My gut feeling tells me that since the beginning of the war on terror we would be surprised if we really knew the extent to which the government restricts the freedom of the press. An example is the ‘Boston Bomber.’ Without seeking information on your own you never really hear about him anymore. He had started to gain a cult following and if my theory is correct, the government may have ‘suggested’ he fall out of the spot light to limit his influence.
In times of war I think freedom of the press, and to a lesser extent freedom of speech, should be limited. It can be difficult for our military to do their job well if CNN is announcing who, what, where and when. Also, because of the atrocities of war, having that footage aired can cause a lot of protests against the government by people who cannot separate what they’re seeing against the idea of the greater good. We spent less cumulative time winning world wars than we have spent struggling in the Middle East because the ‘art’ of war is now heavily subjected to and criticized by the press. For better or worse the media has had a tremendous effect on the battlefield.
Freedom of speech has been reigned in a lot more than I’d like. Political correctness has more or less become law since ‘hate speech’ has become a ‘thing.’ Personally I think people should be free to speak as foolishly as they please. The majority will in time push them and their ideas their ideas to the outskirts of society where they belong. Also, in my reading of the constitution, I’ve yet to come across the ‘Right to never be offended.’