The war on drone secrecy (cont.)

By Christopher B. Daly

The use of unmanned drones may be a good thing or a bad thing (or, of course, something more complicated). Because that’s the case, the United States needs to conduct a big, loud debate about them — in hearings, in editorials and blogs, in speeches, in debates, on the airwaves, and online. After that, we need to have some elections that will clarify where the people stand.

None of that can happen, of course, if the whole program is a big secret. That is a point being made by a rising chorus of voices. The NYTimes Public Editor, Margaret Sullivan, is stressing it.

And today, NYT media columnist David Carr joins the crowd.

Carr’s column refers to a recent study by Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy. If ever there was an issue involving press, politics and public policy, the drone campaign is it. And the report, by Tara McKelvey, is a great primer on the whole issue and the coverage thereof.

Under the Obama administration, the targeted-killing program has
become the centerpiece of U.S. counterterrorism strategy. The Obama White House
program of targeted killing is unprecedented in its mission and scope; moreover, the
administration’s approach to fighting terrorists is likely to be adopted by presidents in
the future, whether Democratic or Republican. For these reasons, it makes sense to
examine the role of media in the public debate about the program and moreover to see
how journalists have fared in their efforts to cover the story of the targeted-killing




Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “The war on drone secrecy (cont.)

  1. theresa mcnally

    Certainly one of this century’s moral dilemma’s. We have a technology with drone warfare , much as nuclear warfare continues to be , to implement strategic agendas to protect ourselves that are dissonant with our country’s stated values. Not an easy question, but a worthy one.


    • profdaly

      Point well taken on the comparison to nuclear weapons. There should be a comparable debate about drones — if for no other reason, because other countries will acquire them soon enough and we will lose our monopoly. Then we will surely want a rationale for using them.


  2. Joakim

    I find it interesting that you were banging on about drones for months, yet when Rand Paul finally brought the issue to national attention, no mention of that whatsoever on this blog.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s