Too quiet on the Hill
Re: “Squelching the News in Democracy’s Name”
10/29/01

Mark Crispin Miller’s fears about government influence on media coverage are well-founded. As a reporter who covers Capitol Hill broadcast and telecom policy-making, I am equally concerned with Congress’ silence and industry’s unflinching cooperation. Sadly, these troubling developments are likely an indication of future actions by the Bush administration to stifle alternative viewpoints and to head off any form of dissent or criticism of US policy.

Steve Peacock

Haven’t we learned anything?
Re: “Squelching the News in Democracy’s Name”
10/26/01

Only Americans can hurt America’s democracy. We are seeing this point in the new anti-terrorism laws being passed by Congress as quickly as possible while the American public is focused on bio-terrorism.

I don’t understand why the politicians — our “public servants” — are willing to throw our fundamental rights out the window. Aren’t they supposed to be representing the people’s best interests? I think we as a society should learn from the past and change our actions for the future. We’ve been to war before, and had our civil liberties threatened by our own government — why is it still happening?

Carrie Meador

No bin Ladin, no big loss
Re: “Squelching the News in Democracy’s Name”
10/26/01

I think it’s quite obvious that a murderous terrorist is more of a danger to our democracy than Bush. Besides, Bush has the support of the House and Senate. He’s not exactly going at this on his own, is he?

Sure, the government is censoring some information — but this is war and it is not unprecedented. We have survived it before. You must really think we have a weak democracy. I do not believe our democratic institutions will fall just because I can’t watch a bin Ladin video.

Brian Cochrane