The New York Times regularly publishes details about Trump and his behind-the-scenes proceedings. While some of this is to be expected, could they really be endangering his ability to serve the public? Worse yet, could the esteemed paper be putting the public at risk in the process? Some intelligence experts believe the answer is yes.
The most recent questionable move by the media outlet detailed conversations between President Trump and Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte. In what was meant to be a private conversation, the POTUS revealed that “two nuclear submarines” were parked just off of the coast of North Korea. While the information is true — the first submarine arrived in April — releasing that information to the public could seriously compromise the mission.
North Korea was well-aware of this first submarine, but what they may not have known is that a second submarine sits just off of the coast, idling underwater. It isn’t known whether the tiny country has the firepower to deter submarines, but if they do, they could view the move as an act of war. In a time when tensions are rapidly increasing between the United States and North Korea, even the slightest information leak is dangerous.
And there’s absolutely no doubt that publication in the New York Times just allowed North Korea to get their hands on the information.
Posted in the article in question was a not-so-hidden paragraph detailing much more information than should have ever been released:
“President Trump praised President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines in a phone call last month for doing an “unbelievable job on the drug problem” in the island nation where the government has sanctioned gunning down suspects in the streets. Mr. Trump also boasted that the United States has “two nuclear submarines” off the coast of North Korea but said he does not want to use them.”
What is even stranger about the move is that even the Times admits it sourced its information from a confidential report out of the Philippines that was never intended for public eyes. Not only did the Times understand that the information was risky to release, but they chose to release it anyway.
The New York Times has even accused Trump himself of compromising national security in the past. That seems a bit hypocritical after an event like this.
The event reconfirms concerns held by many intelligence officials — and indeed, Trump himself — over exactly how much freedom the press has. Though most people support freedom of information and speech, a growing group of people believe that the press sometimes holds too much freedom. Those individuals believe that there are certain situations where the press should not be granted access to release information without penalty.
The complication of fake news also plays a role: when people begin to believe anything they read in the paper, it can have serious consequences on both home soil and on the world political stage.
How do you feel about the New York Times releasing such sensitive information? Do you believe that the press should have absolute freedom as long as information is true? Or, do you feel that more information is needed?