|
Menu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Essays by Lester Garrett |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Essays by
Tiresias
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply To Tom
Gutting - Page 2 of 2
by Tiresias |
(Concluded From Previous Page)
To characterize that
decision as "flying around the country like a scared child seeking refuge in
his mother's bed after having a nightmare" was an obscenity, not an act of
genuine and considered criticism. It was an indecent wise crack by a little
man who brought upon discredit upon himself.
To subsequently suggest that his comments did no more than "raise some
doubts about the quality of [the president's] leadership"; and to further
suggest that he was the victim of a lack of "commitment of editors and
publishers to the ideals of free speech", is nothing short of intellectual
dishonesty. A dishonesty amplified by the fact that, at the end of the
"Nightline" show to which I referred, Mr. Gutting admitted that
that column should never have been written.
In so far as the "the ideals of free speech" are concerned, he of all
people should know, that the protection of free speech is a prohibition against
government interference, not against private actions. To
suggest, as he improperly does, that being fired for those comments he somehow
represents a lack of commitment to free speech on the part of the publisher
compounds his hypocrisy.
Publisher Les Daughtry Jr. was so upset when he read Mr. Gutting's original
column that he wrote an apology to his readers in the next edition. As
related on "Nightline," he called Gutting into his office the next
morning and told him that he did not believe they could continue to work together
and properly terminated him.
Mr. Gutting has today, just as he had on the day he wrote his column, the right
to seek employment on any newspaper in the land. His freedom of speech is
as unimpaired today as it was the day before he was fired. Mr. Gutting does
not have the right to require that a publisher employ him.
Nor did he have that right on the day before he was fired. His
right to free speech does not obligate anyone to provide him with a the means to
publish his views. For him to now suggest that his firing was somehow a
betrayal of free speech by members of his profession compounds his obscenity and
exposes him for the dishonest writer that he is.
- Tiresias -
8 October 2001
copyright © 2001 hyways.com
|
|