Image by Steve Rhodes via Flickr
I bought a Roku as a family holiday gift this year and last night I hooked it up and connected my Netflix account. There in the suggestion queue was a documentary called 'The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers.' It was fascinating on a number of levels, but it showed me that the early 1970s represented Journalism's finest hour.
For those who aren't familiar with the story, Ellsberg was a high ranking Pentagon official who helped Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara build a case for the 1960s build up for the Vietnam War. Over time he realized that the government was outright lying to the American people, sometimes even fabricating inflammatory incidents like the Gulf of Tonkin attack to convince President Johnson to escalate the war. It worked.
Eventually, Ellsberg went to visit Vietnam, spent time on patrols with soliders and realized that much of what we were being told about the progress of the war was just a lie. When Ellsberg came across a history of the United States' involvement in Vietnam, which showed a pattern of lies back to President Truman, he began copying and sneaking the document out of his office of at the Rand Institute. Eventually, these papers became known as 'The Pentagon Papers'
Ellsberg was a former marine and one of the shining stars of the Defense Department. He was not some half-baked nut case. He was most importantly a man of conscience. He started by sending the papers to powerful members of Congress, but they did nothing. This lead him to leak the story to a New York Times reporter, who realized right away what he had.
The Times struggled with what to do with these papers, however. Some of their lawyers told the publisher they would be violating the Espionage Act if they published the contents of these documents, but eventually, they decided to publish it, partly because they felt it needed to get out, and partly because they felt they would be judged harshly if it ever came out they had sat on information that showed the war was predicated on a series of lies dished out to the American people by five presidents.
As the story broke, the White House reacted. Henry Kissinger called Ellsberg 'The most dangerous man in America' (hence the title). After four days of publishing the papers, The New York Times was ordered to stop publishing, which according to the documentary, was the first time in American History the courts had acted to cease publication of anything in this manner.
A couple of days later, the Washington Post picked up the ball until it too was ordered to stop, Eventually 17 papers, one after the other picked up the publishing of the Papers defying the government in an expression of true 'Freedom of the Press' the likes of which we haven't likely seen before or since.
Eventually, the New York Times and its fellow newspapers were vindicated by the Supreme Court in the New York Times v. The United States. By a vote of 6-3, the court ruled that the government had overstepped its bounds when it ordered the papers to cease publishing.
Interestingly, it was the Ellsberg case which morphed into Watergate and brought down President Nixon because the president was so incensed he started a series of actions to get Ellsberg (including ordering the break in at the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist's, which lead to Ellsberg's case being thrown out for prosecutorial misconduct). The groups established to go after Ellsberg eventually also broke into the Democratic headquarters at Watergate.
Woodward and Bernstein at the Washington Post broke the Watergate story and the rest as they say is history.
It was for one brief shining moment, the glory days of journalism. I watched the Watergate Hearings in my 7th grade history class--my teacher had the foresight to recognize he was watching history in the making--and it had a profound influence on me professionally and politically.
Today as I watch the WikiLeaks drama play out, and as the New York Times comes under attack for publishing the embassy cables, it's impossible not to recognize the historical parallels. Whatever your thoughts of Daniel Ellsberg, however, what he did took tremendous courage, as did the actions of the New York Times and its fellow newspapers, and we're not likely to see that kind of courage again, WikiLeaks not withstanding.