Did the Pentagon Papers matter?

In July 2013, US government agents stood by while computers full of hard drives containing
stolen documents were destroyed. The destroyed files contained massive electronic
surveillance programs used by the US and the British, these programs were designed to spy
on terrorist, but also ordinary citizens by collecting their personal data.

The Guardian was already publishing this information for a month, refusing government
demands to stop. Their US collaborator would be The New York Times, and in the US, the
government doesn’t practice prior censorship.

A critical question asked by an executive editor of the Times is: Is the Pentagon Papers’
Supreme Court decision against prior censorship iron-clad? American courts took the right
to censor news off the table almost 45 years ago, after weighing the government’s desire to
keep national security programs secret versus the role of the media in American Life.

One effect of the Pentagon Papers is that you can publish anything you could lay your hands
on. It made fearless journalism, and the Papers protected many journalists’ various times.

The Justice Department has launched dozens of leak investigations, seized reporters’ phone
records, and threatened prosecutions. They also weakened some whistle-blower protections
to stop employees from leaking information about government programs whose legality
they question. But classified information continues to pop up in the news.

The reason for the Times to get the Pulitzer is because they published “Vietnam Archive:
Pentagon Study Traces 3 Decades of Growing U.S. Involvement” on June 13, 1971. Attorney
General John Mitchill requested the Times to stop publishing and give further information to
the Pentagon. A court injunction followed the next day, but the Times declined all of this.

The Post took its place beside the Times on the frontline against censorship. Ellsberg kept on
passing information to newspapers throughout the country, but after a 15-day legal struggle
that ended at the Supreme Court, the matter was settled with a 6-to-3 decision against the
government. Ellsberg turned himself in, together with Anthony J. Russo, a colleague who
helped him, they were charged with violating conspiracy, theft, and espionage laws.

Max Frankel described best, the informal way responsible journalists and government
officials had learned to deal with each other on national security matters. The Pentagon
Papers decision titled the power balance between the government and the media to the
media’s side. The decision to publish rests with the owners and editors of US media outlets.
For the government side, they must ask themselves, why should reporters have the right to
publish any secrets they find when the gatekeepers of that classified information have to
endure a labyrinth of security screenings?
The media has a greater responsibility to be thoughtful about what it publishes and to give
government the chance to make its case. Newspapers tried to explain their findings, but
they didn’t get any reasonable response for the government, only a simple request not to
publish their findings.
James Risen and his editors had many talks with the Withe House before they run their
stories in December 2005. They wanted guidance from the White House how to publish their
stories, but the White House only blamed them for having blood on their hands, to scare
them.
Gellman, working on the Snowden stories, also tried to work together with US intelligence
officials, but they refused to set up a secure way to communicate with him about the
documents.

Many factors have rattled American stability and security in recent years, but press leaks
aren’t one of them. In the wake of Snowden’s disclosures, the government has been
declassifying programs he revealed once stamped secret or top-secret.
The latest weapon against journalists from the government is the ‘insider threat’ program.
Government employees are no longer permitted to speak with journalists, without prior
approval. All contacts with the media, even social ones, must be reported.

Dana Priest has been covering the intelligence world, but there is one area that never makes
it into her stories. She has sources in the CIA, the NSA and other intelligence agencies, she is
meticulous about antiseptic communication.