This article was produced in collaboration with the Columbia Journalism Review.
Media self-censorship, anticipatory compliance, capitulation, bending the knee. Whatever you call it, it represents one of the most insidious means by which people with power can squelch news reporting that doesn’t serve their interests. You don’t have to arrest or fire reporters—you just have to make them increasingly afraid that you will.
Donald Trump’s second term—and the ascendancy of billionaire press antagonists—has already created an environment in which journalists feel more pressure than ever to self-censor or soften their coverage to ensure that they stay on legally and politically safe ground. How does a reporter, or a newsroom full of them, guard against sheltering in such truth-killing safe harbors?
To some degree, long-standing newsroom ethical guidelines can help stiffen reporters’ spines. The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics has it right: journalists should “deny favored treatment to advertisers, donors, or any other special interests, and resist internal and external pressure to influence coverage.” I also like this from the Boston public media station WBUR:
“Decisions about what we cover, how we do our work, and what we report are made by our journalists. We are not influenced by those who provide WBUR with financial support.… We are not swayed in our journalistic mission by those in power or those who attempt to manipulate our journalism.’”
But even more important than adhering to ethics guidelines, I believe, is preserving the culture of journalistic independence that thrives at countless successful newsrooms and has shone at some of those now under the most pressure, such as the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, and CBS News. Maintaining such a culture—and thus summoning the courage to practice independent journalism in the face of any threats—has been a hallmark of these institutions for generations.
Such courage is enhanced by a recognition of the proud tradition in which we work—and the reasons we went into journalism in the first place.
So many in my generation were inspired by the New York Times’ and the Washington Post’s historic decision, in 1971, to publish the Pentagon Papers—despite fierce Nixon administration opposition to disclosure of the Defense Department’s secret history of the Vietnam War. As dramatically related in the 2017 Steven Spielberg movie The Post, publisher Katharine Graham faced down extraordinary legal and financial pressures, listened to her journalists, and gave the go-ahead to publish.
On the fiftieth anniversary of that decision, the New York Historical Society wrote: “Though her lawyers opposed publication, her reporters and editors argued that failing to publish would be ‘gutless’ and erode the Post’s credibility. Frightened and tense, as she later wrote in her Pulitzer Prize–winning memoir, Graham ‘took a big gulp and said, “Go ahead, go ahead, go ahead. Let’s go. Let’s publish.” ’ ”
Maintaining, and passing on, a culture in which journalists can continue to hold power to account, no matter who holds that power, is one of the biggest ethical responsibilities of the current generation of reporters and newsroom leaders. Individually, it’s exceedingly difficult for a reporter to push back. But when reporters have each other’s backs, whether through their union or more ad hoc alliances, it becomes more feasible to do the right thing. It’s past time to forge such alliances.
Meanwhile, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, which I chair, can help journalists protect against new and sometimes unconventional legal threats.
Maintaining a culture of independence also turns on how newsroom leaders behave: when they choose to lead by example, even in the face of the evident risks, independent journalism has a fighting chance to survive and to serve.