What our other readers are saying:
'Loose lips sink ships' still applies
No story is worth a person's life. In fact, I think the media publishes far too many "facts" in this time of war. The old saying "loose lips sink ships" is as true today as during WWII. As the mother of a Marine, I sometimes wish the media was more responsible about the safety of those in jeopardy.
Cyril Hosley, Sugar Land, Tex., USA
Don't distort information
First, I'm impressed with the Monitor that it would put this discussion in the open. It's transparent and shows class.
While I appreciate the discussion, though, I disagree with the decision they made. A news organization is in the information business. Holding the story a couple of days is one thing, but supressing and distorting information afterward is another. To downplay her importance is a distortion of information and takes away from the credibility of the news source. All information coming from a news organization should be clear, accurate, and as complete as possible.
David Hinckley, Plano, Tex., USA
Report the facts, don't censor
The media is relied upon to report, not censor. I yearn for a reporter who follows after the detective on the old 'Dragnet' series, who wanted 'Just the facts, just the facts'.
Thomas Howard, Palacios, Tex., USA
Blackout was appropriate; pressure to run the story was not
One cannot begin to imagine the exceptional circumstances that might or might not come into play for any individual who is kidnapped – whether in Iraq, or in any other country. As an ordinary member of the public, I cannot presume to be knowledgeable on how negotiations, search methods, rescues, etc. might have to be carried out to minimize the risk to the kidnapped individual.
Reading your article about how and why this blackout was imposed, I can only state that the reasons given seem appropriate to me. What is disturbing is the pressure applied by other media outlets to publish information after two days. Surely the media's "need" to tell the story does not override the safety of the individual.
Sandra Flagler, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
News organizations not objective, and that's OK
What is interesting here is that the various media organizations chose to honor the blackout on their own free will, out of respect and hope for a colleague. To comment that this choice was somehow a restriction of media freedom would be incorrect.
If the Bush administration or government were to ask for such a blackout, my guess is that most news agencies would ignore it (and have in the past), asserting First Amendment rights.
This also goes to show that news organizations are never truly objective. When faced with a moral dilemma, journalists and editors pick a side. If they were merely reporting events, the media would not have honored the blackout. Instead, they made decisions in an effort to hopefully shape the outcome of the event. Do I blame them? No. I would have made the same decision. But lets not pretend news agencies are objective.
Jeff Fisher, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Common sense prevailed
I think that the blackout was a good idea. I think the free and open exchange of information is a great thing, but sometimes common sense needs to prevail. The blackout wasn't due to any hidden political agenda or an attempt to hide the truth from anyone, but it was a precaution. Whether we like it or not, sometimes to protect a human life, our way of life or quash a rumor that could have a devastating impact, information needs to be harnessed.
I believe that in today's society, we look at things within our constitution and apply a broad vision to them, and bend them to fit any particular situation.
Melissa Ritts, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
The humanity of the media
It seemed to me that the media were quite able to balance both the issues of Jill's safety and the newsworthiness of her kidnapping. They initially stayed silent when it seemed possible that their silence could aid her release, but pressed to make the story public when they realized silence was no longer a viable strategy.
I admit it is hard for me to believe that today's media would act out of anything other than self-interest. I am encouraged by the humanity displayed by reporters in Baghdad and elsewhere in sorting out both the truth and humanity of this story.
Jim Dunagan, Liverpool, N.Y., USA
Look at the big picture
If the media would stop publishing any terrorist activity or giving any organization "credit" for these activities, then the purpose for doing these evil deeds would be eliminated.
Chris Schmitt, Garden City, Mich., USA
Threat to life? Yes. Political expediency? No.
If it is a direct threat to a person's life and sitting on the story could help save that person, then absolutely, the media should sit on the story.
If it is a request out of political expediency as has been used time and time again by this administration, then absolutely not. The media must not only report the story, but the efforts by the administration to quash the story in their continuing campaign of fear tactics.
Ryan Blackhawke, Bothell, Wash., USA
A restriction of media freedom
Due to the fact that there is no assurance as to whether or not a blackout could save a life, such as in this case, a blackout is clearly a bit dark in its own right. Because of that doubt, the media should be allowed to report as it pleases, blackout-free. The idea that the media be asked as a whole in this regard suggests a restriction of freedom. It requires that the media band together and keep themselves in line. A blackout undermines the very principles of free press that the media tries to uphold.
LJ McKay, London, England
Deprive the kidnappers of their shock value
Absolutely. Imposing a news blackout immediately deprives the kidnapping group of its desired goal, namely, the shock value of what has been done, exacerbated by intensive media coverage. As long as the immediate family is notified, there is no compelling reason why the public at large needs to know of these events until an intelligent strategy for securing the individual's release has been developed. There's always the chance that quiet negotiations can accomplish more if there is no need to save face.
Mary Townsager, Barrington, Ill., USA
Look at the big picture
I think the media should always take into consideration the big picture. I believe media sometimes makes the news sensational for many reasons, and I would like to see them portrayed in a more human scope.
I am surprised and pleased that the media responded they way they did, and that no one felt the need to be the first with the story.
Kay Keeslar, Mason, Mich., USA
