To what extend should contemporary Western governments be able to regulate journalists in times of conflict?

Résumé du document

The 3rd of May is the day for the freedom of the press. It had been created by the UNESCO to defend the freedom of expression of journalists, but this fundamental right is being flouted everywhere. The freedom of the press is mentioned in every constitution of the western countries, with respect to the Human Rights, and is linked to the emergence of democratic regimes. Like this, journalists, in the western countries are supposed to be totally free, anywhere, anytime. Even during war, journalists are supposed to be able to do their job freely. History shows us that the Vietnam War is known for this freedom allowed by the American government to the journalists in reporting conflict. But according to a lot of authors, this freedom has been one of the biggest reasons for the loss of the war. Thus, after this conflict, western governments have been led to think that during war they should control the media, to avoid this happening again. What kind of control on media is necessary and acceptable in a democratic country during war?

Extraits

[...] But, it can be very important for the national interest of their people that western governments, in war time, be able to orient the power of media, used in a “Machiavelic” way, it can be very dangerous. For example, if the Head of the State try to use the media to persuade people of the justness of a war, through the voice of the journalists, it is dangerous. That means that the war is not justified, and that it is not in the General Interest to go to war. [...]

[...] To what extend should contempory Western governments be able to regulate journalists in times of conflict? The 3rd of May is the mondial day of the press freedom. It had been created by the UNESCO to defend journalists in their freedom of expression everywhere this fundamental right is flouted. The freedom of the press is writen in every constitution of the western countries, respectuous to the Human Rights, and is linked to the emergence of the democratic regimes. Like this, journalists, in the western countries are supposed to be totally free, anywhere, anytime. [...]

[...] That is why the state should not intervene in the field of journalism, should not be able to control nor to restrict journalists, who should be totaly free. Firstly, that is linked to the ideal of the respect of Human Rights. The eleventh article of the French “Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen” proclames the freedom of speech, and says that free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the more precious rights of humans”. Like this, the American Bill of Rights also protects Human Rights in saying in the first amendment that the “Congress shall make no law ( . [...]

[...] That is why in the western democratic countries, the State should be unable to restrict journalists. Thus, the western countries, because democratic and respectful of the Human Rights, could not be able to restrict nor to control journalists. The media are becoming more and more important; they have more and more power. This is linked to the role that they have to play in Democracy, which gives them legitimacy and attention from people. This is also linked to the technological development. [...]

[...] Through the media for example, governments can make a threat juged more important than it is in reality. Concerning the Gulf War, “MacArthur suggests a high degree of purposefulness in American policy- makers' use of news media to exaggerate the threat posed by Saddam in the tense transition from Desert Shield to Desert Storm” (Media At War, S. L. Carruthers, p.44). If a government try to exaggerate the threat of another country, it means that perhaps the war is not really needed, because there is no justification, or because other means can be used. [...]