Review of Potolsky, Matthew. 2019. The National Security Sublime: On the Aesthetics of Government Secrecy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prashan Ranasinghe
Author(s):  
Mary-Rose Papandrea

Balancing the equally important but sometimes conflicting priorities of government transparency for public accountability versus government secrecy for national security seems intractable. One possibility is to recognize a constitutional right of access to government information. This would support democratic self-governance, allow the public to engage in meaningful oversight, and provide access to necessary information without the game of leaks. It could radically refocus arguments regarding the rights of government employees to reveal national security information and of third parties to publish it. Recognizing this right faces an uphill battle against decades of First Amendment jurisprudence. It also faces innumerable logistical and practical obstacles. It would not eliminate the need to determine when the public, the press, and government insiders can disclose national security information. Nevertheless, the ongoing collapse of press access norms and government’s increasing desire to operate outside public view may warrant dramatically rethinking First Amendment scope and protections.


Author(s):  
Judith Miller

The Pentagon Papers case leaves open the question of whether journalists can be compelled to disclose the identities of those who reveal classified information to them. This essay considers some of the most enduring arguments for and against a federal shield law. Those who argue against such a law note definitional problems and contend that we must punish leaks given their impact on national security. They argue that institutionalizing the press actually harms the press and that the shield law is unnecessary given current use of technology to identify sources of leaks. Those in favor counter that definitional questions should not be a problem because almost all states have been able to resolve the questions in their laws. Moreover, most leaks do not compromise national security; government secrecy, deceit, and incompetence cause more damage to national security than the press’s reporting of secret information; and without a federal shield law, sources will not provide important information about government misconduct.


Communication ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Betty Houchin Winfield

In a very large body of censorship scholarship spanning centuries, communication scholars point out that every civilization since antiquity has attempted to stop disagreeable expression. This bibliographic essay, focusing primarily on the United States, demonstrates that censorship can be institutional, individual, and by practice, a way to restrict or expunge objectionable material, information, or expression. Societies, as well as major institutions of the state, family, and church and their representatives, suppress expression thought to be dangerous, harmful, immoral, sensitive, or inconvenient. Historically, the research mostly focuses on political and legal censorship, which refers to any government restriction of the content of expression or its dissemination. Censorship can also be self-imposed. More recently, the research has emphasized corporate and Internet censorship. As a concept, censorship generally refers to three major areas of research: philosophical and legal controls juxtaposed with free expression values; theoretical constructs; and particular restrictions on specified media or content pushed by an organization or group. The kinds of controls are defined by governments or particular societal groups. The process of control can explain how suppression operates, such as by licensing as permission or approval to communicate or by government secrecy and closure of access to government meetings and information. Censorship has inhibited communication by punishments afterward with fines or imprisonment. The reasons for censorship can be numerous, most often in democratic societies to hide government malfeasance or as a necessity for survival during crises of national security and public safety. The following sections focus on censorship studies that would be useful for scholars: general overviews; references; ancient philosophical tenets to the later European basis, American foundations, legal case precedents, theoretical aspects, social responsibility expectations, restrictions by medium, crisis restrictions, and access issues; and self-censorship.


2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard J Aldrich ◽  
Christopher R Moran

The significance of Edward Snowden’s revelations has been viewed primarily through the prism of threats to citizen privacy. Instead, we argue that the most dramatic change has been a decline of government secrecy, especially around national security. While the ethical aspects of state secrets and ‘whistle-blowing’ have received recent attention, few have attempted to explain the dynamics of this growing climate of exposure. Our argument is largely technological and we ground our analysis in the changing nature of intelligence work, which is increasingly merging with ‘big data’. But we also identify a related cultural change: many intelligence contractors are at best agnostic about the national security state. Meanwhile, the Internet itself provides the perfect medium for the anonymous degradation of secrets. Because the main driver is technology, we suggest this trend is likely to accelerate, presenting national security chiefs with one of their biggest future challenges.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document