Certainly terrorism has been a primary concern for Americans, since the advent of September 11th and the tragic loss of life that occurred on that fateful day. The fact that the media is now so omnipresent adds a complex facet to the situation, one that wasn't present only a few decades ago. This facet leads to security dilemmas never before faced for the country, thanks to the various readily available channels for media, including the Internet and 24-hour news networks such as CNN and Fox News. The question then becomes, should measures be implemented to protect the public from too much information dissemination? Should Homeland Security play a part in this process, if undertaken? How can other countries be policed when presenting coverage from a different perspective than America? What recommendations can be made to the state communications department regarding updating current criminal justice media practices?
             National Security VS Freedom of the Press:
             Although Americans have come to take for granted the "always on" live news they can receive, either via the Internet or the various news channels, there are dilemmas that arise when it comes to this availability. Freedom of the press is one of the basic freedoms that Americans often take for granted, but there are occasions when the release of information not only further exacerbates an already frightened public, by sensationalizing information, but also can be detrimental to national security. Although it would seem to be un-American to suppress information that could be delivered by the media, in certain instances, there is occasionally information that is too sensitive, too valuable to the war on terrorism, to simply let it air out on the laundry lines of the public media. For this reason, measures need to be taken to protect this sensitive information.
             When dealing with this type of information the Homeland Security office can be of invaluable serv...