第28页 chapter 2: Terrorism, censorship and the 1st amendment: in search of policy guidelines

The Patterns of Past Solutions:

There are basically three approaches to the dilemma of reconciling the conflicting aspects of press freedom and survival security. The "formal censorship" approach has been most common. It involves legislation that sets forth what may or may not be published. Such laws vary in the terms and scope of the censorship operations and often stipulate severe penalties for violations.......
The opposite "free press" approach leaves journalists free to decide what is or is not safe to publish under the circumstances. Journalists may choose to follow guidelines provided by the government or respond to specific requests by public officials. But reporters make the ultimate decision free from formal pressure by public officials, although there are always ethical mandates to be risk-averse when national security of at stake.
The third approach, the "informal censorship" scheme, is an ingenious combination of the two: There are no censorship laws and the press is left officially free to decide what it does or does not wish to publish. But pronouncements by high-level government leaders constitute informal censorship because they create a coercive climate that forces the press into self-censorship in line with the wishes of public officials. Criticism of government policy is castigated as unpatriotic flirting with treason......