U.S. Shows Us, Free Speech is 'Easier said than Done'
While the
United States often preaches to others about free expression, does it always live up to
its own ideals? According to this analysis from China's state-run Nan Fang
Daily, the recent controversy involving commentator Juan Williams and
broadcaster National Public Radio exposes the difficulty of
making sure that free speech remains free.
NPR President Vivian Schiller: Rarely seen or heard of on the airwaves, her decision to fire commentator Juan Williams made huge waves, some of which have reached all the way to China's state-run press.
Last month, Vivian Schiller,
president of National Public Radio (NPR), did not receive her 2010 year-end
bonus, and the broadcaster's vice president, Ellen Weiss, was forced to
resign. This marked the beginning of the end of a political storm that started
in October 2010. Looking back at the entire affair will be of great
significance to us, instructive as it is in regard to the basic rules of
freedom of speech.
In
the United States, the idea of "freedom of speech" sounds simple
enough, but it's easier said than done. When there are no fundamental conflicts
of values and interests, finding common ground is easy, and small differences
can be tolerated. But when there are fundamental conflicts of values and
interests, it is inevitable that people will do everything in their power to
revoke the opposing side's right to speak.
NPR
is a very important news organization, with greater influence than most other major
television networks and newspapers. This is mainly because the United States is
a car-based society, in which listening to the radio on long commutes is the
best way of passing the time. In addition, American media are generally
privately-owned, yet NPR enjoys a federal subsidy. Over the years, conservatives
have regularly complained that NPR takes taxpayer money, but is dominated by
liberal elites, with programming that has a strongly left-wing bias. Complaints
about ending its federal funding have never ceased.
Last
October, National Public Radio triggered a major dispute. The broadcaster was
the first to have black political commentator Juan Williams. But as his
reputation in the media grew, he became a regular guest on the station with the
most conservative mindset, right-wing Fox News. The liberal leadership
of NPR brooded over this. One day, while appearing on a Fox News program
with one of its most right-wing hosts [watch below], Juan Williams said he got
nervous when sitting on a plane next to someone wearing Muslim garb. Two days
later, NPR responded with a phone call by Vice President Ellen Weiss, who fired
Williams and triggered a huge U.S. media eruption.
By punishing
Juan Williams for what he said, NPR had crossed the line of free speech. First
of all, many people were quick to point out that Williams' comments were taken
out of context. He was in fact using an introspective tone to describe his own feelings,
since he immediately analyzed himself by asking, "Why do I feel this
way?"
Moreover,
many people contend that he should have the freedom to express his feelings.
If feelings are expressed freely, it can lead to necessary public discussions -
and what's so bad about that? However, the leadership of NPR won't budge. As
president, Vivian Schiller once took a dig at Juan Williams in a speech, saying
that his private feelings are matters for him and his psychiatrist, but that
bringing them out into the public domain for discussion violated NPR's
professional standards. Although she later apologized for her remarks, they obviously
angered even more people.
After
being fired from his job, Juan Williams' popularity skyrocketed. Fox News
immediately gave him a three-year contract worth $2 million, firstly because
they were made a fool by NPR, and secondly to raise their own reputation.
Meanwhile, the chairman of Fox News condemned NPR executives as
"Nazis." Furthermore, on Fox News, Juan Williams also attacked
NPR for not being able to tolerate differing views and Republican lawmakers
once again demanded that Congress terminate funding for NPR.
After
firing Juan Williams, NPR quickly discovered the difficulty of finding another Black
person in media with the same top notch reputation to take his place. That is
something that the left-wing, which has always made it a mission to defend the
interests of Black people, has been unable to justify.
Under
siege on all sides, NPR's independent board of directors began to review the
situation with the help of a law firm. This resulted in the resignation of Vice
President Ellen Weiss, who had served NPR since 1982, and was generally
believed to be in line for the presidency of the broadcaster; and although
President Vivian Schiller kept her job, she lost her year-end bonus. This is how
the crisis was resolved.
Although
the crisis was a media scrum over public opinion between liberals and
conservatives, in the end, both sides had to go back to the basic rules of
freedom of expression. American media have a very strong tradition: newspapers
hire columnists and radio and TV stations employ professional commentators.
These people generally have strong personal opinions, and if their personal
views differ from those of their employers, the employers have no right to
interfere. Once they do, it is tantamount to a scandal, and is subjected to attacks
from all sides. In this way, opinion leaders have nothing to fear when expressing
their views because free speech is guaranteed. Readers and audiences can
believe that such people's opinions are their own, rather than those of whoever
employs them.
Posted by
WORLDMEETS.US
Unfortunately,
over the past ten years, with the polarization of American politics, media has
followed suit. Left and right sides are subject to the temptation of imposing
their own ideology on others, and the behavior of commentators frequently
crosses the line. The NPR crisis is just one example. But in the end, there is
always a judge to catch those who cross the line and break the rules. These
cannot be broken.