The First Line In The Defense Of Freedom
Paul McMasters’ lifework is devoted to a single sentence, 45 words long, that he considers precious. He wishes his former colleagues in the press weren’t quite so cavalier about or even hostile to those words, the First Amendment.
He also would be happier if the Sam Donaldsons and George Wills of the world of journalism were more circumspect about making appearances for big fees, and confusing the public about the distinction between gathering facts and offering opinions.
That would make his job easier, he says.
But he defends beyond measure their right to do it.
“If I had my druthers,” says McMasters, “it would be that journalists wouldn’t have to resort to outside income. I would rather that journalists not compromise their credibility by going on television and delivering themselves of opinions about things they cover as well as things they don’t know much about. They have every right to do that, mind you, but I think they pay a price and we (in journalism) also pay a price.”
McMasters, a former USA Today editor, calls himself the country’s first - and only - First Amendment ombudsman - a watchdog, whistleblower and boiler room operator, ever alert to threats to an abstract concept.
“It’s not just an irony, but a travesty,” he says, “that after 204 years of selfless service to our democracy, the First Amendment should find itself in need of a friend. But it does.”
McMasters is employed by the Freedom Forum, a foundation created in 1935 by Frank E. Gannett, founder of a publishing empire, with a $100,000 gift of stocks now worth more than $800 million.
The son of a garage mechanic in the Missouri Ozarks, McMasters started out writing obituaries for the Springfield (Mo.) Daily News while in college.
He began proselytizing as chairman of the Society of Professional Journalists’s Freedom of Information Committee in the 1980s.
“He is a valiant fighter for First Amendment rights. Thank heavens he’s there,” says Richard M. Schmidt Jr., a First Amendment lawyer. “He’s just always ready to go to bat at any time for free press and free speech.”
When McMasters sees a First Amendment emergency - and he thinks the five freedoms protected by it are “never been under more siege than they are today” - he sounds the alarm.
The most recent threat, he says, occurred in December, when Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole thought he had enough votes to send to the country a constitutional amendment to permit laws against the desecration of the American flag.
McMasters went into action. Editorials were written. Judges, lawyers, editors made phone calls. Four senators on the edge - Republican Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, and Democrats Barbara Mikulski of Maryland; Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut; and Bill Bradley of New Jersey - were targeted. All but Specter were converted, and the amendment fell short by three votes.
“It’s a dramatic story, and it went almost uncovered,” McMasters said in an interview. “Most journalists wouldn’t want to be accused of overcovering themselves and their interests. That’s wrongheaded.
Obviously the press is one of the most important institutions in our society and it needs to be covered. Beyond that, the First Amendment doesn’t belong to the press; it belongs to the people.”
As for the flag amendment: “It was the first serious and tangible threat to the Bill of Rights in more than two centuries. The Bill of Rights placed restraints upon the government and the flag desecration amendment would have placed restraints upon the people.”
McMasters sees the press performance on that story as poor, and typical. The press fails to see that in protecting unseemly things - trash on television, violence in comic books, ugliness in song lyrics, bomb recipes on the Internet - it is protecting a vital right.
He is astonished that “support for, and appreciation for, and knowledge of the First Amendment by members of the press” is shown in polls to be “not better than that of the average public.”
“People often accuse me of being a First Amendment absolutist, going toward being a First Amendment fundamentalist. But I truly believe that no one has free speech unless everyone has free speech.”
The amendment not only prohibits laws curtailing speech and the press, it protects religious freedom and the rights to assemble and to petition the government. Even the press “will write about lobbying with a sneer, despite the fact that it is a fundamental right, petitioning the government,” McMasters said.
“Those five freedoms are inextricably entwined. You can’t threaten or restrict one without threatening or restricting them all.” xxxx THE FIRST AMENDMENT “Congress shall make no law respecting and establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”