The
newspaper is a powerful medium. It is
powerful because it has the ability to influence the way that people view the
world, as well as their opinion of what they see. In peaceful times (or in times of oppression,
for sometimes they can appear to be happening at the same moment) the press is
usually one of the instruments used by the state in order to maintain the
status quo. However, during times of
political unrest it is often the press who becomes the major antagonist in the
fight against the government.
Why is this so?
Why does the press get so deeply involved in, not just the reporting of,
but the instigating and propagating of political change? In order to properly answer this question
there are several other key ideas and questions which must first be
examined. To understand the nature of
the press' involvement in political change, one must initially understand the
nature of political change in its own right.
In this vein, the first section of the paper is dedicated to this
investigation. An examination of the
motives behind revolution will be given in order to provide a framework for the
second part of the paper, which will look at the involvement of the press
during revolutionary times in more specific terms. The French revolution of 1789 will be used as
a backdrop for this inquiry.
There are many different types of political
movements, and accordingly there are many different reasons for these movements
to occur. Value-oriented and
norm-oriented movements deal with matters of social and political concern, but
do so in the setting of the already existing political and social
structures. Revolutionary movements seek
to make fundamental changes to society in order to establish a completely new
political and social order.1 The distinction
being that the first aims to make subtle changes to society from within, while
the latter's aim is to make drastic changes to society by getting rid of the
principles that society was based on.
Usually this will involve a change in political
beliefs and values, or political ideology.
In today's world there are numerous forms of political ideologies, but
in essence they are all derived from two basic root ideologies; socialism and
liberalism. Socialism is an ideology
which places power in the hands of the state, rather than in the people who
populate it. Examples of modern
socialist states include: the former Soviet Union, China, and Cuba. Other more extreme forms of socialism are
fascism and authoritarianism. These
ideologies more closely resemble the monarchies that ruled much of Europe and
the new world, before the great revolutions.
Monarchism is an ideology that believes in the absolute rule of a
"royal" family. The king
and/or queen have the power to make decisions without question from
anyone. The series of revolutions which
included the English Reformation, the American and French Revolutions, and to a
lesser extent the revolts in Upper and Lower Canada, were all confrontations
over who should hold political ascendancy.
Moreover, they were clashes of ideology, between monarchism and
liberalism.
Liberalism was developed during the
Enlightenment. This was a period of time
when writers, scientists, and philosophers began to openly question certain
aspects of society and the role that they should or should not play. Attacked were the kings and queens, the
clergy and feudalist system as a whole.
The ideas of this time formed the basis of revolutionary thought. The goal of the revolutionaries was to build
a new society based on liberal values of the Enlightenment. "Liberal politicians in Europe wanted to
establish a framework of legal equality, religious toleration and freedom of
the press."2 It was the deprivation
of these principles, by the monarchical leaders, which led to discontent among
the people of France. Above all,
liberalism stresses the primacy of individual rights. One can see that these
ideals were at the forefront of French revolutionary thought by examining the
Declaration of rights, which in 1789 stated that, "All men are equal by
nature," and brought republican concepts such as liberty, equality and
fraternity into awareness.3
When one looks at
the motives behind the great revolutions of our time, a recurring theme seems
to prevail in all of them. There is a
part of human nature which makes freedom almost as much of a necessity as food
and water. When people's freedom is somehow oppressed or taken away, discontent
emerges. "As soon as discontent is
generalized a party is formed which often becomes strong enough to struggle
against the Government."4 The
conditional nature of this statement can be attributed to the fact that
discontent among a minority of people is not enough to cause a revolution. There are other factors which are necessary
for a complete revolution to transpire.
First, there must be a medium whereby the masses are able to learn about
the principles which will be fought for.
Second, there must be a means by which the masses can acquire
sufficient knowledge of the wrongs that
have been perpetrated against them, in order to foster and unite support for
the cause. Third, there must be a way
for the masses to receive information about the revolution all the time, so
that support does not wain, and so the revolutionaries can organize
itself. The best and easiest way for
these factors to be satisfied is through the news media.
The involvement of the news media is important
to any revolutionary cause. In a
democratic revolution it is especially important. When the population revolts, in an effort to
obtain democracy or a more liberal society, it is only natural that the press
become involved. The reason for this is
not as complicated as it may seem to be.
In a democratic revolution, the radicals are fighting for the rights
that they believe they should have, if for no other reason than by the fact
that they are born. These rights are
based on liberal values such as the right to life, liberty and property. They also include the right to freedom of
speech and expression, and all the aspects that go with it, like freedom of the
press. In a revolution where freedom of
the press is being fought for, it is only natural that the press play a large
role in the fight. Harold Innis, when
observing the development of a free press stated, "the advantages of a new
medium will become such as to lead to the emergence of a new
civilization."5 Without a free
press, the success of the great revolutions and the societies that they helped
to create, would not have been possible.
So we have seen why the press becomes involved
in revolutions. Essentially it is
because the press, as we know it, is a liberal and democratic institution which
gives it strong ties to the revolutionary cause. However, the question of the role that the
press actually plays in a revolution still remains. It is obvious that during a revolution, the
newspapers do more than just report on the facts. The facts, while still important, are not
what the people want to hear or what they need to hear. There are three essential functions that the
press perform during a revolution: education, unification and the safeguarding
of the new constitution.
For a revolution to begin, the people must know
what it is they are revolting against.
For a revolution to continue, once started, the people must have
knowledge of the events that have been carried out in their name. The Enlightenment served this first purpose
somewhat, but for the most part, the ideas of the Enlightenment were confined
to the upper classes for reasons of wealth and education. The ideas of that period did not reach the
masses because they were either unable to afford the books, or unable to read
them, and most of the time both. It was
not until the censorship laws were lifted, that the people really began to get
a sense of the corrupt behavior of the monarchical government.
In pre revolutionary France, the press was
tightly controlled by the King and his government. It was officially forbidden to discuss the
pros and cons of government policies....The French government, increasingly
willing to allow periodicals that stimulated public discussion in every other
area of life, balked at officially permitting any honest discussion of its own
doings.6
The only way for
French citizens to find out about their government was through the foreign
press which was only moderately censored by the government of France. However, towards the end of the Old Regime,
even these foreign papers were no longer sufficient to satisfy the reader's
demands for commentary and behind the scenes stories in the news. These were
necessary so that the French could try to make sense of what was
happening.7
The road to a censor free press was paved in
May of 1788 when the French government in an attempt to raise new taxes, tried
to abolish the parlements, who were opposing the tax increase. This move created great opposition to the
ministries and flooded the market with pro-parlement pamphlets. The strength of this opposition was enough to
make the government try another route.
They called the first meeting of the kingdom's traditional
representative assembly in 175 years, the Estates-General, which could undercut
the authority of the parlements and get the taxes passed. To build up support for this move, and to
counteract the anti ministerial pamphlets, censorship restrictions were lifted
and all authors were encouraged to publish their ideas about how the
Estates-General should proceed.8 In this
way the press was able to begin educating the masses on the problems caused by
the absolutism of the French monarchy.
These early pamphlets provided the spark that
was necessary for the traditional periodical to take hold as the medium of the
revolution. The political pamphlet was
too limited a medium to satisfy the demand for the news and ideas that the calling of the Estates-General had
created.9 The relative advantages
of daily newspapers were recognized
early in the revolution. Two men in
particular, Jacques-Pierre Brissot and Honore-Gabriel Riqueti, comte de
Mirabeau, realized the power that newspapers could give to the revolutionary
cause, and they issued the first numbers of their unauthorized newspapers
shortly after the beginning of the sessions of the Estates-General. One of the advantages that the newspaper has
over the pamphlet is its extensive readership, and the fact that it is a
constant source of information. Whereas,
the pamphlet was only able to reach a limited audience and do so in a sporadic
nature. As Brissot said of the
newspaper, "one can teach the same truth at the same moment to millions of
men; through the press, they can discuss it without tumult, decide calmly and
give their opinion."10 The
revolutionary press was able to promote the ideas of the revolution in a manner
that would have been impossible for the pamphlets to carry out. The newspapers were able to unite people and
ideas from all over the country, something that mere geography would have
prevented the pamphlets from doing.
The third function that the revolutionary press
performed, was to act as the safeguard of the new society. The French Revolution was part of the series
of great modern revolutions, based on liberal democratic values. This series of events made popular consent
the only basis with which a government can claim legitimacy.11 However, the French revolutionaries felt that
all politics must be carried on in public for it to be completely
legitimate. "Publicity is the
people's safeguard,"12 according to Jean-Sylvain Bailly, the revolutionary
mayor of Paris. To promote this theory,
the revolutionary assemblies opened their doors to the public. The only problem with this is that France
happens to be a very large country, and even then it had a very large
population. In 1789 the population of
France was 28 million and the population of Paris alone was 600 000,13 which
made it theoretically impossible for everyone to take part it the new
government. The newspapers were the only
way that all of the citizens of the new republic could, in a sense,
participate.
In providing a link between the government and
its citizens, not only did they allow most citizens to be "active"
participants, but the revolutionary newspapers also filled the position of
political watchdog. It was the absence
of a responsible press, that allowed the monarchs to rule unchallenged for so
long a period. That is why it has been
said that the emergence of the press was, "a development that was watched
with unfriendly eyes by kings and Parliaments alike."14 The revolutionaries did not want there to be
any possibility for the new government to take advantage of their power, in the
same manor that the monarchs had used theirs.
That is one of the reasons why they felt so strongly about freedom of
the press. Only a press independent of
government interference and regulation, would be able to effectively monitor
the actions of the new government.
The press plays a large role in revolutionary
times for various reasons. The basis for this involvement is found in the very
nature of the revolution itself. Liberal
revolutions fight for certain values, of which, the press and its freedom are
one. As a participant in the revolution
the press also has many specific roles.
It acts as an educator, bringing knowledge of what the revolution is
fighting for and why. The press also
acts as a common voice for the revolutionary fight. It unites the revolutionaries from all over
the country and allows them to coordinate and organize. It also allows the people to keep track of
events on a daily basis because the newspaper can reach them all the time. The third role of the press during
revolutionary times is to serve as the watchdog of the new political
order. Without a free press, the new
government might be tempted to abuse the powers that have been conferred upon
it.
Many historians have downplayed the importance
of the press during these periods of political upheaval, saying that the press
was no more than an observer. However,
one cannot ignore the obvious influence that the press has had in the bringing
about of revolution.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Le Bon,
Gustave. The Psychology of Revolution.
USA: Fraser Publishing Company, 1968.
Censor, Jack
Richard, Prelude to Power, The Parisian radical Press: 1789-1791, Maryland: the
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976
The Influence of
the Enlightenment on the French revolution, edited by William F. Church,
Canada: D.C. Heath and Company, 1974
Darton, Robert
and Daniel Roche, Revolution in Print: The Press in France 1775-1800, USA: New
York Public Library, Astor, Lenox & Tilden Foundations, 1989
Guy, James John,
People, Politics & Government, Toronto: Maxwell Macmillan Canada Inc.,
1990.
Osler,
Andrew. News, The Evolution of
Journalism in Canada. Missisauga: Copp
Clark Pitman Ltd., 1993.
Popkin, Jeremy
D. Revolutionary News, The Press in
France 1789-1799. USA: Duke University
Press, 1990.
Footnotes
1James John
Guy, People, Politics and
Government, (Toronto, 1990), p. 103.
2 Ibid., p. 81
3 Gustave Le Bon,
The Psychology of revolution, (USA, 1968), pp. 162-3
4Ibid., p. 28.
5Andrew M.
Osler, News, The Evolution of Journalism
in Canada, (Canada, 1993), p. 54.
6Jeremy D.
Popkin, Revolutionary News The Press in France, 1789-1799, (USA, 1990),
pp. 19-20.
7Ibid., p. 22-3.
8Ibid., p.25.
9Ibid., p. 26.
10Ibid., p.28.
11Ibid., p. 2.
12Ibid., p. 3.
13Ibid., p. 3.
14Osler, p. 54.
No comments:
Post a Comment