Dear Editor,

According to Oxford Dictionary, freedom is the right or state of being able to do or say what you want without being stopped. By this definition, freedom appears not as an absolute right, since if all were to exercise such freedom, each man would be equally infringing on the other man’s right to do or say what he wants — given that each individual is also an autonomous being.

A free press, should thus not be exempt from the general rules governing free speech. For, if the media is the vanguard of free speech, its exercise of freedom requires more management and filters than that of the general public. For instance, a man speaking to a closed room of people may have general agreeing on his side and needs not worry about being politically incorrect, but the media, on the other hand, the print media especially, enjoys a world audience and should be more conscientious about walking the tightrope of sharing information and infringing the liberty to know. For the withholding of information can be an immoral as peverting them.

For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the media provided an invaluable amount of information that may have protected the public at large. The reverse could also be equally deplorable if all the information and updates were purposefully withheld from the public. Thus, the freedom of the press should be more important than a camera which captures information and indifferently makes copies available.

The value of press freedom is that it informs while extolling the virtues of such exercised freedom.

Homer Sylvester

Elmsford, New York, USA

h2sylvester@gmail.com