"For my self", Patten says, "I start at least with an ardently Jeffersonian belief in free speech, siding naturally with Junius and the jurors against Lord Mansfield, I recall with enthusiasm that when Franklin Roosevelt called, in his third inaugural address, for a world founded upon four essential freedoms, the first that he cited was 'freedom of speech and expression - everywhere in the world.' While that is my starting point, I soon find myself confronting some tricky propositions. None of us surely would argue that the only aim of a benevolent, decent society should be to achieve freedom of expression. Nor are we likely to believe that freedom of speech is the only freedom cherished by individuals. When we consider the arguments for free speech, we have to remember the arguments for other values too - justice, equality, community, order and (is it permissible to add?) moral progress. In a good society, therefore, it is inevitably necessary to reconcile free speech with many other aims and values. So freedom of expression is not an absolute."
Patten's book provides many interesting reflections. "Why should business bother about any of this?" One of the lessons of the Asian annus horribilis is the importance of openness in good economic management, and openness is difficult to compartmentalize. Our old friend 'transparency' includes other things as well as free media - corporate disclosure of ownership and debt, governmental honesty about reserves, and so on. The more open all the books, the better for the business environment: if only every company everywhere had to provide the information required to list on the New York Stock Exchange. Openness with economic and commercial facts and figures will not necessarily happen just because there is a free press. Yet, once again, such openness is more probable where the media are free, and at least good, uncensored media will pick up incidents of cover-ups and dishonesty, and harry those who are trying to hide the truth. The worst problems in securing the acceptable minimum of accurate information occur in countries where the domestic press and broadcasting companies are gagged, are in the government's pocket, or are owned by the very businessmen who are clouding with government to cheat and chisel the market." (4)
Not all comments from the Taiwan press corps follow the Washington line, considers the remarks of Norman Fu, Washington-based correspondent of Taipei China Times:
"The United States government, on the one hand, pushes the authorities in Taiwan to democratize and allow full freedom of the press. On the other hand, when these precepts run counter to its national interests, it wants democracy suspended and the press silenced. While I understand the dilemma of the U.S. government, I cannot, in good conscience, condone its doubles standard or hypocrisy. I deplore this abominable practice because it has made a mockery of the First Amendment enshrined in' the U.S. Constitution.
