NCJ Number
86145
Date Published
1982
Length
7 pages
Annotation
Media reports on terrorist hostages incidents are valuable, but they should not jeopardize police negotiations and strategies designed to save the lives of the hostages.
Abstract
The courts have ruled that the first amendment rights of freedom of speech and the press must be balanced with the interests of public order. Terrorist hostage incidents are occasions where this balance is critical to the proper handling of the incident. Journalists should not be permitted to speak directly with the hostagetakers, because police negotiators should not have to compete with journalists for the time and attention of the terrorists. Further, police control over media contact with the hostages enables police to use such contact as a bargaining 'chip' with the terrorists, who may wish to communicate a message through the media. The press should also restrict live coverage of police operations so as not to give terrorists, who may be monitoring radio and television reporting, the latest information on police activities. Press coverage of a terrorist incident should also be limited to ensure the terrorists their constitutional right to a fair trial, which might be jeopardized by adverse pretrial publicity or contamination of a crime scene. When the press obtains information from other than police sources, it is reasonable to check this information with the police information officer to obtain the officer's opinion as to whether it might jeopardize the safety of the hostages. The final decision about whether to report the information, however, must rest with the media. The balance between the public's right to know and the interests of public order can be served by police and media representatives meeting to develop guidelines satisfactory to both, so that costly mistakes can be avoided in the course of a crisis. Nine footnotes are listed.