Court Injunction Quiets Boston News Station

Boston's WHDH-TV Channel 7 News has been court ordered not to report information obtained from several confidential sources regarding the autopsy reports of two Boston firefighters who died battling an August blaze. As a result, the story is not the findings of the autopsy report, but the fact that only one of several Boston news outlets has been singled out in court and prevented from reporting the story, while other publications and broadcast news stations have gone on to freely discuss the same findings.

It is called prior restraint, and it is what suffocates the First Amendment. It is justified, in the eyes of the law, in situations where national security is at stake, where "clear and present danger" will surely result if information is released by the press. The grounds on which the Boston firefighter's union sought the injunction, however, was an invasion of privacy. The court decided that, since autopsy reports can only be released to the victim's next of kin, the informant had not obtained the report through legal means, and thus the press had no right to report the information.

What is interesting, though, is that the other local news outlets have not hesitated to report the same story for which Channel 7 is being silenced, clear evidence that this court order has had no chilling affect on other Boston news media. And, as the controversial information has been released for hours now with no threat to national security arising, I would say the foundation for Channel 7's appeal is firm.

Autopsy findings allegedly reported that one of the fallen firefighters was legally intoxicated with a blood alcohol level of .27, while the other had traces of cocaine and marijuana in his system. While these men were hailed as heroes after they lost their lives in August fighting a fire at a Chinese restaurant, such information could certainly tarnish their reputations, as well as that of all firefighters in Boston, and cause unnecessary grief to their families.

But is that grounds for stomping on the freedom of the press? While it is unfortunate, certainly, that these men lost their lives, it is crucial that this information be brought to light. What problem exists that makes it possible for two men to be under the influence of drugs while they are fighting fires? And how will it be solved?


The Boston Globe article...
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2007/10/sources_autopsi.html