OCR Text |
Show age 8 Signpost Nov. 22, 1974 I I3S til! Lwi" Rial lllimllrti 'Our Vanishing Liberties' Government censors you By Omar V. Garrison Number Five of a Series A book by your favorite author is scheduled for release today. You hurry to pick up a copy, but when you reach the bookstore, you learn it hasn't arrived yet. "How come?" you ask the dealer. "It's been held back by the government censors," he replies! Your local newspaper has announced a series of articles by a popular columnist. The first installment is scheduled to appear today. Eagerly you scan the pages, but the feature is nowhere to be found. You phone the paper, demanding to know why. "Sorry," the editor explains, "but the government censors forced us to kill the series!" Democracy Tainted Censorship in America is an abuse which no citizen in his right mind would tolerate. Yet, it is happening all around you! Unless you are rich or powerful enough to fight back, you stand little chance against the sophisticated censorship techniques of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other federal agencies. One such technique was demonstrated when the San Mateo Times of California announced an upcoming nutrition series based on a book by a popular author. Two days before the first installment was scheduled to appear, the author's distribution syndicate received a phone call from the Times' general manager. He said that McKay Mc-Kinnon, of FDA's San Francisco district, objected to the feature, because FDA disagreed with the author's views. McKinnon admitted he had never read the book he only objected to the man who wrote it! He didn't like him! Despite the fact that the articles had been proved medically sound despite the question of freedom of the press that was involved the Times buckled OKI SO HE'S INNOCCHT. WE SURE MADE HIM LOOK GUILTY- under FDA pressure, and withheld the series. It took a flood of phone calls and letters from irate readers to finally convince the paper that it was "safe" to run the feature which it did a few days later. Win the Battle, Lose the War A more subtle weapon in the dictoorats' censorship arsenal is publicity via the courtroom. By airing serious charges in the news media, replete with innuendo and downright defamation, the agency cannot completely lose its case. Even if innocent, the defendant will always carry some stigma of guilt. After all, the public may reason, why would the government give him trouble if he's innocent? On top of that, the defendant often sustains a financial loss which is far greater "punishment" than any sentence he would incur if found guilty. Describing his "day in court" with another agency, the Federal Trade Commission, Ezra Levin, president of a firm specializing in dietary supplements, gave this summary of the outcome:"FTC damaged our. reputation. They caused us a $500,000 loss in business. We won our case, but we. had no recourse to collect damages." FTC's case against Levin collapsed when it was discovered that the agency's chief witness was paid $4,000 to give false testimony. - : - . - - What did the FTCexaminer-in-charge have to say about such irresponsibility? Simply "So, we made a mistake." The late Senator Everett M. Dirksen fought to curb such administrative abuses. He said: "The injury done to those concerned is irreparable, even though they are eventually cleared." Censorship by Propaganda Less obvious perhaps, but equally high-handed, is censorship in the guise of "education." If you live in one of a number of large cities, you can pick up your phone and dial a dietician, who is waiting to give you a list of "objectionable" books. These are works by eminent nutritionists whose views conflict- with those of the FDA dictocrats. (It is interesting to note that the dial-a-dietician program, until recently, told callers that the warnings of "health quacks" on the dangers of cyclamates were "unsupported by scientific evidence!")What makes a book "objectionable?" Apparently, under FDA's distorted code of ethics, it is the work of any person whose views are not favored by a federal agency. He should be banned from the public prints. Of course, the dictocrats would be the last to construe such actions as censorship even when their behavior is blatant and undisguised.Censorship by Seizure A typical case of dictocratic tyranny involved an "objectionable" book by a distinguished Philadelphia physician. Based on years of experience, his work demonstrated the close relationship between nutrition, health and disease. One night, without warning in typical spy-thriller fashion FDA agents raided the home of a private citizen. Among other publications, they seized the good doctor's book. In a letter to FDA, the author-physician requested "a statement as to whether citizens, supposedly enjoying freedom of speech and press, are allowed to have this book in their possession."He received this curt reply: "The contents of your book are not in agreement with informed medical and scientificconsensus." Adapted from "The Dictocrats" by Omar V. Garrison (with additional material). All rights reserved. Distributed by Specialty Features Syndicate, Detroit, Michigan 48219. Next: How dictocrats use the "big lie" to defend their abuse of your freedom. Does newspapers ts accusation really h&i What about censorship? What about student government and the Signpost UPI Wire Service? Is the Signpost being censored? By definition, censorship is the examination by some public authority of a public expression before it is published or uttered to determine its acceptability and the alteration or suppression of such statements that the censor believes would have an undesirable effect upon public morality, safety or the interests of religion. If this is a true definition of censorship, maybe another word should be sought by the newspaper. Civil liberty Perhaps what has occurred through student government bureaucracy is a violation of civil liberty denial of expression. In our opinion, freedom of speech and press guarantees the right to speak or write on any subject without obtaining prior permission from any authority or being subject to any penalties for expressions that do not infringe upon the rights of others or the good order, safety or welfare of the community. The preferred position of the First Amendment doctrine was followed by the Supreme Court in the 1940's and accords freedom of expression and religions preferred or superior status in the constitutional system and places upon the judiciary the obligation of protecting them against interference with, except and only under conditions of absolute necessity to prevent a serious and immediate evil. A denial With the termination of the Signpost's United Press International service without taking a poll as they agreed to do, perhaps the more im- portajfas Exeoiive more; Jers the rfgktf of otbfmi Thekden thatpee reasonjy require : s them, t- .' In Jhg Assocuted that K?t 1943 fte "FreeBim posesiJiat moreliel multite'" any kiriiif. Thelfe believe! jn He cape speedier the focjish things"uat we woul n thandojwj In fit, freedom sf terfereiwi disturbfcic( libel-r-sacrileg, conduct ! citeraerile the govnr Noneir plan orjuq Studeig recentlj 1 leaders at docurnmtii sorship:! preference pressioirof : In tbissc postisbdnj Death sentence unm By Dave Midget Editor-in-Chief Wednesday afternoon, the final part of the Ogden Hi-Fi murder trial came to its conclusion. And at that end the jury blew it. At sentencing the jury decided to recommend the death penalty for the two Hill airmen who were earlier found guilty of murder. The death penalty. It's as if this place hasn't had enough violence already. When will PJ murder is mu is legal. -w- Even if the : (which attnTs one has uv.': the families, o getoutottu " The kiUtf?. not bring any destroy tws |