Showing posts with label freedom of the press. Show all posts
Showing posts with label freedom of the press. Show all posts

July 31 - Of Public Punishment and Flowers

Posted on July 31, 2019

Freedom of the press is an important thing - especially when used to let people know that the rich or powerful - and especially the rich AND powerful! - are doing shady things to grab even more money or to keep their power.

And freedom of religion is also super important. Of course governments should not insist that all of their citizens worship one or more god or goddess, in one particular way! Of course citizens should have the right to believe in any or no religion, and if they hold religious beliefs, they should be able to do any lawful activity to practice those beliefs.

But back when author Daniel Defoe was living (1659 - 1731), these freedoms weren't as obvious. Back then, many, many rulers had and used the power to punish people for criticizing their decisions, and most nations had a state church (temple, etc.) or official religion; many - but not all - nations required its citizens to belong to the state church (etc.) and punished or discriminated against those who didn't. 

Defoe was an Englishman, and in 1702 the King of England, William III, died and was replaced on the throne by Queen Anne. She immediately began to punish what was called "Nonconformists," people who didn't belong to or believe in the Church of England.

One of the people Queen Anne moved to punish was Defoe. He had written a lot of political pamphlets, and one satirized those who pushed for everyone to belong to the Church of England. In other words, he used what should have been his right to freedom of the press to criticize those who go against freedom of religion. It was a sort of pro-rights "two-fer." 

Daniel Defoe was arrested for "seditious libel" - in other words, publishing criticism of the government. He had three punishments: he had to pay a fine, he had to stay in prison until the fine was paid, and - on this date in 1703 - he had to be locked in a pillory.

A pillory was a device set up in a public square. It had three holes meant to secure the head and two hands. It was supposed to be all about public humiliation plus uncomfortable, even painful, corporal punishment.

The public was encouraged to insult, laugh at, or taunt whoever was locked into a pillory. Even more, the public was encouraged to throw yucky stuff at the prisoner. You know, slop water, rotten vegetables, mud, dead animals, the guts from a butchered animals, even poop.

This picture shows yucky stuff, including dead
animals, being thrown at several prisoners
locked into multiple pillories.

Once in a while, the jeering, mocking, pelting public got too carried away, and the prisoner in the pillory would get badly hurt as people threw stones or bricks at him or her. 

Now, supposedly, when Daniel Defoe was put into the pillory for criticizing the government, he was a hero to the general public. Instead of pelting him with disgusting, foul-smelling stuff, people threw flowers. Or so the story goes.



One thing is for sure: most people who get put into the pillory had a worse reputation after the public punishment. But Defoe ended up becoming more respected and more famous after his punishment.

By the way, if you think to yourself, "I've never heard of him - I don't know how famous he could be!" - have you ever heard of his book Robinson Crusoe?







May 3 – World Press Freedom Day

Posted May 3, 2015
Way back when people talked about “freedom of the press,” getting and keeping that freedom was much more difficult. Of course, “press” meant just what it sounded like: a printing press. The only “mass media” – that is, way of communicating with masses of people – was using a printing press to publish writings. There was no radio or TV or internet or social media!


And printing presses weren't cheap. Not everyone could afford one, and using a press took know-how.


It was fairly easy in the 1400s and the 1500s for kings and aristocrats to control what was published. But in England in the 1600s, a struggle began against the king's control of what was published. Finally, in 1695, licensing and censorship laws were abolished.


But there were still laws against libel, and even true criticism of the government was considered libel! As a matter of fact, the legal tradition was that “the greater the truth, the greater the libel.”


Think about that. That means that, if you printed a criticism of a governmental official taking bribes, you could be brought on charges of libel. If you proved that your story was correct – the guy really WAS taking bribes – you were in even bigger trouble!


That basically meant you could never criticize the government, right?


In the American colonies in 1735, the Zenger case set the precedent that it wasn't libel if it was true. Later, the U.S. Constitution famously declared that the new nation will not allow any laws that abridge the freedom of speech or of the press.
Flash forward to now:


Not only does “the press” now mean publishing books and magazines and newspapers, it also includes radio and television, the internet and epublications, Facebook and Twitter! And it's never been easier for average people to spread their words and ideas. Anyone with access to a computer or a smart phone can do so – and many millions of people choose to do so!


Now it is incredibly difficult for anyone – presidents, popes, professors, kings, corporate executives – to control what people say, print, or know. Of course, that means that there is an incredible amount of silly, inaccurate, hateful, and harmful stuff being said and repeated and shared and spread...but there is also a ton of accurate, uplifting, and important information and ideas being communicated.



Unfortunately...

In some nations many people do not have access to the web of information. Some nations really do imprison or even kill journalists, claiming that they are spies. Some religious extremists have killed writers, filmmakers, cartoonists, and others in the media, if they dared to say, write, or draw something that the extremists disagree. These killings, of course, are meant to shut everyone else up, too, out of fear.



The United Nations deemed today as World Press Freedom Day to spread awareness of the pockets of repression in the hopes that people will work to end censorship and governmental control over ideas and information. Today was chosen because it is the anniversary of the 1991 Declaration of Windhoek, a statement of free press principles put together by African newspaper journalists.

Also on this date:























Plan ahead:

Check out my Pinterest boards for:
And here are my Pinterest boards for:

August 5 – Zenger Found “Not Guilty”

Posted on August 5, 2014

If a powerful leader such as a mayor, governor, or president was doing something very wrong, and a newspaper reporter found out about the wrongdoing...should he publish his findings?

I hope you answered, “Of course!”

But...this leader is powerful. And he or she is part of the government. Wouldn't the government official be able to make a lot of trouble for the reporter?

Once again, I hope you are answering that the freedom of the press (and we include podcasts and TV reporting and radio broadcasts and blogs as part of the “press”) is very important to a free society. The people MUST be informed of the wrongdoing of their elected officials, and the informers themselves must be protected.

The question of the day is, how did “freedom of the press” get started?

Today is the historic anniversary of an important step toward that freedom.

German-born John Peter Zenger was a publisher and printer working in New York City. He actually started a publication in order to express his criticisms of the colonial governor William Cosby.

Cosby didn't like being criticized in print. He issued an official proclamation that said that Zenger's New York Weekly Journal was filled with “divers scandalous, virulent, false and seditious reflections.”

And then Cosby sent police officers out to arrest Zenger on charges of “seditious libel.” After more than eight months in prison, after two trials and several lawyers, the public was behind Zenger and hanging on every word of the trial. The main defense lawyer, Andrew Hamilton, pleaded the case directly to the jury (because the judge owed his position to Cosby and had been showing bias at every turn.

And how did the lawyer defend Zenger? He obviously HAD published the things that Governor Cosby said he had – the printed papers were right there, for all to see! Hamilton's argument was that, if he could prove that the things Zenger had said were TRUE, it wasn't libel.

That's not how things were seen back then. There was an argument that “a libel is no less a libel for being true.” In British law, back then, truthful criticisms of others were the worst sort of libel, because if the criticisms were true, the criticized couldn't easily refute them.

Hamilton argued that people ought to be able to criticize their government. Zenger, writing as Cato in his Journal, said, “The exposing therefore of public wickedness, as it is a duty which every man owes to the truth and his country, can never be a libel in the nature of things...”

On this date in 1735, the jury found Zenger innocent of libel. The truth won out!

Did you know...?

Libel is now generally defined as false statements appearing in print (or via audio visual media) that harm the reputation of a business, individual, product, government, or even group.

Slander is the same thing but spoken rather than published or broadcast.

Defamation is the general term that includes libel and slander.

Also on this date:






















Plan ahead:

Check out my Pinterest boards for:

And here are my Pinterest boards for: