Press Restrictions Quotes

The organization of our press has truly been a success. Our law concerning the press is such that divergences of opinion between members of the government are no longer an occasion for public exhibitions, which are not the newspapers' business.

Usually when reporting on powerful public figures, the press advisor and I would have had a conversation that established what journalists call 'ground rules,' placing restrictions on what can and cannot be reported.

An ordinance that permits a mayor to say yes to a friendly [news]paper and no to a critical paper is an ordinance that has to fall.

The freedom of the press works in such a way that there is not much freedom from it.

I would never say, as a member of the press, that there should be fewer press briefings. The more access, the better, no matter who is there or what's going on.

What has been adjudicated and established in the wake of Vietnam and the Civil Rights movement is the ability of the press to basically write or broadcast almost anything about the government. There's very few restrictions in that way.

In all the nations of the earth, where presses are known, some correction of licentiousness has been indispensable.

Over the years since I became a Christian, I have always deliberately explained that I have 'accepted Jesus Christ.' These words are invariably translated into 'Colson's professed religious experience.' I discovered that one major U.S. daily, as a matter of policy, will not print the two words Jesus Christ together; when combined, the editor says, it represents an editorial judgment.

Every war has seen unscrupulous reporters who are willing to hurt the national effort, even betray secrets, for the sake of a story…but it did no good to treat the press as enemies.

In 2007, as a condition for hosting the Olympics in Beijing, the Chinese government removed restrictions barring Beijing-based journalists from leaving the capital without prior written permission.

The press should not get special privileges - if they drive recklessly or put people in danger, they should be subject to every reckless driving and endangerment law on the books - but they should also not be singled out for special punishment.

In spite of your “liberty of the press”, at a hint from your government your whole national press becomes unanimous on questions outside domestic politics.

There is no such thing as absolute freedom of the press, not even in the most advanced countries in the world. There are things you just don't say, because it will destabilise the environment.

I think you have a danger of regulating, putting regulations in place which will mean there will be no press in 10 years to regulate.

We can make no such promises, but if the White House wanted to request the holding of a specific story, the request would have to come from the President to the Executive Editor or the Publisher.

In Haiti, it - people seemed - in my experience in Haiti, people are so open to photographs and journalism. And there doesn't seem to be the same sort of restrictions or wariness about the press that you would experience in Washington, for instance, on many levels.

The Defense Department's plan to ban newspaper reporters from pool coverage of military operations is incredible. It reveals the administration to be out of touch with journalism, reality and the First Amendment.

The violation of press freedoms has been egregious under this administration, even as the press fetes President Obama as an honest and effective commander-in-chief.

If some people keep saying that the press is still not free in Turkey, then I would like to say this: there has been a coup attempt in Turkey. And there are people siding with the coup plotters. And there are - there is also media outlets that have been against - that are against the coup attempt. So my question is that against the media that supported the coup, will the Turkish justice, judicial system, not take any steps? Of course it will.

If I want to ban any newspaper, I will, with good reason.

I can't think of a time that the U.S. government asked us or instructed us not to report or air something.

No presses should be set up or used except those in London and one in the University at Cambridge and one at the University in Oxford. That every printer should within 10 days render an inventory of his implements; upon pain to the delinquent of having the same utterly demolished, and of being imprisoned twelve months … no press should be set up in any obscure place; upon pain to the offender of imprisonment for one year, and also of being disabled forever from using his trade ..:. No new presses should be set up, and that none set up within the six months last past should be used, until their excessive number should have been so reduced as might seem good to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London ; upon pain to the offender of the destruction of his implements, and of imprisonment for a year : That no one should print any book against the meaning of any law of the realm or injunction of her Majesty, nor should any one print any book at all unless the same be first read by the- Archbishop of Canterbury or by, the Bishop of London ; under pain to the printer in either case of being disabled from any practice of printing and of being imprisoned six months: That sellers or binders of any such books should be imprisoned three months: And that the wardens of the Company of Stationers might search for all such books wherever they should have reasonable cause of suspicion, and destroy all presses and other instruments set up or used contrary to the meaning of this decree.

Obviously, if the commander makes certain decisions that the reporter thinks is inhibiting his right to report a legitimate story, he has to appeal to the commander's boss to get that changed.

I don't think that there is absolute freedom of the press. We operate under laws - against libel, for instance. The idea that there is some absolute press freedom is kind of a myth.

There is no law that guarantees press access to the White House. Communication was lessening during the Obama years. There was every reason to suspect that Trump was going to create an adversarial relationship and that people were going to be faced with the impossible dilemma between sort-of-complicity and access.