Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, September 21, 1995 TAG: 9509210060
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-10 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
By publishing the "Unabomber's" 35,000-word manifesto against modern technology and industrial society, the newspapers set a terrible precedent, yielding both to government pressure and a terrorist's blackmail.
The so-called Unabomber, believed to have killed three and injured 23 in sophisticated mail-bomb attacks over the past 17 years, had said he would stop sending bombs if the Post or Times published his treatise. The newspapers, sharing the costs of a special section in the Post Tuesday, said they decided to publish it "for public-safety reasons."
Bad move. Even if the Unabomber is satisfied that his extortion worked, a message has gone out:
Want a novel manuscript or term paper published and can't find anyone to recognize your genius? No problem. Simply send a couple of mail bombs or seize a few hostages and you, too, can be a published author.
When you give terrorists the publicity they crave, for "public-safety reasons" or any other, that doesn't make the problem go away. It makes the problem worse.
Of course everyone has to say they won't negotiate with terrorists and blackmailers, then do it anyway in many cases when a situation arises.
In most cases, talking, at least, is reasonable. In many cases, making concessions or giving in is understandable. If it's a family member being held hostage, love for him or her can appropriately override the more abstract risk of setting a bad precedent for society. No one blames families for paying ransom.
But no one at the Post or Times "families" was threatened by the Unabomber - so it's harder to see why emotion should have overridden reason.
Reasonable persons should ask themselves: Would I rather work for a company with a reputation for paying ransom for anyone who is kidnapped, or a company with a reputation for never paying ransom? In which job would I stand a greater risk of being kidnapped?
It's not that the Post and Times failed to anguish over their decision. They obviously hated making it. But that doesn't change the fact they made the wrong decision.
Not only did they inappropriately bow to government pressure - becoming in effect agents of the Justice Department by printing what it wanted them to print. (``We didn't run this for its journalistic merit," said Times publisher Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr.)
The newspapers have virtually created a new market - publication by extortion - for terrorist publicity-seekers.
by CNB