Meiklejohn, Monica, & Mutilation of the Thinking Process

Abstract

Fifty years after Alexander Meiklejohn first linked himself to free speech -jurisprudence with the principle of democratic self-governance, this Article links his writings about free speech to the ensuing media coverage of President Clinton's inappropriate relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky.' It is a dubious distinction, no doubt, for the famed philosopher and educator to be linked with "Oralgate" and one of Bill Clinton's alleged affairs, but the link here is scholarly, not salacious. 

This Article asserts that Meiklejohn's writings on the values of free speech in a self-governing democracy provide an excellent philosophic context and an ideal lens through which to consider and evaluate press coverage of the latest "Washington sex-and-deception scandal." That coverage, of course, has caused much consternation and self-reflection-or perhaps pseudo self-reflection-among journalists.8 Meiklejohn prized self-reflection. He once praised the United States and Britain for having developed what he called "the high political art of selfcriticism." Today, Meiklejohn's own writings help to providejournalists and legal scholars alike with the necessary structure and guideposts for that same "art of selfcriticism." 

In particular, Meiklejohn's work provides a serious, alternative framework to the pointless pontification and verbal masturbation of the Washington pundits who critique the media's performance while simultaneously stroking their own egos on frenetic talk shows such as CNN's Crossfire. More importantly, his writings are laden with statements and admonitions which raise many important questions that should frame debate about whether the press did its job properly when it "saturated the airwaves and print media" with ratings grabbing coverage about President Clinton's alleged sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. The relevance of Meiklejohn's work extends well beyond the narrow reaches of the ClintonLewinsky entanglement, of course, and includes general press coverage of politics during the age of tabloid television and the cyber journalism of Matt Drudge.

This Article does not pretend, however, to resolve the issues it raises from a Meiklejohnian perspective regarding the press coverage of the Lewinsky scandal. Indeed, given Meiklejohn's penchant for the open-but-orderly process of debate at a town hall meeting, it would be inappropriate for one individual to resolve any issue alone. This Article does, however, use Meiklejohn's principles and theories to raise important questions concerning the recent press coverage. This inquiry is well grounded in a body of work associated, at least since the United States Supreme Court's seminal defamation decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan,  with First Amendment jurisprudence that is fundamental to both a free press and a democracy at the close of the twentieth century. Furthermore, this Article teases out different perspectives and suggests possible responses and answers to these questions.