Basic HTML Version
fl'eedom of the pl'ess
THREATENEDP
Has the precious freedom of the press been seriously threat–
ened? ls government censorship imminent? News media,
particular/y the major
T.
V . networks, reacted sharply to
President Nixon's recent nationally tefe vised speech. The ad–
ministration's reactions to news
com
mentaries, in particular
the now sensationalized speeches of the Vice-President, hove
created a bigger
furor
than anything in recent
memory.
Read
in this informative article just what did happen, and what it
" • • • AN UGLY
era of the most
fearsome suppression and. intimida–
tíon
!"
saíd Thomas D. Hoving,
Chairman of the National Cítizens
Committee for broadcasting, of
Vice-President Agnew's criticism
of television news coverage. But
if
the Vice-President reacted sharply
to "instant analysis" of President
Nixon's nationwide address on the
Vietnam war - assai ling news
media in a succession of speeches
- the news media, too, reacted
with their own sharpness.
It all began with Mr. Richard
Nixon's address during prin)e TV time
early in November - and his appeal
for the "silent majority" to back his po–
sitien on the handling of the situation
in Vietnam.
Mr. Nixon explained that "for the
United States, this first defeat ( if Amer–
ica suddenly withdrew) io our nation's
history would result in a collapse of
could portend.
by
Gorner Ted Armstrong
American Jeadership, not only in Asia
but throughout the world."
He pleaded for
unity
from ". .. you,
the silent majority of my fellow Ameri–
cans" and said, "let us be united for
peace. Let us also be united against de–
feat. Because let's understand: North
Vietnam cannot defeat or humiliate the
United States. Only Americans can do
that. ..."
Following the add ress, Press Secretary
Ronald Ziegler said there was a highly
positive, favorable response for the
most part - and the White House re–
ported its switchboard was jammed with
calls from all over the country reacting
to President Nixon's statement.
Immediately following the Presi–
dent's address, news media reported on
it - analyzcd it - and perhaps even
speculated about what it meant.
It was noted the White House
seemed particularly disturbed over a
contradiction, at least twice, from a cor–
respondent who took issue with Mr.
Nixon's explanation of the correspon-
dence with Ho Chi Minh. Apparently,
the reference was to CBS's Marvin
Kalb. Mr. Nixon had termed the at–
titude of Ho "intransigent," and Kalb
said the letter "... contained sorne of
the softest, most accommodating lan–
guage found in a Communist document
concerning the war in Vietnam in recent
years," thus directly contradicting the
Presiden
t.
Vice-President Agnew observed that
another commentator had "cballenged
the President's abilities
as
a politician"
(apparently meaning ABC's Bill Law–
rence) , and noted that still another had
claimed the President was "following
the Pentagon Jine," meaning Bill
Downs of ABC, apparently.
Mr. Agnew, carried live by the major
TV networks in an early evening hour,
was heard to pointedly criticize the com–
mentators and producers who seemingly
control the nation's · foremost network
news hours - and induded in his state–
ments publisbers and editors of leading
East Coast newspapers and magazines.
The Vice-President quoted that these