public to evaluate press content based on a story’s accuracy, instead of its

political affiliation. Through their history of exposing harsh labor conditions during the Gilded
 Neil 25

Age to calling for the resignation of President Nixon after the Watergate Scandal, these ages of

the United States press exhibited constant integrity, aimed at finding the truth, no matter what it

looked like. Overall, through this analysis of historical, psychological, and philosophical

information relating to the American media, this institution can exist freely. A media network

unattached from government control, released from partisan bias, and aimed at producing

constructive material with unfailing integrity36 would embody a truly free press in America.

Conclusion

Since the founding of the United States, citizens debated true freedom in America and

specifically that of the press. While the First Amendment expresses the right of the press to

exercise freely, the reality of this unrestricted exercise remains less common. The historical

occurrences such as the publishing of first newspaper in Boston, the passing of the Sedition Act,

and the Jacksonian Era all teach citizens today about the dangers of a media controlled by the

government or a political party, as these powers eliminate the unrestricted functioning of the

press. However, movements such as that of muckraking and investigative journalism exhibited

the ideal American media and guided this establishment towards freedom.

The psychology behind the current distrust and negativity towards the press, as well as

the standard of credibility for the outlet followed the analysis of press history. The importance of

constructive commentary and credibility in creating and maintaining a free press remains

essential as a core component of integrity.

Finally, this paper detailed the philosophical history of the ideal press in America.

36
​Unfailing Integrity, a Luddy Outcome.
 Neil 26

The philosophies of John Milton and John Locke, two British intellectuals, shaped the First

Amendment right reserved for the press in America. John Milton promoted the publishing of

content which he agreed with. John Locke took this a step further to include all content, free

from the restraints of the government or his personal preferences. Finally, James Madison

established the ideal press in America as an entity separate from the confines of individual and

government control, describing this institution in more modern terms.

American press can exist as a free entity. In order for this freedom to become a reality

however, the press must exist separate from government control, unattached from partisan bias,

and as an entity aimed at constructive work which embodies unfailing integrity37. Using the

historical, psychological, and philosophical information above, the media can reach these

requirements. Beyond the practical steps however, American journalism must prosper, not

perish, as its destruction only yields the certainty of the silencing of democracy, and thus the

silencing of the people.

Work Cited

Christians, Clifford G., Theodore L. Glasser, Denis McQuail, Kaarle Nordenstreng, and Robert

37
​Unfailing Integrity, a Luddy Outcome.
 Neil 27

A. White. "Roles of News Media in Democracy." In ​Normative Theories of the Media:

Journalism in Democratic Societies,​ 114-36. University of Illinois Press, 2009. Accessed

August 27, 2018. ​http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/j.ctt1xcjws.8​. Ebook.

Bezanson, Randall P. "How Free Can the Press Be?" In ​How Free Can the Press Be?,​ 250-54.

University of Illinois Press, 2003. Accessed August 27, 2018. ​http://www.jstor.org/stable/

10.5406/j.ctt2ttfcs.9​ Ebook.

Pickard, Victor. ​Media Activism from Above and Below: Lessons from the 1940s American

Reform Movement.​ Journal of Information Policy 5 (2015): 109-28. Accessed

August 27, 2018. ​https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jinfopoli.5.2015.0109? logged

in =true​. Journal.

Humphrey, Carol S, and David A Copeland. “Conclusion.” In ​The American Revolution and the

Press: The Promise of Independence, e​ dited by David Abrahamson, 179–203. Evanston,

Illinois: Northwestern University Press 2013. Print.

Levy, Leonard W. “Early English Theory: From Milton to ‘Cato.’” In ​Emergence of a Free

Press,​ edited by Leonard Levy, 89–118. New York, New York: Oxford University Press

1985. Print.

Sussman, Leonard R. “Press Freedom, the Past Quarter Century: The Vile and the Valiant.” In
 Neil 28

Freedom of the Press 2003: A Global Survey of Media Independence,​ edited by Karin

Karlekar, 13–30. Maryland, United States: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 2003.

Print.

Howe, Daniel W. ​What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848.​ Oxford

History of the United States. Edited by David Kennedy. New York, New York: Oxford

University Press, Inc. 2007. Print.

Gunther, Albert C. "Biased Press or Biased Public? Attitudes Toward Media Coverage of Social

Groups." ​The Public Opinion Quarterly​ 56, no. 2 (1992): 147-67. Accessed August 27,

2018. ​http://www.jstor.org/stable/2749167.​ Journal.

Robinson, Michael J., and Andrew Kohut. "Believability and the Press." ​The Public Opinion

Quarterly​ 52, no. 2 (1988): 174-89. Accessed August 27, 2018.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2749272.​ Journal.

Zimmer, Troy A. "The Impact of Watergate on the Public’s Trust in People and Confidence in

the

Mass Media." ​Social Science Quarterly​ 59, no. 4 (1979): 743-51. Accessed August 27,

2018. ​http://www.jstor.org/stable/42860478​. Journal.

Lewis, Anthony. “A Press Privilege?” In ​Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography

of

the First Amendment​, 81–100. New York, New York: Basic Books, A Member of the

Perseus Books Group 2007. Print.

Barbalet, Jack, and Nicolas Demertzis. “Collective Fear and Societal Change.” In ​Emotions in

Politics: The Affect Dimension in Political Tension​, edited by Nicolas Demertzis,

167–85.

New York, New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2013. Print.

Sanford, Bruce W. “The Canyon of Distrust.” In ​Don’t Shoot the Messenger: How Our Growing

Hatred of the Media Threatens Free Speech for All of Us, ​11–25. New York, New York:

The Free Press, a division of Simon & Schuster Inc. 1999. Print.

Soroka, Stuart N. ​Negativity in Democratic Politics: Causes and Consequences.​ Edited by

Dennis Chong and James Kuklinksi. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press

2014. Print.

Martin, Mike W, Elliot D Cohen, and Martin Gunderson. ​Ethics Journalism: A Reference

Handbook.​ Contemporary Ethics Issues. Edited by Elliot Cohen and Deni Elliott. Santa

Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO 1997. Print.

Day Louis A. ​Ethics in Media Communications: Cases and Controversies.​ Edited by Kristine

Clerkin, Jerilyn Emori, Robert Kauser, and William Waller. Belmont, California:

Wadsworth Publishing Company, a division of Wadsworth, Inc. 1991. Print.

​ ew York: Vintage Books, published by

Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., a division of Random House, Inc.1959. Print.

Owen, Diana. “‘News Media’ and Contemporary Interpretations of Freedom of the Press.” In

Freeing the Presses: The First Amendment in Action​, edited by Timothy Cook, 139–61.

Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Louisiana State University Press, in cooperation with the Kevin

P. Reilly Center for media and Public Affairs 2005. Print.

Stein, Laura L. “The Future of Democratic Communication.” In ​Speech Rights in America: The

First Amendment, Democracy, and the Media​, 113–39. Urbana and Chicago: University

of Illinois Press 2006. Print.

Copps, Michael J. “What about the News? An Interest in the Public.” In ​Will the Last Reporter

Please Turn Out the Lights: The Collapse of Journalism and What Can Be Done To Fix

It​, edited by Robert McChesney and Victor Pickard, 289–98. New York, New York: The

New Press 2011. Print.

Cohen-Almagor, Raphael. ​Speech, Media and Ethics, The Limits of Free Expression: Critical
 Neil 31

Studies on Freedom of Expression, Freedom of the Press and the Public’s Right to Know​.

New York, New York: Palgrave 2001. Print.

Jenkins, David. "The Sedition Act of 1798 and the Incorporation of Seditious Libel into

First Amendment Jurisprudence." ​The American Journal of Legal History​ 45, no. 2

(2001): 154-213. Accessed March 3, 2019. doi:10.2307/3185366. Journal.

Cook, Elizabeth C. ​Literary Influences in Colonial Newspapers, 1704-1750​. Reprint,

Columbia University Press, 1912. Accessed March 3, 2019.

https://books.google.com/books?id=H7IQAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR3&dq=boston+newspape

r+of+1704&lr=&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=3#v=onepage&q=boston%20newspa

per%20of%201704&f=false. Ebook.

McGovern, George, and John P. Roche. "The Pentagon Papers--A Discussion." ​Political Science

Quarterly​ 87, no. 2 (1972): 173-91. Accessed March 3, 2019.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2147824. Journal.

Eksterowicz, Anthony, and Robert Roberts, eds. Public Journalism and Political Knowledge.

Lanham, United States: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc. 2000. Accessed March 3,

2019. https://books.google.com/books

id=C0z1u0CQiHEC&lpg=PA3&ots=jlx5GTNbn3&dq=muckraking%20journalism&lr&

pg=PA3#v=onepage&q=muckraking%20journalism&f=false. Ebook.
 Neil 32

Jefferson, Thomas. “First Inaugural Address.” In The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, 148–52.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 2006. Accessed March 3, 2019.

https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/first-inaugural-address-0.

Ebook.

Daly, Christopher B. “Covering America: A Narrative History of a Nation’s Journalism.”

Boston

University n.d. Accessed March 3, 2019.

https://www.umass.edu/umpress/sites/default/files/Daly%20-%20JO%20Timeline.pdf.

Website.

Campbell, John, ed. “The Boston News-Letter.” London Flying-Post, April 24, 1704. Accessed

March 3, 2019.

https://cdn.loc.gov/service/rbc/rbpe/rbpe03/rbpe033/0330050a/0330050a.pdf.

Newspaper.

"New York Times Company v. Sullivan." Oyez. Accessed March 3, 2019.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1963/39. Website.