Court cameras don't
mean press freedom
l,ast Thursday, the Oregon Supreme Court voted unani
mously to break an almost three-decade tradition that ban
ned news media cameras from state (rial courts. Until now.
Oregon had been among a small number of states to bar
news cameras from trial courtrooms.
But while we'd like to accept this decision as one more
broken barrier against freedom of the press, our excitement
has been tempered somewhat as it is only under several re
strictions that the news media will lie allowed to bring cam
eras and audio recording devices into trial courtrooms.
The rules allow a trial judge to deny a request for televi
sion coverage if the judge believes coverage would interfere
with a fair trial or efficient administration of justice. While
we obviously don’t think television coverage should he al
lowed to interfere with a fair trial, or with administration of
justice, it is well known that members of the Oregon State
Bar have long voiced their opposition to allowing news
cameras in the courts. Bar members also have suggested that
a majority of trial court judges also oppose the use of cam
eras in the courtroom.
But what could stop a judge from denying television at
cess simply because he or she didn't want it there?
Another section of the rules, with which we don't agree,
states television cameras must lie operated by ( ourt staff
members rather than by television news personnel.
But this rule could lit! even more disruptive it untrained
court clerks were set free to use equipment valued in the
range ol $30,000 to $40,000. This is undeniably a job for
professional news photographers, not amateur camera fanat
ics.
for years, jurists have feared cameras in the courtroom
would interfere with the judicial process We hope this most
recent step by the Oregon Supreme Court will dispel these
fears and allow the publii a wider examination of the
courts.
But lor now. it looks as though it's up to the courts to
determine when. if. or what information will be distributed
to the viewers
Dirty tactics not startling
from North, trial lawyers
In the summer of 1UH7, we Americans were faced with
a major governmental scandal and coverup sc heme (the'
Iran-Contra hearings) that loft us feeling insecure and disap
pointed in the? nation's loaders except for Oliver North,
whom many thought to be the epitome of a hero throughout
the proceedings.
Almost two years later and with the* Oliver North trial
set to begin, we are once again faced with coverup schemes
and withheld information, courtesy of tin; North trial law
yers Those old feelings of insecurity and disappointment
are resurfacing. And Oliver North? Well, now he's just a
regular guy trying to sell the farm to cover his tracks (and
avoid (it) years in prison and $:t million in fines).
laist week, Attorney General Dick Thornburgh and inde
pendent counsel Iarwrence Walsh had hoped U S. Distric t
Court fudge Gerhard Gesell would accept their plan to pro
tect against unnecessary and uncontrolled disclosures of in
formation of vital importance to national sec uritv in ef
fect. allowing the lawyers to protest as perceived threats to
national security surface during the* trial.
But Gesell showed little sympathy to this plan, lie re
jected it outright, saying that Thornburgh can protect na
tional security only by filing an affidavit "scuttling the case
m wnoie or hi pari.
Thornburgh, of course, is reluctant to file the affidavit
protecting certain classified information, as he does not
know precisely what classified information North’s lawyers
intend to use. (Two main charges against North conspira
cy and theft of government property were dismissed last
month following a Thornburgh affidavit.)
These tactics, of course, are justifiably lawyer-like, hut
they are unseemly nonetheless.
So, as the American public awaits the proceedings of
the Oliver North trial, a tangled web of deceit in the govern
mental system, there are at least two things we cun be sure
of: Oliver North and the trial lawyers definitely are not he
roes.
_Commentary Policy_
The Oregon Daily Kmerald welcomes commen
taries from the public concerning topic s of interest to
the University community Comments must refrain
from personal altai ks on the i haracter of others.
Page 2
Editorial
TOGA!
TOGA!
TOG^',,
(ib? )
TOU
TO&\
TO(A
T06*
_Forum_
U.S. cover up racks El Salvador
Bv Kevin Hornbuckle
Tver wonder vvh\ our gov
eminent s<-mI^ $1 t million .1
da\ to support Kl Salvador's
milil.irv dictatorship? II you're
like most people, you spend
mole time worrying iiImiuI
whit li TV programs to avoid
To l>e sure, it'll be television
that tea< lies I" S nti/.ens about
our neighbor in revolt
Sin h vras the case during the
revolution in \ii aragu.i that
did not i .ill li the attention ot
I S i ili/ens until the cold
blooded murder of a i ountry
man was broadi ast on tile six
_Commentary_
01 loi k news As bis shaking
partner recorded the scene, re
porter Mill Stewart of AIM! was
made to lie on the street as one
of Somoza s National (luards
men casually parted bis skull
with a round from a U.S.-sup
plied assault rifle
Shew ked ami surprised were
the viewers who bad no pre
vious knowledge ol the carnage
their tax dollars bought daily
Those less ignorant about our
government's role and Somo
za's terror rightly concluded
that the victim was relatively
lui kv: most of the ('.yard's vu
tuns were fori ed to endure long
periods ol torture before being
allowed to die.
The mainstream media in our
country are of course happy to
help us quit Us forget the
would-be lesson of the thou
sands ol deaths caused by our
country's murderous foreign
policy in Central America Af
ter all. ( apilalist media is ilriv
tin not hs the mission to in
form, but rather by the mission
to profit Kmbarrassing exposes
do not make a ( onsumer hap
PV
But imagine, for example,
the audiences that ssould he
drawn to their TV sets if they
i ould view live i overage of K!
Salvador's revolution as was
done with Vietnam during that
war No such link though. To
get that sort of exi itement
sou'll base to settle lor the
weekly remakes of history un
ahashedls hroadi ast in the form
nf tl«> popular new Vietnam
war TV shows
The Pentagon knows from
experience that if U S citizens
knew of our country 's role in hi
Salvador, they'd have dornestii
revolts for the same reason
there were domestic, revolts in
response to the Vietnam war
Isn't it true that the average
I' S citizen is intolerant of the
vie Utilization of innocent peo
ple' The warmakers think so
For it is the Pentagon's goal
.mil the media's duly to keep
the populace ignorant of that
which we would not tolerate
The Pentagon denies at cess to
embarrassing information and
reporters self i ensor. Thus, re
porters are rarely allowed out
side of San Salvador, and most
simply would rather not make
reports that they know will not
get past the editor’s desk.
So we do tolerate the victimi
/ation in Kl Salvador, partially
because of lack nf accurate in
formation For example, a lie
that the media dutifully reports
is the assertion that the war in
Kl Salvador is now a "stale
mate." It strains ( redulitv to at
t.u h such a label given that the
Salvadoran military receives
$15 million per day in addi
tion to thousands of U S train
ing hours for its officers.
The Pentagon claims that the
relied army commands fewer
than 7,000 combatants, the
I'Ml.N has no vehii les or forts
Yet in nine years of fighting
and more than 70.000 deaths
the superiorly equipped and
trained Salvadoran army loses
daik more territory and weap
ons to the revolutionaries The
IMI.N has thrice overrun some
of the principal military posts,
including ones inhaiiited bv
I S military trainers In No
vember amid broad daylight
the rebels attai keil and nearly
destroyed the National ('.uard
headquarters in downtown San
Salvador Whether horn ot ig
norance or deceit, the eharat
terization ot the war as "stale
mated" flounders hopeless for
lack ol support
At the same time there is
support tor the case against in
tervention (,'onsider the words
ot Sen liarbara Mikulski (I)
Mtl i. who interviewed ,i pens
.ml vvoniiin who witnessed .in
attack on Dei I!. lutll by a
I S trained elite battalion:
"Many of her family were
killed She personally saw chil
dren around the age of eight be
ing raped, and then (the sol
diers) would take their bayo
nets and make mincemeat of
them With their guns they
would shoot at their faces
Tliev would slit the stomach of
a pregnant woman and take the
child out as d they were taking
eggs out of an iguana
Little has changed since
1‘IIU Still some people refuse
to believe that our virtuous
government supports this sort
of terrorism in El Salvador Lib
erals who do believe it Ire
quently cry out, "it's just so
senseless.” Hut U.S. foreign
policy can he seen as eminently
sensible once one sees that the
U.S. policy serves a well-de
fined purpose as does terror In
short, it is ostensibly the "pro
tection of U.S. interests." Real
ity is of course something else
The U.S. taxpayer generously
finances the profit schemes of
the company stockholders that
ow n. for example, textile mills
once located in South Carolina
There U.S. workers earned less
than $4 per hour and their Sal
vadoran replacements are paid
approximately $1.50 a day The
company cuts its costs further
by eliminating safety equip
ment Workers who try to
unionize for better pay and
work conditions .ire abducted
by the death squads Thus we
are left with brutalized people
in K1 Salvador, and unem
ployed people in our own
country The multinational cor
porations are left with higher
profits That s < apitulism
As the Salvadorans hei nine
more organized in their opposi
tion to the economic explora
tion made possible 1' S foreign
policy Washington's response
is increased militarism A natu
ral product of this is the asi en
dam e to power of Id Salvador's
ultra right wing AKKNA parts
A combination political para
military organization, AKKNA
Turn to Commentary, Page 3