Until now. As the Times and the Post face a similar dilemma over how to handle the much longer statement mailed to them by the Unabomer, all the old issues about handling terrorism are being revisited, only this time it’s the media – not the government – that have to confront them. “Never negotiate with terrorists” sounds good as a policy. But it’s in the same league as “Never sit with your back to the door or eat at a place called ‘Mom’s’.” In the real world, “Mom’s” always seems to be the only place open. Even when the Israelis face terrorism, there’s always some negotiation; the only question is how much.
The Times and Post do have some options, but most of them are bad. If they hold fast and refuse to publish the theories of this twisted neo-Luddite, then they may have to explain later why they didn’t do more to prevent bloodshed. On the other hand, the Unabomer is also demanding three annual follow-up stories. And even then, he hasn’t promised to stop blowing up property, much less turn himself in. Where would capitulation lead? The man, after all, is a meticulous self-promoter. He sent the letters specifically to Warren Hoge at the Times and Michael Getler at the Post–both highly placed editors. (In the latter case it sat in Getler’s in-box for a day because his secretary was away.) If the newspapers aren’t careful, soon he’ll start trying to bargain for a better sketch artist or a bigger byline.
Fortunately, the self-styled anarchist gave the newspapers three months to make their decision. Considering that he has been at large for 17 years, he isn’t likely to be caught by then. But it gives the press some time to stall and think. One possible solution would be to publish a portion of the statement (the complete text of which would consume seven full newspaper pages) and put the rest of it online. It isn’t hard to predict what the Unabomer’s reaction to that would be. He apparently monitors the Internet, but his whole philosophy is anti-technology, and his views online would be unavailable to the very computer-poor masses he is apparently trying to whip up into a revolutionary fervor.
Maybe the papers should simply handle the whole thing exactly as the FBI recommends, which is unclear right now. To journalists, this sounds a bit peculiar. A belief has grown up-within journalism and without-that self-respecting publications don’t let someone else tell them what to publish. But actually there’s a long tradition in the news business of cooperating with authorities when lives are clearly at stake. (It’s when reputations are at stake, not lives, that the press usually goes ahead and publishes in defiance of the government.) In his forthcoming memoirs, Bradlee relates several eases of the Post’s holding back, in-eluding one story he decided not to run about how American POWs in Vietnam were secretly communicating in photos taken by their captors. NEWSWEEK held off reporting some details about the American hostages in Iran during the Carter administration, among other stories.
But actually turning over space or air time is worse, isn’t it? Maybe not. One news chief with a reputation as a tough guy, Don Hewitt, executive producer of CBS’s “60 Minutes,” says: “I’d ask the head of the FBI if airing it would make us a safer country. If so, I’d do it.” And if that led to “60 Minutes” routinely being taken over by terrorists? On second thought, says Hewitt, “It’s obviously [CBS chief Larry] Tisch’s decision to make.” As it happens, even in TV, the copycat problem is not serious. Every so often a gunman will break into a local TV newsroom to demand that a statement be read on the air. It doesn’t tend to spawn imitators in that market.
Perhaps the best approach is to simply look at the Unabomer’s statement for its journalistic worth and run excerpts. The Times described the statement as “closely reasoned,” which is a better review than many authors receive in that paper. Whoever he is, this man is dearly expressing an anger at the modern world that is not only well-articulated but representative of the anxieties of lots of other people. “Tell him to write it good,” advises Jimmy Breslin. “If you don’t like it, send it back for a rewrite.”
Of course, the press gets manipulated often–by politicians, business executives, criminals. Yet even the best writing doesn’t get reprinted at 35,000 words in major newspapers, and the Unabomer’s prose is hardly deathless. If he made a firm and convincing offer to turn himself in, then it would be worth striking a deal. But short of that, he is simply yanking some mighty heavy chains. The press should keep the lines of communication open, even publish something, but avoid being completely co-opted by a killer.
