US first Amendment under threat in the land of the free? Six months ago the United States was voted number 32 in the Press Freedom Index. This cannot be the land of the free, can it? Published on eTurboNews (eTN) (eturbonews) What happened to freedom of the press in the United States of America? By Thomas Steinmetz Created Jul 23 2013 - 6:50am On the bottom of this article see a table with the rating of 179 countries showing Finland number one and Eritrea number 179. How would the already low rating of the United States stand now after last Friday when the US administration got what it wanted - an ice-cold chilling effect - from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled on the case of New York Times reporter James Risen. The court "delivered a blow to investigative journalism in America by ruling that reporters have no First Amendment protection that would safeguard the confidentiality of their sources in the event of a criminal trial," the Guardian reported. The part of the US first Amendment that prohibits "abridging the freedom … of the press" is now up against the wall, as the Obama administration continues to assault the kind of journalism that can expose government secrets. The Executive Branch fought for that ruling - and is now celebrating. "We agree with the decision," said a Justice Department spokesman. "We are examining the next steps in the prosecution of this case." The Risen case, and potentially many others, are now under the ominous shadow of the Appeals Court’s pronouncement: "There is no First Amendment testimonial privilege, absolute or qualified, that protects a reporter from being compelled to testify … in criminal proceedings." At the Freedom of the Press Foundation, co-founder Trevor Timm calls the court ruling "the most significant reporter’s privilege decision in decades" and asserts that the court "eviscerated that privilege." He’s not exaggerating. Press freedom is at stake. Journalists who can be compelled to violate the confidentiality of their sources, or otherwise go to prison, are reduced to doing little more than providing stenographic services to pass along the official story. That’s what the White House wants. The federal Fourth Circuit covers the geographical area where most of the U.S. government’s intelligence, surveillance and top-level military agencies - including the NSA and CIA - are headquartered. The ruling "pretty much guts national security journalism in the states in which it matters," Marcy Wheeler writes. That court decision came seven days after the Justice Department released its "News Media Policies" report announcing "significant revisions to the Department’s policies regarding investigations that involve members of the news media." The report offered assurances that "members of the news media will not be subject to prosecution based solely on newsgathering activities." (Hey thanks!) But the document quickly added that the government will take such action "as a last resort" when seeking information that is "essential to a successful investigation or prosecution." Translation: We won’t prosecute journalists for doing their jobs unless we really want to. Over the weekend, some news accounts described Friday’s court decision as bad timing for Attorney General Eric Holder, who has scrambled in recent weeks to soothe anger at the Justice Department’s surveillance of journalists. "The ruling was awkwardly timed for the Obama administration," the New York Times reported. But the ruling wasn’t just "awkwardly timed" - it was revealing, and it underscored just how hostile the Obama White House has become toward freedom of the press. News broke in May that the Justice Department had seized records of calls on more than 20 phone lines used by Associated Press reporters over a two-month period and had also done intensive surveillance of a Fox News reporter that included obtaining phone records and reading his emails. Since then, the Obama administration tried to defuse the explosive reaction without actually retreating from its offensive against press freedom. At a news conference two months ago, when President Obama refused to say a critical word about his Justice Department’s targeted surveillance of reporters, he touted plans to reintroduce a bill for a federal shield law so journalists can protect their sources. But Obama didn’t mention that he has insisted on a "national security exception" that would make such a law approximately worthless for reporters doing the kind of reporting that has resulted in government surveillance - and has sometimes landed them in federal court. Obama’s current notion of a potential shield law would leave his administration fully able to block protection of journalistic sources. In a mid-May article - headlined "White House Shield Bill Could Actually Make It Easier for the Government to Get Journalists’ Sources" - the Freedom of the Press Foundation shed light on the duplicity: As a supposed concession to press freedom, the president was calling for reintroduction of a 2009 Senate bill that "would not have helped the Associated Press in this case, and worse, it would actually make it easier for the Justice Department to subpoena journalists covering national security issues." Whether hyping a scenario for a shield law or citing new Justice Department guidelines for news media policies, the cranked-up spin from the administration’s PR machinery does not change the fact that Obama is doubling down on a commitment to routine surveillance of everyone, along with extreme measures specifically aimed at journalists - and whistleblowers. The administration’s efforts to quash press freedom are in sync with its unrelenting persecution of whistleblowers. The purpose is to further choke off the flow of crucial information to the public, making informed "consent of the governed" impossible while imposing massive surveillance and other violations of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments. Behind the assault on civil liberties is maintenance of a warfare state with huge corporate military contracts and endless war. The whole agenda is repugnant and completely unacceptable. Reporters Without Borders is alarmed by the charges currently facing the American investigative journalist, Barrett Brown, who has written for The Guardian and Vanity Fair. Brown, 31, had been investigating before his arrest, in September 2012, the contents of over five million internal emails released through a hack on the private intelligence company, Stratfor, which were later published by WikiLeaks. Brown is currently in federal custody, facing charges that add up to 105 years in prison. His trial should start next September. “Barrett Brown is not a hacker, he is not a criminal” stated Reporters Without Borders General Secretary, Christophe Deloire, “He did not infiltrate any systems, nor did he appear to have the technical expertise to do so. Above all, Barrett was an investigative journalist who was merely doing his professional duty by looking into the Stratfor emails, an affair of public interest. The sentence of 105 years in prison that he is facing is absurd and dangerous, given that Jeremy Hammond who pleaded guilty for the actual hack on Stratfor is only facing a maximum of 10 years in prison. Threatening a journalist with a possible century-long jail sentence is a scary prospect for journalists investigating the intelligence government contractor industry”. Here is where the United States was 6 months ago when it comes to the freedom of the press. How will this move in another 6 months? Rank Country 1 Finland 2 Netherlands 3 Norway 4 Luxembourg 5 Andorra 6 Denmark 7 Liechtenstein 8 New Zealand 9 Iceland 10 Sweden 11 Estonia 12 Austria 13 Jamaica 14 Switzerland 15 Ireland 16 Czech Republic 17 Germany 18 Costa Rica 19 Namibia 20 Canada 21 Belgium 22 Poland 23 Slovakia 24 Cyprus 25 Cape Verde 26 Australia 27 Uruguay 28 Portugal 29 United Kingdom 30 Ghana 31 Suriname 32 United States 33 Lithuania 34 OECS 35 Slovenia 36 Spain 37 France 38 El Salvador 39 Latvia 40 Botswana 41 Papua New Guinea 42 Romania 43 Niger 44 Trinidad and Tobago 45 Malta 46 Burkina Faso 47 Taiwan 48 Samoa 49 Haiti 50 South Korea 51 Comoros 52 South Africa 53 Japan 54 Argentina 55 Moldova 56 Hungary 57 Italy 58 Hong Kong 59 Senegal 60 Chile 61 Sierra Leone 62 Mauritius 63 Serbia 64 Croatia 65 Central African Republic 66 Tonga 67 Mauritania 68 Bosnia and Herzegovina 69 Guyana 70 Tanzania 71 Kenya 72 Zambia 73 Mozambique 74 Armenia 75 Malawi 76 Republic of the Congo 77 Kuwait 78 Nicaragua 79 Benin 80 Dominican Republic 81 Lesotho 82 Bhutan 83 Togo 84 Greece 85 Kosovo 86 Guinea 87 Bulgaria 88 Madagascar 89 Gabon 90 East Timor 91 Paraguay 92 Guinea-Bissau 93 Seychelles 94 Northern Cyprus 95 Guatemala 96 Ivory Coast 97 Liberia 98 Mongolia 99 Mali 100 Georgia 101 Lebanon 102 Albania 103 Maldives 104 Uganda 105 Peru 106 Kyrgyzstan 107 Fiji 108 Brazil 109 Bolivia 110 Qatar 111 Panama 112 Israel 113 Montenegro 114 United Arab Emirates 115 Nigeria 116 Republic of Macedonia 117 Venezuela 118 Nepal 119 Ecuador 120 Cameroon 121 Chad 122 Brunei 123 Tajikistan 124 South Sudan 125 Algeria 126 Ukraine 127 Honduras 128 Afghanistan 129 Colombia 130 Angola 131 Libya 132 Burundi 133 Zimbabwe 134 Jordan 135 Thailand 136 Morocco 137 Ethiopia 138 Tunisia 139 Indonesia 140 India 141 Oman 142 DR Congo 143 Cambodia 144 Bangladesh 145 Malaysia 146 Palestine 147 Philippines 148 Russia 149 Singapore 150 Iraq 151 Burma 152 Gambia 153 Mexico 154 Turkey 155 Swaziland 156 Azerbaijan 157 Belarus 158 Egypt 159 Pakistan 160 Kazakhstan 161 Rwanda 162 Sri Lanka 163 Saudi Arabia 164 Uzbekistan 165 Bahrain 166 Equatorial Guinea 167 Djibouti 168 Laos 169 Yemen 170 Sudan 171 Cuba 172 Vietnam 173 China 174 Iran 175 Somalia 176 Syria 177 Turkmenistan 178 North Korea 179 Eritrea
Posted on: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:28:11 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015