On page 438 of Nixonland, Rick Perlstein contrasts the
criticism of the media by Richard Nixon’s Vice-President, Spiro Agnew,
with Thomas Jefferson’s approach:
“A querulous American press—-far more opinionated, nasty, and
partisan than anything Nixon would have to suffer—-predated American
government. Thomas Jefferson used to lay out the most scabrous articles
about him in the White House antechamber where emissaries of foreign
potentates waited to be received by him. They would stride forth,
waving the pages: Mr. President, are you aware of the things they’re writing about you?
Jefferson found nothing so delightful. Yes, he would reply, and
they’re welcome to say it, and there’s nothing I can do about it. This
is what America means. But Agnew argued these gentlemen of the media
were a usurping cabal.”
I thought of the miniseries John Adams as I read this. In
one scene, Secretary of State Jefferson has a hard time getting
interested in a cabinet meeting. He had just been in France, where
revolutionary fervor was in the air. Because he was so excited about
the movements against French authoritarianism, the tedious day-to-day
details of running the American government were not of particular
interest to him.
Jefferson valued the American experiment and the freedom that accompanied it. Consequently, he loved
freedom of the press, even when the press was attacking him. I admire
Jefferson for this. But I can also understand Agnew’s criticisms of the
media. Here President Nixon would be, laying out an agenda before the
American people, and, before the American people could even digest it,
the pundits would be nitpicking what Nixon said and saying that Nixon
was wrong. I don’t think that the media should be an arm of the
government, as exists within many dictatorships. But I do believe that
people should be exposed to different perspectives when they turn on the
news.