Here's a civil liberties story - sort of. Scientists have apparently developed a highly lethal version of bird flu and the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity has asked that details of the research not be published. We wouldn't this info to fall into the hands of people who were inclined to use it.
The papers have already been written, so they are ready to be published.
The issue creates a dilemma, one recognized by the board: “Censorship is considered the ultimate sin of original research. However, we also have an imperative to keep certain research out of the hands of individuals who could use it for nefarious purposes,” said Michael T. Osterholm, a member of the board who is also director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. “It is not unexpected that these two things would clash in this very special situation.”
The panel was created in 2005 for this very reason: to avoid slowing down progress without creating new tools for terror.
Here's an NPR story about the group.
The panel apparently lacks the authority to prevent publication - but I have a hunch that some mechanism could be found to prevent it. When we discuss freedom of the press we bring up prior restraint, which allows for the prevention of publications if there is a legitimate reason (harm to national security for example) to do so. But doing so compromises the free exchange of information that has been at the heart of American political, scientific and artistic life.
Similar issues have been brought up regarding information about creating nuclear weapons.
