As a journalist, I'm sure many expect me to be a diehard advocate for the freedom of the press. One may think, "Hey, he's a member of the press. He should want to be free." In most cases I do press hard for press freedom (at least in my thoughts–people don't often ask my opinion on the subject) if not solely because of the added life accountability can breathe into a society. Just by publishing a story, or airing an interview, countless numbers of people from now until the end of digital records could possibly be influenced by the reported perspective of a newsmaker.
But perhaps you caught my "…In most cases…" caveat to an otherwise noble ideal. The founding fathers (John Hancock being one of the first advocates) knew that a free society could not flourish in its freedom until the threats of sedition and treason were lifted from those printing *relative* truths. (The first journalists printed some pretty terrible things.) That noble beginning aside, I'm bothered by the occasional perversion of the First Amendment by the proud, the few, the Obnoxious Journalist Crowd.