People in the media business often profess to be the defenders and guardians of the rights of our society as guaranteed by the Constitution and subsequent amendments. Commonly referred to as the "Bill of Rights," the first 10 amendments proceed to spell out the rights Americans exercise in our democratic and representative form of government. The portion of those rights that gets the most attention from media is, of course, freedom of the press and the right to free speech. While the media often projects these tenants in a light that would give the impression that we invented the concept of free speech and free press, the fact of the matter is media simply reports the manner in which these freedoms are exercised. In doing so, media attempts to be the conveyer of expression of independent ideas and thinking.

Too often media becomes the projection of expression rather than the conveyer of events. That is to say, reporting tends to take on a manner of expression conveyed by the person reporting an event. Who among us has not read a story of coverage of an event, and wondered, "Was this person at the same event I was?" Some of that can be explained as simply the manner in which human beings differ in interpretation of what they saw and in the manner they communicate it to others. The only explanation for other portions can only be attributed to out and out bias. We all have our viewpoint on the way things ought to be. When that viewpoint filters into the manner in which we communicate an event or idea to someone else, our personal bias and prejudice tends to frame the report in a light that promotes our own viewpoint of what "should be" rather than what "is."

In that context, prejudice unto itself is not necessary a good or bad thing. We all have prejudicial elements defining who we are. I'm personally prejudice in a negative manner toward the color orange and any progression of musical notes that results in a tune remotely resembling "Rocky Top." I am much more comfortable with a positive prejudice toward the color Crimson and the progression of musical notes that results in a tune resembling "Sweet Home Alabama." The manner in which I might convey that prejudice when telling a story regarding an Alabama vs. Tennessee football game would, no doubt, reflect that prejudice in spite of my best effort to be neutral in my story telling. After all the word itself is simply a derivative of "Pre Judge." I'm sure I could find an effective way of presenting that bias in a light that would convey my feelings clearly. After all, isn't "Sweet Home Alabama" by definition a classic, while "Rocky Top" is just some sort of excuse for drinking corn from a jar? (See what I mean?)

By this time you may be wondering where I'm heading with all this. To tell the truth, I'm thinking the same thing. It's just that lately I've been disturbed by the manner in which some politicians have decided to exercise their right of free speech to project their prejudice and bias. In the manner of one week, Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic party, John Kerry, Senator from Massachusetts, and others have eluded to the current engagement of our loved ones in uniform as, loosely translated, a war we can't win, soldiers who terrorize Iraqi women and children in the night, and various other negative and bias terms designed to frame their opinion in a manner they believe advances their own agenda.

Since my childhood, I've heard the expression "people gave up their lives so that you can express your opinion and to protect your rights and freedom." I've always believed that and still do. An untold number of tombstones bear witness to the fact that throughout the history of our great country, men and women, have paid the ultimate price to secure those freedoms. The real difference to me is the acknowledgement of those who made the sacrifice in the past compared to those who will now be called upon to make a sacrifice in the future not because of protecting the right of free speech but rather because someone uses free speech in an irresponsible manner. It is one thing to remember in reverence our fallen heroes who died for a cause. It is quite something else to think of those who will now die because someone doesn't understand the right of free speech carries with it a responsibility of knowing when and how to use it.

Gary Lawrence is Publisher of the Claiborne Progress