Gags choke press

Superior Court Judge Lance A. Ito, in an attempt to curtail leaks of information to t he press in the O.J. Simpson murder case, is considering placing a gag order on anyone connected with the case, banning them from discussing documents, exhibits or evidence.

The rationale given for this decision is to prevent the jury from becoming biased. Ito apparently seems to think the media publicity hasn't yet biased a large slice of the American population.

Ito's order, were it to be implemented, would reduce the quality and truthfulness in the stories that would still get printed. In stead of printing facts, reporters would have to rely on rumors. Contrary to popular belief, we, speaking for the media as a whole, prefer to print truthful news.

What Ito would likely prefer instead would be a direct gag order, that is, a gag ord er on the press itself. But the Supreme Court ruling in the 1976 case, Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, unanimously found this kind of order in violation of the First Amendment. It imposed a prior restraint on publication.

This is where the Fi rst Amendment clashes with the Sixth Amendment. Freedom of speech clashing headlong into the right of the accused to a speedy trial by an impartial jury.

Both the defense and the prosecution for the Simpson case have used the media to sway public o pinion. A gag order placed directly on the attorneys would slow the flood of news items that keeps washing onto the front pages and TV shows, but Ito's proposed order would seal all motions filed in court.

These legal documents are an good channel for obtaining and reporting accurate information. The competition for any ÒnewÓ news has become such that the locating of any story which might possibly attract readers or viewers becomes a major coup.

If a legitimate source of information is sudde nly denied reporters, it could cause the feeding frenzy for any tidbit of news to reach astronomical proportions. The Simpson case is an example of a story big enough to draw attention away from Bosnia, Rwanda and countless other news items.

A ga g order by Judge Ito will not stop the presses. We can imagine any possible source for news being hounded mercilessly.

We are sick of hearing about the Simpson case. It needlessly draws readers away from the important news and it speaks volumes abo ut the mentality of American culture, but the gag order issue elevates the status of this trial in newsworthiness.

While lower courts have placed gag orders on attorneys and otherofficers of the court, the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the cons titutionality of a gag order on lawyers. This trial may become a test case in an issue which will decide once and for all how the courts treat the press.

We hope a balance between the First and Sixth Amendment will be maintained without resorting t o gag orders.>

/a>