Podcasts about reporters committee

Reporters Committee for Freedo v. Todd Rokita

In the United States, the right to dissent and speak freely is essential to democracy.  President Donald Trump campaigned on a promise of free speech. But under his administration some forms of speech and viewpoints carry harsh consequences. MPR News host Catharine Richert and her guests talk about who feels free to speak, who feels silenced and whether it's possible for everyone to be heard. It's part of the MPR News Talking Sense series helping Minnesotans have hard political conversations … better. Guests: Jane Kirtley is a professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota where she directs the Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and Law. She also served as executive director of The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press for 14 years, practiced law and worked as a reporter.  Manu Meel is the CEO of BridgeUSA, a national organization that helps young people engage in respectful, productive dialogue and disagreement through its chapters on university campuses across the country.  Subscribe to the MPR News with Angela Davis podcast on: Apple Podcasts, Spotify or RSS.   Use the audio player above to listen to the full conversation.     

From June 15, 2021: A spree of stories has emerged over the last week or so that the Justice Department under the prior administration obtained phone and email records of several journalists, several members of Congress and staffers, and even family members. It has provoked a mini scandal, calls for investigation, howls of rage and serious questions. To discuss it all, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Gabe Rottman of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, former FBI agent Pete Strzok, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic and Berkeley law professor and Lawfare contributing editor Orin Kerr. They talked about what we really know about these stories and what happened in these investigations. Was it all legal? Was it legitimate? How should it be investigated and by whom? And what does it mean that none of the prior attorneys general or deputy attorneys general seem to remember it?To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Local journalism is in crisis — and among its challenges is the urgent need for lawyers to enforce open records laws and assess stories for legal vulnerabilities. In Part One, hear how lawyers from Microsoft and Davis Wright Tremaine joined forces with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Knight Foundation to build ProJourn, an initiative to protect journalists by equipping them with the pro bono legal support they need to tell impactful, truthful stories. Want to hear about new Pursuing Justice releases? Subscribe to our monthly pro bono emails Explore our Pro Bono programs and resources Learn about our Pro Bono Memberships and Scholarships for qualified organizations and individual Please note: CLE is not offered for listening to this podcast, and the views and opinions expressed within represent those of the speakers and not necessarily those of PLI.

Listen above to an audio version of Why PETA Kills, my book, which tells the story of Maya and those of over 30,000 other animals PETA has put to death. On October 18, you can also download the e-book from Amazon for free. (Ignore Kindle Unlimited and click below where it says “$0.00 to buy.”)On October 18, 2014, two PETA representatives backed their van up to a home in Parksley, VA, and threw biscuits to Maya, who was sitting on her porch. They hoped to coax her off her property and allow PETA to claim she was a stray dog “at large” whom they could legally impound.Maya refused to stay off the property and, after grabbing the biscuit, ran back to the safety of her porch. One of the PETA representatives went onto the property and took Maya. Within hours, Maya was dead, illegally killed with a lethal dose of poison.A PETA spokesperson claimed Maya was killed by “mistake,” and defying credulity, explained that the same PETA representative who had earlier sat on the porch with Maya's family talking to them about her care and who was filmed taking Maya from that same porch mistook her for a different dog. The “apology” was not only a devastating admission of guilt but evidence that killing healthy animals was business as usual for PETA employees — so commonplace that the only excuse PETA could offer for Maya's death was that in taking her life, a PETA representative had mistaken her for another healthy animal they had decided to kill. Was it likewise a “mistake” that five other animals ended up dead from the same trailer park and on the same day, too? Though PETA claimed to be “devastated” by Maya's death, the claim was contradicted by the facts and, given its timing, motivated not by honesty, transparency, or genuine contrition but by political necessity as the Virginia Department of Agriculture had opened an investigation into Maya's killing and Virginia's governor was weighing whether to sign into law a bill overwhelmingly passed by the legislature aimed at protecting animals from PETA. As public outrage over PETA's killing of Maya spread, a former PETA employee came forward, shedding even more light on how disingenuous PETA's claim of being devastated at the killing of Maya was. Explaining that killing healthy animals at PETA was not an anomaly but “standard operating procedure,” Heather Harper-Troje, a one-time PETA field worker, publicly uncovered the inner workings at PETA as no former employee ever had. “I know from firsthand experience that the PETA leadership has no problem lying,” she wrote. “I was told regularly to say whatever I had to say in order to get people to surrender animals to me, lying was not only acceptable, it was encouraged.” The purpose of acquiring these animals, according to Harper-Troje, was “to euthanize the[m] immediately.” Maya's family would ultimately sue PETA, alleging conversion of their dog (theft), trespass, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. PETA, in turn, asked the court to throw out the lawsuit based on several questionable claims.First, PETA argued that Maya was legally worthless because she was not licensed, citing an 1887 law that required a dog “to be properly licensed as a condition of being deemed personal property.” Putting aside the irony of a supposed “animal rights” group arguing that Maya had no value, the statute they cited was repealed in 1966. It had not been the law in half a century.Alternatively, PETA argued that Maya had no value beyond the replacement cost for another dog. In other words, PETA's position was that Maya was like a toaster. If you break it, you throw it away and get a new one.Third, PETA argued that they had permission to enter the trailer park from its owner to remove community cats, so they cannot be guilty of trespassing for entering a private residence in that trailer park to kill a family's dog.Fourth, PETA argued that the theft and killing of Maya was not “outrageous,” a prerequisite to the awarding of punitive damages. Finally, in an argument reeking with racist overtones, PETA demanded to know if Maya's family was legally in the U.S. After arguing and losing most of the pre-trial motions — including rulings that the family's immigration status was not relevant to the theft and killing of their dog and that such conduct was, indeed, “outrageous” — as well as facing the specter of being forced to turn over records and testify under oath about PETA's inner workings, and perhaps trying to put the publicity behind their killing of Maya behind them, PETA settled the case, paying Maya's family $49,000.But the condemnation only grew following a series of articles I wrote about Maya's killing, which ultimately led to the publication of Why PETA Kills, my book. Why PETA Kills tells Maya's story and that of over 30,000 others who have also died at their hands, a number that continues to increase by the thousands every year. In 2022, for example, PETA put to death 1,374 out of 1,737 cats. Another 347 went to pounds that also kill animals. Historically, many of the kittens and cats PETA has taken to those pounds have been killed, often within minutes, despite being young (as young as six weeks old) and healthy. Not only do those records prove the lie that all of the animals PETA rounds up to kill are “suffering,” but if those cats and kittens were killed or displaced others who were killed, that puts the overall cat death rate as high as 99%. They only adopted out 15 cats, an adoption rate of ½ of 1% despite millions of “animal loving” supporters, a staff of hundreds, and revenues in excess of $72 million.While dogs fared a little better, 718 out of 1,041 were killed. Roughly 4% were adopted out. And PETA staff also killed almost 80% of other animal companions: 30 out of 38.To date, PETA has killed 46,364 dogs and cats and sent thousands more to be killed at local pounds, that we know of. The number may be many times higher. According to Harper-Troje,I was told regularly to not enter animals into the log, or to euthanize off-site in order to prevent animals from even entering the building. I was told regularly to greatly overestimate the weight of animals whose euthanasia we recorded, in order to account for what would have otherwise been missing ‘blue juice' (the chemical used to euthanize); because that allowed us to euthanize animals off the books.Following the release of Why PETA Kills, PETA filed a run-of-the-mill defamation lawsuit targeting The No Kill Advocacy Center (NKAC), my organization, and me in an attempt to intimidate me and others into silence. But they didn't sue me directly, as they knew it would ultimately fail: truth, after all, is a defense to defamation. More importantly, they feared doing so as suing me would be dangerous for PETA. Not only would it allow me to force the deposition (e.g., testimony under penalty of perjury) of Ingrid Newkirk, the architect of PETA's killing, as well as others at PETA who do the actual killing, but it would allow me to seek documents from PETA that would augment what public records and the PETA employees I spoke with already revealed: that PETA intentionally seeks out animals to kill and that the majority of those animals are healthy and adoptable. Absent a court case, as a private organization, PETA is not required to release that information under state freedom of information laws and has ignored my requests to do so. Instead, PETA named me as a “co-conspirator” but not as a defendant in the complaint, a procedural gimmick that gave PETA the ability to issue a subpoena to (try to) seek the names of PETA employees who, fearing retribution, spoke to me on condition of anonymity; information that was used to corroborate newspaper articles, on the record sources, government documents, testimony and information from civil and criminal cases against PETA, videotape evidence, and admissions of killing by PETA officials. At the same time, that procedural ploy would prevent me from demanding documents and depositions of PETA leadership and staff in return.But PETA's legal tactic failed to take into account two important factors. First, I would never reveal my confidential informants. Second, I did not have to legally do so, given my First Amendment rights as a journalist. In an attempt to force me to, however, PETA filed a motion in court to compel the disclosure of the names, claiming that as an animal advocate, I was not entitled to the protection of the First Amendment, a point of view they hypocritically reject for themselves and which, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the organization founded to protect the rights of journalists by legendary Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee of Pentagon Papers fame, called “alarming.”In assisting me with my legal defense, the Reporters Committee noted,We're concerned about the legal efforts to require Nathan Winograd to reveal the confidential sources for his reporting on PETA's practices. Both the First Amendment and California's constitution protect those who engage in journalistic activity… and any efforts to limit these protections should be alarming for all newsgatherers.Threatened with a fine and jail time if I refused to reveal my sources, my lawyer argued that California Courts have consistently ruled that the First Amendment protects “investigative reporting.” And investigative reporting includes “authors such as Lincoln Steffens and Upton Sinclair [who] exposed widespread corruption and abuse in American life. More recently, social critics such as Rachel Carson, Ralph Nader, Jessica Mitford, and others have written books that have made significant contributions to the public discourse on major issues confronting the American people.”As my attorney argued,Every crusading journalist in that pantheon of heroes cited by the court would have flunked PETA's putative ‘journalism' test, for their journalism was inseparable from their advocacy. Indeed, Sinclair and Nader took their advocacy onto the campaign trail and sought public office. Winograd and NKAC's intertwined investigative and advocacy work are no different from that done by Nader and his nonprofit Public Citizen.The court agreed. Despite PETA hiring one of the most expensive law firms in the world, the Court denied PETA's motion, not only providing me and, more importantly, the animals an important victory but breaking new ground by extending First Amendment protections to new/non-traditional media.Following that ruling, another whistleblower from inside PETA openly came forward and confirmed what my sources had revealed: that PETA staff lie to people to acquire their animals to kill, kill despite adoption alternatives, and indoctrinate people to kill in a cult-like atmosphere she described as “terrifying.”[A]s most new PETA employees are blooming animal rights activists, freshly plucked from college and determined to do whatever it takes to succeed in this demanding, low-paying activist world, PETA's methodology of indoctrination is quite successful. These employees soak it all in like a sponge, as I did at the age of 21 when I started there, and begin to spout the organization's soundbites at every turn. They will start to do so so naturally that they can't see where they themselves end and the organization begins.“Ultimately,” wrote Laura Lee Cascada, a PETA field worker whose job included rounding up animals to kill, “the culture was terrifying and desensitizing — and I gradually felt that my view of death, of taking animals' lives, was being warped, my emotions being stripped away.”Like Heather Harper-Troje before her, Cascada's chilling account described the method whereby employees are intimidated and emotionally manipulated into participating in the killing of animals, an act that came to be euphemistically called to “take care of” an animal (the words “killing” and even “euthanasia” are not used). Employees “were forced to participate in euthanasias they didn't believe in” or “were fired because they refused to do so.”[I]f an employee, like many animal rights advocates who believe in the rights and autonomy of each individual animal, wanted to critically assess whether a euthanasia decision was truly the best thing for an individual animal in his or her unique circumstances, there was a real, true fear of being branded as an advocate for hoarding or a secret supporter of the enemy. Thus, speaking up could have meant being booted from the tribe.Cascada also described numerous examples of healthy animals who were killed for the “good of all animals”:I rescued and cared for a pair of birds from a cruelty case for weeks, bonding with and growing to love them. When the decision was made to euthanize the boy because of a debilitating medical condition, the girl was also euthanized because it was thought that she would be lonely without him. She was one of those lumped into the ‘unadoptable' category PETA brushes past as it explains its euthanasia statistics each year. I was expected and required to swallow my emotions for her for the good of all animals. I was expected to welcome her death as a positive outcome in order to maintain my employment.Another time, I rescued an unloved dog whose body condition and personality were unremarkable, meaning there was no immediate indication for euthanasia. I quickly heard from my mom that she'd be interested in adopting him. I excitedly emailed the manager of the shelter to make this offer but never received a reply. A few days later, I checked in with her and was told that he had already been killed. She recounted being told to lie to people to acquire animals to kill and getting chastised for trying to find them homes. For example, Cascada wrote that she,[R]esponded to a call from a concerned woman who'd found an abandoned days-old kitten under her porch. When I came to pick up the kitten, I had her sign a generic give-up form that spelled out that euthanasia was a possibility. But I was instructed to repeatedly convey that we would do our absolute best, and so that's what I said, even as the woman described her careful search for an organization she knew would work around the clock to help this tiny being pull through. It was my job to make sure I did not leave without that cat — that I said whatever necessary for the woman not to change her mind.The entire way back to PETA's Norfolk, Virginia, headquarters, I sobbed, petting the infant cat in my lap, telling her things would all be OK, even though in my gut I knew it wouldn't, that she never really had a chance. I even began plotting out how I might take a detour and deliver her to a rehabber instead. But how could I explain a missing kitten to the woman waiting with the needle? I couldn't, so I complied without a word.As a result of coming forward, she reported that she was,[C]ontacted by individuals from all over the country expressing their gratitude, and their own fear, about speaking out about their experiences. People who worked at PETA and were forced to lie about euthanasias, people who were forced to euthanize animals they loved as a condition of their employment, and people who were told by leadership that they were worthless. There are dozens, and maybe hundreds, of us. Most are still afraid to break their silence.PETA's lawsuit would ultimately collapse, but four important things came out of my victory against them. First, as noted above, it extended First Amendment protections for investigative journalism to new media for the first time.Second, it demonstrated that PETA may have deep pockets and has no qualms about misusing the court system in an attempt to intimidate people into silence, but their strategy will always be limited by the fact that depositions and the witness stand could compel employees, including Newkirk, to testify under penalty of perjury. Consistent with the overwhelming evidence already available, such testimony would be damning, and PETA knows it. If people stand up to PETA's donor-funded intimidation tactics rather than cower to them, PETA will invariably back down. Third, their empty saber rattling may have led to another whistleblower openly coming forward. Fourth and finally, it led me to Ralph. As fate would have it, on the way to court in the case, my wife and I came upon a little dog who had been hit by a car, bleeding in the gutter. Wrapping him in a coat, we rushed him to the nearest emergency veterinary hospital, where he was given the care he needed, including pain medication. After recovering from his injuries at our house, we found him a loving, new home consistent with our belief in the ethical treatment of animals. Were it not for PETA's meritless lawsuit, we would never have found him. For obvious reasons, I am grateful that it was us and not PETA representatives who saw him on the way to the courthouse. If PETA had gotten to him and history is any guide, Ralph would no longer be alive, put to death with a lethal dose of poison.Because despite all we may still not know about PETA, this much is certain: PETA is letting loose upon the world individuals who not only believe that killing is a good thing and that the living want to die but who are legally armed with lethal drugs that they have already proven — over 46,000 times — that they are not averse to using.To receive future articles and support my fight for the animals, please subscribe. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit news.nathanwinograd.org/subscribe

The National Constitution Center, in partnership with a coalition of leading free speech organizations, is convened a National First Amendment Summit on September 13, 2023 to discuss the increasing threats to freedom of expression and to celebrate the opening of the Center's new First Amendment gallery. This program is presented in partnership with the Freedom Forum, FIRE, the First Amendment Watch at NYU, PEN America, and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Keynote: A Conversation with Salman Rushdie  The keynote panel of the event, a conversation with author and free speech advocate Salman Rushdie about the importance of free speech in a democratic society and the forces of censorship that imperil its existence, was moderated by Suzanne Nossel, CEO of PEN America. Panel 1: The Origins of the First Amendment and Its Central Role in Democracy Probing the origins of the First Amendment and its critical role as a check on the government Akhil Reed Amar, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science at Yale University Jacob Mchangama, founder and CEO of The Future of Free Speech Project; Research Professor at Vanderbilt University Stephen Solomon, Marjorie Deane Professor of Journalism at New York University; founder of NYU's First Amendment Watch Moderator: Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center Panel 2: The First Amendment in the Courts Exploring the current legal controversies filling the daily headlines—from defamation to book banning to threatening language Floyd Abrams, senior counsel at Cahill Gordon & Reindel Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University Lyrissa Lidsky, Raymond & Miriam Ehrlich Chair in U.S. Constitutional Law at Florida Law Moderator: Bruce Brown, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Panel 3: The First Amendment on Campus and Online Examining the increasing conflicts involving free speech on campuses and online in an age of social media, artificial intelligence, and other new technologies Will Creeley, legal director at FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression Jeannie Suk Gersen, John H. Watson, Jr., Professor of Law at Harvard Law School Nadine Strossen, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law, Emerita, at New York Law School Moderator: Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center Stay Connected and Learn More  Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

In this weekend's episode, three segments from this past week's Washington Journal  First –   Climate Power executive director Lori Lodes and Heritage Foundation senior research fellow Jack Spencer discuss the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act on clean energy job creation. Then - University of Houston political science professor Brandon Rottinghaus discusses his new study that found scandals don't have the impact on politicians like they used to. Plus - Gabe Rottman of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press discusses that recent police raid on a small-town Kansas newspaper -- and broader concerns over press freedom in the U-S. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's been about six months since the Attorney General issued new guidelines on compulsory process to members of the press in criminal and national security investigations, and two officials of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press—Bruce Brown and Gabe Rottman—wrote a detailed analysis of the document in two parts for Lawfare. Rottman joined Lawfare Editor-in-Chief Benjamin Wittes to go through the document carefully: the long history that led to it, the shifting policies that have gotten more restrictive over the years since the Supreme Court ruled in Branzburg v. Hayes, the ramp-up of leak investigations and reporter subpoenas in the Obama and Trump administrations, and the new policy that creates a red line policy against them under most (but not all) circumstances. They talked about the document, about why the Justice Department has forsworn a historic and upheld authority, and about what it means for reporters and criminal investigations going forward. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Attorney Aaron Mackey joins Tim to talk about how intelligence agencies, law enforcement and private companies are buying your data as part of larger surveillance operations. Is this against the spirit of the Fourth Amendment rights to privacy?  Aaron works for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, or the EFF. The foundation is the leading nonprofit organization defending civil liberties in the digital world. It champions user privacy, free expression, and innovation. In this episode, Aaron talks about your privacy. How much you have, who's invading it, how they're doing it. And most importantly, what they're doing with your personal information. https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/shapingopinion/Swiping_Your_Privacy_auphonic.mp3 You probably already know that you don't have much privacy. When you leave your house, cameras are watching. You have cameras throughout the city, sending images back to some central security hub. Then you have cameras homeowners install to watch their own property. In the process, you can't walk down any street without the possibility that you're being watched and recorded. But it's not just cameras. That smartphone in your pocket may be the most prolific source of your private data. The cloud knows where you are, where you were, how long you spent there, and in some cases, where you're going. It knows what you're thinking about based on what it hears you saying through the microphone and the search engine in the device itself. Did you use a social media app like Facebook, Twitter or Instagram? It's not just each of those sites that know what you're saying and doing. It's the network that the phone itself is connected to.  They know…and they share. They share your information, and you don't know who's seeing it, and what they're doing with it. You don't know how you're being judged. Aaron Mackey is a senior attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I mentioned all of this to him, but I asked him the big question on my mind. We know these companies have our information, but is it all harmless? Links The Electronic Frontier Foundation Big Brother Watching? Government agencies buying cell phone, internet data to track Americans, Just the News Carpenter v. United States (2018) Supreme Court Case, National Constitution Center About this Episode's Guest Aaron Mackey Aaron Mackey is a senior attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). He works on free speech, anonymity, privacy, government surveillance and transparency. Before joining EFF in 2015, Aaron was in Washington, D.C. where he worked on speech, privacy, and freedom of information issues at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown Law. Aaron graduated from Berkeley Law in 2012, where he worked for EFF while a student in the Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic. He also holds an LLM from Georgetown Law. Prior to law school, Aaron was a journalist at the Arizona Daily Star in Tucson, Arizona. He received his undergraduate degree in journalism and English from the University of Arizona in 2006, where he met his amazing wife, Ashley. They have two young children.  

https://youtu.be/s5Jhj1smhFI With the risk of kinetic war between the US and Russia becoming more and more likely each day, the United States is already marshalling its forces to silence domestic and international dissent to the conflict. In this episode, I examine this weekend's cancellation of Consortium News, Mintpress News, and Geopolitics and Empire from PayPal and place them in the historical context of wartime censorship in the United States. Episode 214 of the Liberty Weekly Podcast is Brought to you by: CrowdHealth Use promo code LW99 to get your first three months for $99/mo Liberty Weekly Substack The Liberty Weekly Patreon Page: help support the show and gain access to tons of bonus content! Become a patron today! Show Notes: PayPal Cancels CN Account; May Seize Balance – Consortium News About – Consortium News MintPress News on Twitter: "ICYMI: MintPress & @BTHeadline Founder & Executive Director @MnarMuh's statement on our removal from PayPal. https://t.co/AxEmRx0qm0" / Twitter MintPress News About Mint Press News / Mnar Muhawesh Founder Let's Go Behind The Headlines | Indiegogo Liberty Conservative News on Twitter: "Popular Anti-War Channel Geopolitics and Empire Gets Banned from Paypal https://t.co/XiI6aKphcB" / Twitter Avoiding Bloodshed? US Journalists and Censorship in Wartime (tandfonline.com) Popular Anti-War Channel Geopolitics and Empire Gets Banned from Paypal - Liberty Conservative News Nina Jankowicz

With the risk of kinetic war between the US and Russia becoming more and more likely each day, the United States is already marshalling its forces to silence domestic and international dissent to the conflict. In this episode, I examine this weekend's cancellation of Consortium News, Mintpress News, and Geopolitics and Empire from PayPal and place them in the historical context of wartime censorship in the United States. Episode 214 of the Liberty Weekly Podcast is Brought to you by: CrowdHealth Use promo code LW99 to get your first three months for $99/mo Liberty Weekly Substack The Liberty Weekly Patreon Page: help support the show and gain access to tons of bonus content! Become a patron today! Show Notes: PayPal Cancels CN Account; May Seize Balance – Consortium News About – Consortium News MintPress News on Twitter: "ICYMI: MintPress & @BTHeadline Founder & Executive Director @MnarMuh's statement on our removal from PayPal. https://t.co/AxEmRx0qm0" / Twitter MintPress News About Mint Press News / Mnar Muhawesh Founder Let's Go Behind The Headlines | Indiegogo Liberty Conservative News on Twitter: "Popular Anti-War Channel Geopolitics and Empire Gets Banned from Paypal https://t.co/XiI6aKphcB" / Twitter Avoiding Bloodshed? US Journalists and Censorship in Wartime (tandfonline.com) Popular Anti-War Channel Geopolitics and Empire Gets Banned from Paypal - Liberty Conservative News Nina Jankowicz

The Virginia Department of Education voluntarily handed over a file on Tuesday that it previously blocked from public release; A Charlottesville-based medical company has received emergency use authorization for a new rapid test for COVID-19; City officials released a draft plan this week on the methods Richmond wants to use to tackle climate change; and other local news stories.

John List Gone, Larry Ray Trial Blues by Matthew Russell Lee, 3/26/22 There was a John named Randy Levinson It was coercion but he called it win-win They named him in the trial of Larry Ray But kept 120 other Johns out of the way There was the power couple running culture for the Gap That Claudia Drury was suffocated they didn't give a crap There was art historian working an auction house Word on the street he likes 'em quiet as a mouse There was the school architect working up at Yale If they arrested him he quickly get on bail There was the hedge funder, museum with his name He laid down his donation and then on it he came Next up might be the nasty global diamond dealer While he measures the carats of girls' souls he is a stealer Also on deck is a veteran travel writer And where's Talia Ray and when will they indict her? Support: https://www.patreon.com/posts/64280088 Story: http://www.innercitypress.com/sdny2ex... John List Gone But Back As Piltch & Levinson IDed Now Inner City Press On Larry Ray Trial By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell Book BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN SDNY COURT/UN GATE, March 25 – In the course of covering and live-tweeting the US v. Larry Ray sex cult trial for two weeks, Inner City Press has obtained and published a number of the exhibits. The same occurred on the night of March 21: a list of Ray's victim Claudia Drury's prostitution clients. Inner City Press uploaded it to its DocumentCloud, and spoke about the list in a brief vlog on the morning of March 22 on the way into the Southern District of New York courthouse to cover the day's trial starting at 9 am. Just before 10 am the prosecutors emailed reporters and asked that the exhibit be taken down. In an abundance of caution, Inner City Press deleted the document from its DocumentCloud - and wrote to several accounts at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press asking for a statement of applicable First Amendment law. By the afternoon, having covered the trial until Larry Ray citing a seizure was taken out on a stretched (Inner City Press tweeted video here), a second request came in, to delete the March 21 evening tweet of the list, which still had an image from DocumentCloud.

What does it mean to be Black media? And how can media that targets Black audiences be culturally competent?The Pivot Fund and Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press hosted this conversation on Feb. 23, 2022, about Black media ownership and the support systems they need to be successful and serve the Black community.Tracie Powell, The Pivot Fund's CEO, moderated the discussion with Kamesha Laurry, an attorney and fellow at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.Panelists included:  Joseph A. Torres, co-author of "News for All the People: The Epic Story of Race and the American Media"  Sara Lomax-Reese, co-founder of URL Media and president and CEO of WURD Radio Cheryl Thompson-Morton, director of the Black Media Initiative at the Center for Community Media at City University of New York Hiram Jackson, the CEO of Real Times Media Resources:  Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press hotline: 1-800-336-4243. rcfp.org  The Pivot Fund is a new venture philanthropy organization dedicated to investing $500 million into independent BIPOC-led community news outlets through grantmaking, development support, and strategic consulting.For more information on The Pivot Fund, visit thepivotfund.org.

Eve Burton is the Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer at Hearst, a leading global diversified media information and services company. Their major interests span cable entertainment, syndication interactive, emerging digital media, and many more. She is a member of Hearst Board of Directors.    Additionally, she's a member of Hearst Venture Committee, which funds digital initiatives and is the co-founder of an overseas HearstLab, which fosters innovation and investment in early-stage businesses led by women. Eve also sits on the board of directors of Intuit and previously was on the board of directors of AOL until it was sold to Verizon.   She's a member of the advisory board of David and Helen Gurley Brown Institute for media innovation at Stanford and Columbia universities and as a trustee of Middlebury College.   In our conversation, Eve talks about the importance of inclusion, building the HearstLab, and fostering innovation and change.    Things you will learn in this episode:   Creating an environment where people could be themselves The three goals of HearstLab How to speak the truth to power The importance of using coaches Eve's Ten Lessons for Success   Quotes   "You don't just learn from people who mentor you; you also learn from people whom you come across." - Eve Burton   "Empathy is a critical component of successful interaction with people. You're not born to it; You have to learn it." - Eve Burton   "Diversity is a fact, but inclusion is a choice." - Eve Burton   "No matter what people say, we all want to be included, and we want to be better together."  - Eve Burton Resources Eve on Linkedin   Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Frank A. Bennack' s Tribute to Eve Burton WBL Summit 2019 Priori Interview Hearst on Linkedin Hearst on Twitter   Hearst HearstLab

The infinitely funny and smart David Cross stopped by for a chat and we couldn't contain our excitement. You know him from Mr. Show, Arrested Development, The Increasingly Poor Decisions of Todd Margaret (tip from Wilson: the best hidden gem show you'll find), and his hilarious standup specials. And now you know him as a Useful Idiot. We talk comedy: creating a standup special, using audience feedback to perfect his set, and how he felt when Netflix took down an episode of w/ Bob and David for having a character in blackface. We talk politics: why Bernie would've won, why (some) Hillary Clinton supporters were blinded by tribalism, and why Andrew Yang should “fuck all the way off.” And for good measure we geek out about our favorite David Cross roles and bits. Come back Monday for the extended interview where we take a deep dive into his new special “I'm From the Future,” politics, and more. Plus, Joe Manchin and the crackhead daughters, military-grade snow removal, and naked but masked. It's all this, and more, on this week's episode of Useful Idiots. Check it out. And subscribe to hear the ad-free version. Your subscription goes to help the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press and independent journalists everywhere. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Subscribe at http://usefulidiots.substack.com for the ad-free version, which helps independent journalists through the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press. He wrote and directed multiple classic, culture-defining American movies. He created groundbreaking documentaries, interviewing Putin, debunking Russiagate, and uncovering JFK's murder. He won three Academy Awards. There was only one thing left for Oliver Stone to do: Become a Useful Idiot. Stone's new documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass, uses newly declassified and reexamined footage to present a case that conspiracy theories about the president's death are actually “conspiracy facts.” And it creates a big debate on Useful Idiots. Watch the pod, watch the doc, then let us know: do you agree with Matt, Katie, or Oliver? Who really killed President John F. Kennedy? Plus, this week's Dems and Republicans Suck finally breaks Matt, leading to an impassioned stump speech of the good of all Americans. Once we stop laughing, we're pretty sure we'll realize he's telling the truth. It's Oliver Stone on Useful Idiots. Don't miss this one. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Subscribe at usefulidiots.substack.com for an ad-free listen and extended interview On this week's show, award-winning journalist David Sirota justly rips Democrats for not only selling out the American people but for enabling Right Wing authoritarianism: “Democrats get elected promising to help people, promising various programs to directly help people. And then you get into power and you shield your corporate donors who don't want that change. You choose your corporate donors and you betray your promises to voters. What you're saying to voters is that democracy doesn't matter. And if you do that, there's going to be a lot of voters who say, ‘Look, I just voted for you. I just used democracy to put you in power. You're saying we got to get Donald Trump out of here because he's not helping people. I have to support you only because of democracy. You're proving to me that democracy doesn't matter.'" If Dems keep wasting their time in power, they're going to stop holding power and push people into the arms of people like Trump, which is what happened in 2016. Listen to this interview with the exceptionally interesting, intelligent and prolific David Sirota, and then listen to Meltdown on Audible. Plus, Dems are cutting everything Dem voters want in their bill, and so much more vaccine debating. And don't worry, there's some poop stuff in here too. Heads up: this week, we have begun donating a large portion of our profits to the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press to help independent journalists in need. To help this, we're starting ad reads this week. If you want to donate to indie media (and not have to hear ads), become a subscriber today to hear our chat with David about an important study about the Weimar Republic and the rise of Nazism. And NO we're not comparing Trump to Hitler. It's all this, and more, on the Halloween episode of Useful Idiots. Check it out. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A spree of stories has emerged over the last week or so that the Justice Department under the prior administration obtained phone and email records of several journalists, several members of Congress and staffers, and even family members. It has provoked a mini scandal, calls for investigation, howls of rage and serious questions. To discuss it all, Benjamin Wittes sat down with Gabe Rottman of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, former FBI agent Pete Strzok, Lawfare senior editor Quinta Jurecic and Berkeley law professor and Lawfare contributing editor Orin Kerr. They talked about what we really know about these stories and what happened in these investigations. Was it all legal? Was it legitimate? How should it be investigated and by whom? And what does it mean that none of the prior attorneys general or deputy attorneys general seem to remember it? See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Advocating for press freedom around the globe has long been a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. The Trump administration changed the rules, but what can Biden do to restore the public's faith in the press? "Doorstep" co-hosts Nick Gvosdev and Tatiana Serafin speak with Stephen J. Adler, board chair of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Carlos Martínez de la Serna, program director for Committee to Protect Journalists.

Advocating for press freedom around the globe has long been a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. The Trump administration changed the rules, but what can Biden do to restore the public's faith in the press? "Doorstep" co-hosts Nick Gvosdev and Tatiana Serafin speak with Stephen J. Adler, board chair of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Carlos Martínez de la Serna, program director for Committee to Protect Journalists.

Chris Garaffa, web developer, technologist, security and privacy consultant, talks to us about reports that Facebook and Instagram are threatening to charge Apple users for their services if they don’t let the companies track their movements through apps and what these privacy changes mean for users. We also talk about Signal purchasing ads on Facebook showing the extremely detailed information that is harvested from individuals by the social media giant, and their justification for not running those ads. Trupti Patel, Lead DMV Organizer for One Fair Wage, joins us in a conversation about recent media reports on alleged labor shortages, with certain industries arguing that unemployment benefits are preventing employees from returning to work, and how it’s not a right to own a business if you rely on paying poverty wages to workers. We also talk about how employers cheat workers out of their wages, with $287 million in stolen wages in 2019 alone, and how the pandemic has also exacerbated this problem. Margaret Flowers, a doctor, co-director of Popular Resistance and a member of the steering committee of HOPE - Health Over Profit, an organization working to achieve a national improved “Medicare for All” healthcare system, joins us to talk about the announcement by the Biden administration supporting waiving IP protections for COVID-19 vaccine,and the insanity of tying global health to profits. We also talk about the CDC eviction moratorium being struck down by a federal judge, what this means for tenants, and the tragic case of whistleblower Daniel Hale, who is now in solitary confinement.Esther Iverem, multidisciplinary author and independent journalist, host of "On The Ground: Voices of Resistance From the Nation's Capital" on Pacifica Radio, and founding member of DC Poets Against the War, joins our Trends with Benefits segment to talk about a report from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press revealing the extent of police violence against journalists in the U.S., and a new poll commissioned by the Alliance of Democracies Foundation which found that the US is seen around the world as more of a threat to democracy than Russia and China.

Social justice issues have been at the forefront of protests across our nation. In order to report on these protests, journalists have been on the front lines of the action. Yet, due to a lack of public trust, journalists are often targeted by law enforcement or counter protesters. American broadcast journalist Walter Kronkite, famously said, “Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy.”So what are the rights of journalists during protests? What about public citizens? On Lawyer 2 Lawyer, host Craig Williams is joined by Shannon Jankowski, the E.W. Scripps Legal Fellow at Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and David Bralow, Legal Director for the Press Freedom Defense Fund & Senior Vice President, Law, for the First Look Institute, Inc., as they discuss incidents of mistreatment of journalists by law enforcement during recent protests. Together, we explore freedom of the press generally and in the context of protests; and talk briefly about the legalities surrounding the filming and photographing of the police by citizens. Shannon Jankowski is the E.W. Scripps Legal Fellow at Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. David Bralow is Legal Director for the Press Freedom Defense Fund and Senior Vice President, Law, for the First Look Institute, Inc.

Social justice issues have been at the forefront of protests across our nation. In order to report on these protests, journalists have been on the front lines of the action. Yet, due to a lack of public trust, journalists are often targeted by law enforcement or counter protesters. American broadcast journalist Walter Kronkite, famously said, “Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy.”So what are the rights of journalists during protests? What about public citizens? On Lawyer 2 Lawyer, host Craig Williams is joined by Shannon Jankowski, the E.W. Scripps Legal Fellow at Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and David Bralow, Legal Director for the Press Freedom Defense Fund & Senior Vice President, Law, for the First Look Institute, Inc., as they discuss incidents of mistreatment of journalists by law enforcement during recent protests. Together, we explore freedom of the press generally and in the context of protests; and talk briefly about the legalities surrounding the filming and photographing of the police by citizens. Shannon Jankowski is the E.W. Scripps Legal Fellow at Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. David Bralow is Legal Director for the Press Freedom Defense Fund and Senior Vice President, Law, for the First Look Institute, Inc.

Social justice issues have been at the forefront of protests across our nation.  In order to report on these protests, journalists have been on the front lines of the action. Yet, due to a lack of public trust, journalists are often targeted by law enforcement or counter protesters.  American broadcast journalist Walter Kronkite, famously said, “Freedom of the press is not just important to democracy, it is democracy.”So what are the rights of journalists during protests? What about public citizens? On Lawyer 2 Lawyer, host Craig Williams is joined by Shannon Jankowski, the E.W. Scripps Legal Fellow at Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and David Bralow, Legal Director for the Press Freedom Defense Fund & Senior Vice President, Law, for the First Look Institute, Inc., as they discuss incidents of mistreatment of journalists by law enforcement during recent protests. Together, we explore freedom of the press generally and in the context of protests; and talk briefly about the legalities surrounding the filming and photographing of the police by citizens. Shannon Jankowski is the E.W. Scripps Legal Fellow at Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. David Bralow is Legal Director for the Press Freedom Defense Fund and Senior Vice President, Law, for the First Look Institute, Inc.

Clay welcomes White House Correspondent under 5 administrations April Ryan to hear what she’s learned pushing our leaders to answer tough questions, and how things have changed under President Biden.  Will he be able to help bridge the urban/rural divide, get infrastructure done, and unite us as a country?  April lets us know she thinks there's a decent chance-- if we can get everyone to understand the issues that are truly at stake.  Can we?Guest:April RyanWhite House Correspondent April Ryan has a unique vantage point as the only black female reporter covering urban issues from the White House – a position she has held since the Clinton era. Her position as a White House Correspondent has afforded her unusual insight into the racial sensitivities, issues, and attendant political struggles of our nation’s past presidents.  April can be seen almost daily on CNN as a political analyst. She is also the Washington D.C Bureau Chief on TheGrio. She has been featured in Essence, Vogue, Cosmopolitan and Elle magazines – to name a few. April Ryan has served on the board of the prestigious White House Correspondents Association. She is one of only three African Americans in the Association’s over 100-year history to serve on its board. She is also an esteemed member of the National Press Club.  In 2015, Ms. Ryan was nominated for an NAACP Image Award (Outstanding Literary Work - Debut Author) for her first book.  2016 National Council of Negro Women, Mary McCloud Bethune Trailblazer. In 2019 April Ryan became an honorary member of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated and was recognized as the 2019 Freedom of the Press Award Winner by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. April was nominated in 2021 with the NAACP Image Award for Social Justice Impact. April is a Baltimore native and Morgan State University graduate, and she gives back to this community by serving as a mentor to aspiring journalists and assisting with developing “up and coming” broadcasters.  April considers her greatest life’s work raising her two daughters, Ryan and Grace – who are phenomenal young women.  April Ryan is the author of the award-winning book, The Presidency in Black and White, and At Mama's Knee: Mothers and Race in Black and White (December 2016), where she looks at race relations through the lessons and wisdom that mothers have given their children. Her latest book is Under Fire: Reporting from the Front Lines of the Trump White House.Get more from April with: Twitter | Her Website |The Grio | Author of “Under Fire” | And other books! Host: Clay Aiken has sold 6 million albums, authored a New York Times bestseller, and ran for Congress in North Carolina in 2014 almost unseating a popular Republican incumbent.Follow Clay Aiken further on: Twitter  | Instagram | Facebook Email your questions to podcasts@politicon.com FOLLOW @POLITICON AND GO TO POLITICON.COM

Brian Stelter speaks with Los Angeles Times DC bureau chief Kimbriell Kelly, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editor George Stanley, and Katie Townsend, legal director at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. The trio of Freedom of Information experts preview Sunshine Week, a weeklong initiative promoting open government. "There's a lot more that needs to be done to increase transparency to government at both a federal level and at a local level," Kelly says. To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

Reporters Committee for Freed v. FBI

Over the summer, at the insistence of President Trump, the Senate confirmed Michael Pack as the new director of U.S. Agency for Government Media. Since then, the venerable Voice of America and its sister broadcast outlets have been plunged into chaos. MU Journalism School students talked to two former VOA directors, a reporter fired by Pack and a lawyer for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press about the chaos enveloping what has been one of the nation's most effective vectors for "soft power."

In this episode, the Thompson Center was joined by Shannon Jankowski and Diego Zambrano to discuss the current reach of Anti-SLAPP statutes and the potential for further implementation. Shannon Jankowski is the E.W. Scripps Legal Fellow at Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, where she works to protect First Amendment freedoms and the newsgathering rights of journalists. Diego Zambrano is an Assistant Professor at Stanford Law School with expertise in transnational law and arbitration.

1. Miles de personas tuvieron que protestar anoche otra vez frente a La Fortaleza para exigir que el gobierno haga algo para detener los feminicidios. Aquí siguen matando mujeres y la gobernadora Wanda Vázquez no hace nada. Menos hace la Procuradora de la Mujer Lersy Boria. Las dos son cómplices de los feminicidios. 2. Van 24 feminicidios directos, otros 10 feminicidios indirectos (por venganzas y narcotráfico), 8 intentos de feminicidio entre julio a septiembre de este año y 18 mujeres desaparecidas en lo que va de año. Ayer se confirmó que el cuerpo encontrado en Dorado es el de Rosimar Rodríguez, la joven secuestrada en Toa Baja 3. La gente sigue violando el distanciamiento social. Secretario de Salud advierte sobre nuevas actividades que violan la Orden Ejecutiva. Alega que el fin de semana no respetaron la Orden Ejecutiva. 4. Alega el Secretario que va a transformar la operación en el Departamento de Salud, que la prioridad es recuperar la confianza del pueblo y que está dispuesto a quedarse después del 2 de enero en el puesto. 5. Movimiento Hostosiano anuncia que respaldará al partido Victoria Ciudadana 6. Sobre los atornillados: Gobernadora retira nombramiento de su oficial de prensa al Negociado de Telecomunicaciones 7. Escándalo político sacude a México. Se comprueba que le pagaron millones a la actriz Angélica Rivera para que se casara con el que fue presidente Enrique Peña Nieto. La pregunta obligada es: ¿Habrá en Puerto Rico alguien igual de fabricado? 8. Fundamedios y Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press denuncian las violaciones contra la libertad de expresión en los Estados Unidos ante la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos 9. La OMS confirma cuál fue el origen del coronavirus, que ya ha matado a más de un millón de personas 10. Secretario de Estado de EE.UU. crea una coalición global contra el régimen comunista chino es una amenaza. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/sandrarodriguezcotto/support

Speakers Tim Wheeler (Moderator) Associate Editor and Senior Writer, Bay Journal, Bay Journal Adam Marshall (Speaker) Knight Foundation Litigation Attorney, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Jimmy Tobias (Speaker) Independent Reporter, The Nation, The Guardian, Pacific Standard Timothy Whitehouse (Speaker) PEER Description With government agencies increasingly prohibiting their staff from talking to reporters, how can the press find out what the public needs and has a right to know? In this session, we’ll talk about the uses and abuses of the Freedom of Information Act and share tips on how to work around recalcitrant PIOs. We’ll also hear about a new initiative of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press to provide legal help to local or regional news organizations and journalists to pursue enterprise and investigative journalism.

Recorded at the Miami Book Fair, in partnership with the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Laura Moscoso from the Centro de Periodismo Investigativo in Puerto Rico; Norah Gamez-Torres, who covers Cuba for the Nuevo Herald and the MIami Herald; and Emily Michot from the Miami Herald, who worked with Julie K. Brown to break the Jeffrey Epstein story. This fascinating discussion serves as a timely reminder of the centrality of journalism to the health of our democracy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the second half of my interview with EFF's Aaron Mackey, we'll discuss why our federal agencies are not enforcing the laws already on the books that should be protecting your privacy, the real implications of tracking someone's location, other ways in which we're tracked, and how you - as a consumer and citizen - can best defend yourself and advocate for better enforcement and protections. Aaron Mackey works on free speech, privacy, government surveillance and transparency. Before joining EFF in 2015, Aaron was in Washington, D.C. where he worked on speech, privacy, and freedom of information issues at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown Law. Aaron graduated from Berkeley Law in 2012, where he worked for EFF while a student in the Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic. He also holds an LLM from Georgetown Law. Prior to law school, Aaron was a journalist at the Arizona Daily Star in Tucson, Arizona. He received his undergraduate degree in journalism and English from the University of Arizona in 2006, where he met his amazing wife, Ashley. They have two young children. Further Info: Donate to EFF: https://supporters.eff.org/donate/Surveillance Self Defense Guide: https://ssd.eff.orgEFF's California lawsuit: https://www.eff.org/cases/geolocation-privacyReport abused location information: geolocation@eff.orgEFF IMSI Catcher white paper: https://www.eff.org/files/2019/07/09/whitepaper_imsicatchers_eff_0.pdf

In January 2019, Motherboard broke a story about how cellular providers were allowing your location information to be sold to several third parties, effectively allowing anyone to buy the real-time location of any cell phone. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has brought a suit against AT&T and others, claiming that this practice broke several state and federal laws. Today in part one of my interview with the EFF's Aaron Mackey, we'll discuss this case and why our location data can expose so much about us. Aaron Mackey works on free speech, privacy, government surveillance and transparency. Before joining EFF in 2015, Aaron was in Washington, D.C. where he worked on speech, privacy, and freedom of information issues at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown Law. Aaron graduated from Berkeley Law in 2012, where he worked for EFF while a student in the Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic. He also holds an LLM from Georgetown Law. Prior to law school, Aaron was a journalist at the Arizona Daily Star in Tucson, Arizona. He received his undergraduate degree in journalism and English from the University of Arizona in 2006, where he met his amazing wife, Ashley. They have two young children. Further Info: Donate to EFF: https://supporters.eff.org/donate/Surveillance Self Defense Guide: https://ssd.eff.orgEFF's California lawsuit: https://www.eff.org/cases/geolocation-privacyReport abused location information: geolocation@eff.org

O Brasil caiu três posições no Ranking Mundial da Liberdade de Imprensa e está no 105º lugar, em uma lista que analisa 180 países. Segundo a organização Repórteres Sem Fronteiras, que realizou o levantamento publicado em 18/04, o assassinato de 4 jornalistas, ano passado, pelo exercício da profissão e a eleição de Bolsonaro, com uma campanha de desinformações e ataques à imprensa, foram fatores decisivos para a pior colocação do país desde 2014. Nesse contexto, qual a importância da liberdade de imprensa na manutenção da democracia? Qual a influência da internet na garantia desse direito? E de que forma a perda de credibilidade no jornalismo abre precedentes para o aumento da difusão de informações falsas? A 4ª edição do Redação Aberta recebe a especialista norte-americana Jane Kirtley, da Faculdade de Jornalismo da University of Minnesota e diretora-executiva por 14 anos do The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Além dela, o jornalista Vagner Alencar, da Agência Mural de Jornalismo das Periferias, e a jornalista Nina Weingrill, da Énois, discutem sobre Liberdade de Imprensa na Era Digital. O Redação Aberta é uma parceria da Énois com o City Bureau. Saiba mais sobre o projeto acessando enoisconteudo.com.br/redacaoaberta.

Carol Marin talks with Adam Marshall from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press about how reporters can use the Freedom of Information Act to hold government officials and agencies responsible.

Examining the special relationship American Jews have had with the law, and tackling some of the thorniest controversies about the separation of Church and State. Dahlia Lithwick is a senior editor at Slate, and in that capacity, has been writing their "Supreme Court Dispatches" and "Jurisprudence" columns since 1999. Her work has appeared in the New York Times, Harper’s, The New Yorker, The Washington Post, The New Republic, and Commentary, among other places. She is host of Amicus, Slate’s award-winning biweekly podcast about the law and the Supreme Court. She was Newsweek’s legal columnist from 2008 until 2011. In 2018 Lithwick received the American Constitution Society’s Progressive Champion Award, the Hillman Prize for Opinion and Analysis, and was inducted into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. In 2017, Lithwick was the recipient of a Golden Pen Award from the Legal Writing Institute; the Virginia Bar Association’s award for Excellence in Legal Journalism; and the 2017 award for Outstanding Journalist in Law from the Burton Foundation for a distinguished career in journalism in law. Lithwick won a 2013 National Magazine Award for her columns on the Affordable Care Act. She has been twice awarded an Online Journalism Award for her legal commentary. She was inducted into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in October, 2018. Lithwick has held visiting faculty positions at the University of Georgia Law School, the University of Virginia School of Law, and the Hebrew University Law School in Jerusalem. Ms. Lithwick has delivered the annual Constitution Day Lecture at the United States Library of Congress in 2012 and 2011. She has been a featured speaker on the main stage at the Chautauqua Institution. She speaks frequently on the subjects of criminal justice reform, reproductive freedom, religion in the courts. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has called her “spicy.” Lithwick was the first online journalist invited to be on the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press. She serves on the board of the Jefferson Center for Free Expression. Ms. Lithwick has testified before Congress about access to justice in the era of the Roberts Court. She has appeared on CNN, ABC, The Colbert Report, the Daily Show and is a frequent guest on The Rachel Maddow Show. Ms. Lithwick earned her BA in English from Yale University and her JD degree from Stanford University. She is currently working on a new book, Lady Justice, for Penguin Press. She is co-author of Me Versus Everybody (Workman Press, 2006) (with Brandt Goldstein) and of I Will Sing Life (Little, Brown 1992) (with Larry Berger). Her work has been featured in numerous anthologies including Jewish Jocks (2012), What My Mother Gave Me: Thirty-one Women on the Gifts That Mattered Most (2013), About What was Lost (2006); A Good Quarrel (2009); Going Rouge: Sarah Palin, An American Nightmare (2009); and Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary (2008).

Most Canadians trust media, but a Global News survey found that nearly just as many worry about fake news being weaponized. With major news stories breaking around us, how to interpret the information contained in this story and poll? Read more about the Global News story here: https://globalnews.ca/news/4964202/canadians-fake-news-weaponized/ Subscribe to the Roy Green Show on Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or anywhere else you find your favourite podcasts. Guest:  Professor Jane Kirtley, Professor of media ethics and law at the Hubbard School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Minnesota, served as executive director of The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press for 14 years, author of ‘Media Law & Media Ethics Today' See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On today's episode of Loud & Clear, Brian Becker and John Kiriakou are joined by Ahmed Rashid, a journalist and the best-selling author of “Pakistan on the Brink: The Future of America, Pakistan, and Afghanistan” and several books on Afghanistan and Central Asia, including “The Resurgence of Central Asia, Islam or Nationalism.”More than 17 years after US troops entered Afghanistan and overthrew the Taliban, that country is still in a state of disarray. In just the past 48 hours, at least 20 Afghan police officers were killed in a Taliban ambush, a US special forces officer was killed, three American soldiers were killed in a bomb blast, and the Afghan government announced that it may delay the upcoming presidential election. Tuesday’s weekly series is False Profits—A Weekly Look at Wall Street and Corporate Capitalism with Daniel Sankey. Financial policy analyst Daniel Sankey joins the show. A journalists group, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, has filed a federal motion asking that all documents related to a pending indictment of Julian Assange in the Eastern District of Virginia be unsealed. Federal prosecutors oppose the motion and say that a recent leak that seemed to indicate that a secret indictment already exists, was inadvertent and should not be construed as confirmation. Judge Leonie Brinkema, who reserves all national security cases for herself, will make a decision. Brian and John speak with Suzie Dawson. She is an activist and the president of the Internet Party of New Zealand. The Guardian is reporting today that Paul Manafort held secret meetings with Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London in 2013, 2015, and 2016. Manafort calls the report “100 percent false” and Wikileaks said there is literally nothing true about it. Meanwhile, the Special Counsel’s office says that Manafort has violated the terms of his plea deal by continually lying to investigators and should be sentenced to prison immediately. Coleen Rowley, a former FBI special agent who in 2002 was named Time Magazine person of the year along with two other whistleblowers, and Daniel Lazare, a journalist and author of three books—“The Frozen Republic,” “The Velvet Coup,” and “America's Undeclared War,” joins the show. Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, accused Russia on Monday of taking “outlaw actions” against Ukrainian ships in an incident at sea this weekend and vowed that sanctions punishing Russia’s annexation of Crimea would continue. Haley said, “outlaw actions like this one continue to make an improvement in US-Russia relation impossible... “The United States will maintain its Crimea-related sanctions against Russia. Indeed, further Russian escalation of this kind will only make matters worse.” Donald Trump’s comments however struck a different tone from Haley’s. Mark Sleboda, an international relations and security analyst, joins Brian and John. The Mississippi Senate race will be decided in a runoff election today that pits former Congressman and Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy against incumbent Republican Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith. Hyde-Smith has found herself at the center of controversy recently over her previous support of Confederate symbols and monuments. Espy is the strongest possible Democrat to challenge Hyde-Smith, but polls show that the Republicans will keep the seat. Ted Rall, an award-winning editorial cartoonist and columnist whose work is at www.rall.com, joins the show.

Welcome to a very special episode of "We’re All Gonna Die." In the wake of the Daily Dot’s decision to sue the NYPD for Donald Trump’s and his sons’ concealed carry permit applications, we decided it was time to drop some FOIA knowledge on you, our dear listeners. Don’t know what FOIA is? Join the crew as we interview Adam Marshall, an attorney from the Reporters’ Committee for  Freedom of the Press, who works on FOIA cases and is a fountain of knowledge on the topic. Come, join us as we nerd out about press freedom! Give Adam a follow on Twitter here.

Would you take your computer in for repair if you knew the technicians would be scanning your hard drive looking for anything suspicious while they had the hood up? It’s something that apparently we all need to be considering now. A recent lawsuit against a California doctor has revealed that the FBI has been paying Best Buy Geek Squad technicians to search for illegal content on the computers that were sent in for repairs. The relationship appears to go back at least 10 years. Today I speak with Aaron Mackey, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation - the organization who discovered this connection through the use of Freedom of Information Act queries. I’ll also briefly update on the latest Facebook scandals and their attempts to address the massive privacy issues. Aaron Mackey joined EFF in 2015 after moving from Washington, D.C. where he worked on speech, privacy, and freedom of information issues at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown Law. Aaron graduated from Berkeley Law in 2012, where he worked for EFF while a student in the Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic. Prior to law school, Aaron was a journalist at the Arizona Daily Star in Tucson, Arizona. He received his undergraduate degree in journalism and English from the University of Arizona in 2006, where he met his amazing wife, Ashley. They have two young children. For Further Insight: Website: www.eff.org Twitter URL: https://twitter.com/aaron_d_mackey Help me to help you! Visit: https://patreon.com/FirewallsDontStopDragons - https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/geek-squads-relationship-fbi-cozier-we-thought How to delete (or curtail) Facebook: https://firewallsdontstopdragons.com/its-time-to-delete-facebook/

In this installment of the Lubetkin on Communications Podcast, we present a panel discussion recorded July 12, 2016 at Temple University in Philadelphia. The panel, co-sponsored by the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA), the Society of Professional Journalists, and the Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press, focused on the upcoming Democratic National Convention, and was intended to brief journalists on their rights to make photos and video recordings during the expected street demonstrations and protests at the convention. Mickey H. Osterreicher, General Counsel, National Press Photographers Association, poses with @PodcastSteve after the NPPA's DNC Seminar in Philadelphia. (Shelly Lubetkin Photo) We reached out to Mickey H. Osterreicher, General Counsel, National Press Photographers Association, and offered our services to produce this podcast for An expert panel discussion regarding First Amendment rights: What are the rights of citizens and the press to photograph and record in public? Can police seize and view those images or order them to be deleted? What is some of the most recent case law regarding these issues? How can we foster a better understanding of our respective rights and responsibilities in order to have a greater respect for the roles that everyone plays in newsgathering and free speech? Journalists, lawyers, law enforcement officers as well as journalism, criminal justice & law students are all encouraged to attend.                                                                        Moderator: Mickey H. Osterreicher, General Counsel, National Press Photographers Association Panelists: David Boardman, Dean, Temple University, School of Media and Communication Francis T. Healy, Special Advisor to the COmmissioner, Philadelphia Police Dept. Lt. John Stanford, Public Information Officer, Philadelphia Police Dept. Gregg Leslie, Legal Defense Director, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Gayle C. Sproul, Partner, Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz, LLP Joseph Gidjunis, Independent Photojournalist Jim MacMillan, Independent Photojournalist and Program Manager, Temple University Center for Public Interest Journalism

The BBC has come under criticism for the way it covered a police raid on Sir Cliff Richard's home. BBC News decided to film and broadcast a search of the singer's home last week, using a helicopter flying over his home in Berkshire. Since then, the organisation has been accused of breaking editorial guidelines, and will now face questions by the Home Affairs Select Committee. Steve Hewlett talks to Professor Stewart Purvis, former Editor-in-Chief of ITN, about the decision making taken in newsrooms, and crime correspondent for the Times, Fiona Hamilton, about the relationship between crime reporters and the police, especially in a post-Leveson age.Sky TV has announced plans to improve the representation of black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people across its entertainment channels, including Sky1 and drama-focused Sky Atlantic. It's pledged that by the end of 2015, all new shows on Sky entertainment channels will have people from BAME backgrounds in at least 20% of significant on-screen roles, while all original programming will have someone with a BAME background in at least one senior production role. Steve talks to Stuart Murphy, Sky's director of entertainment, about how they'll go about sourcing the talent, and to Simone Pennant who is the founder of the TV Collective, a membership organisation which works to improve diversity on and off screen.A press freedom group says journalists attempting to report on the protests in Ferguson in Missouri are being restricted by police. We speak to Gregg Leslie from The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in the US, and Channel 4 reporter Kylie Morris, on her experience of having an officer pointing a gun at her whilst reporting from the protests. Producer: Katy Takatsuki.

Investigative journalists throughout the world face legal threats. This panel will look at how lawsuits have put a chill on watchdog journalism in the US and elsewhere. It will focus on the threats to national-security reporting, particularly the legal pressures on journalists to reveal their sources. Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee on Freedom of the Press will provide a broad overview on the legal threats and challenges faced by US journalists. James Risen, who covers national security for The New York Times, has been put under surveillance and subpoenaed in court and being compelled to reveal the sources for his 2006 book on the CIA. He will speak on the pressures put on US journalists covering national-security issues. Roman Shleynov of Novaya Gazeta will address challenges faced by Russian journalists reporting on national security issues, and Harinder Baweja will discuss threats to journalists reporting on national security in India. Moderator: John Dinges, professor, Columbia Journalism School Lucy Dalglish, executive director, Reporters Committee on Freedom of the Press: Legal threats and challenges faced by investigative reporters in the United States James Risen, reporter for The New York Times and author of State of War, about the CIA: Protection of sources and threats on national security reporting. Roman Shleynov, investigations editor, Novaya Gazeta (Russia): Challenges in covering national security issues for journalists in Russia. Harinder Baweja, news and investigations editor, Tehelka: Threats to journalists reporting on national security in India.

Investigative journalists throughout the world face legal threats. This panel will look at how lawsuits have put a chill on watchdog journalism in the US and elsewhere. It will focus on the threats to national-security reporting, particularly the legal pressures on journalists to reveal their sources. Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee on Freedom of the Press will provide a broad overview on the legal threats and challenges faced by US journalists. James Risen, who covers national security for The New York Times, has been put under surveillance and subpoenaed in court and being compelled to reveal the sources for his 2006 book on the CIA. He will speak on the pressures put on US journalists covering national-security issues. Roman Shleynov of Novaya Gazeta will address challenges faced by Russian journalists reporting on national security issues, and Harinder Baweja will discuss threats to journalists reporting on national security in India. Moderator: John Dinges, professor, Columbia Journalism School Lucy Dalglish, executive director, Reporters Committee on Freedom of the Press: Legal threats and challenges faced by investigative reporters in the United States James Risen, reporter for The New York Times and author of State of War, about the CIA: Protection of sources and threats on national security reporting. Roman Shleynov, investigations editor, Novaya Gazeta (Russia): Challenges in covering national security issues for journalists in Russia. Harinder Baweja, news and investigations editor, Tehelka: Threats to journalists reporting on national security in India.

The Federal Shield Law is pending in Congress. Meanwhile, reporters have come under fire for protecting the privacy of their sources resulting in jail time and high fines. Join Law.com bloggers and co-hosts J. Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi as they explore the shield law with the experts: Lucy Dalglish, Executive Director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Geoffrey R. Stone, the Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago Law School and Attorney Joel Kurtzberg, partner at the firm, Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP. They will discuss the federal shield law pending in Congress, high profile cases involving reporters, states’ efforts to enact their own shield laws, punishment given to those who protect their sources and the rights of journalists.

  SHOW NOTES   Published August 5, 2007 Lisa's Movie Pick:  Full of Life (1957).  It's a really heartwarming movie about immigrants and their American born children that you can watch comfortably with your kids and your grandkids.   The novel by John Fante is still available:     GEM:  Freedom of Information Act Follow Up Email from Richard Hrazanek:  "I loved the tip about requesting your ancestor's immigration file through the Freedom of Information Act. Do you know if you can do the same thing with a person's military record." FOIA can assist you in obtaining military records. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Website article:    Rod Powers of About.com does a great job outlining article: Access to Military Records by the General Public, including genealogists who are not next-of-kin devoted to the 4th Infantry Division 224th Infantry Regiment Company "D" which his uncle served in.  Timothy outlines his experience with obtaining military records.   GEM:  Thanks for the Memories Get a piece of paper or pull up a word document.  Close your eyes for a second, and visualize a favorite memory from your childhood.  In my case I started with a favorite place, my maternal grandma's house.  But perhaps yours is the back alley where you and your friends played baseball, or your great uncle's garage where he showed you how to work on cars.  Whatever is meaningful to you. Now, open your eyes, and write your thoughts one at a time.  Just free flow it. They don't have to be complete sentences.  Later you can try your hand at writing more of your actual experiences or memories of a person.  Again, it doesn't have to be a novel or sound really professional.  It's just the memories from you heart. Tie together this gem with episode 20's Sweet Memories gem where we made a family history chocolate bar label for a candy bar that could be tucked in a Christmas Stocking as a gift.  Replace the Ingredient's list on the back label with a text box that includes these free flowing memories about the photo that appears on the front label. 

The infinitely funny and smart David Cross stopped by for a chat and we couldn't contain our excitement. You know him from Mr. Show, Arrested Development, The Increasingly Poor Decisions of Todd Margaret (tip from Wilson: the best hidden gem show you'll find), and his hilarious standup specials. And now you know him as a Useful Idiot. We talk comedy: creating a standup special, using audience feedback to perfect his set, and how he felt when Netflix took down an episode of w/ Bob and David for having a character in blackface. We talk politics: why Bernie would've won, why (some) Hillary Clinton supporters were blinded by tribalism, and why Andrew Yang should “fuck all the way off.” And for good measure we geek out about our favorite David Cross roles and bits. Come back Monday for the extended interview where we take a deep dive into his new special “I'm From the Future,” politics, and more. Plus, Joe Manchin and the crackhead daughters, military-grade snow removal, and naked but masked. It's all this, and more, on this week's episode of Useful Idiots. Check it out. And subscribe to hear the ad-free version. Your subscription goes to help the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press and independent journalists everywhere. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Subscribe at http://usefulidiots.substack.com for the ad-free version, which helps independent journalists through the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press. He wrote and directed multiple classic, culture-defining American movies. He created groundbreaking documentaries, interviewing Putin, debunking Russiagate, and uncovering JFK's murder. He won three Academy Awards. There was only one thing left for Oliver Stone to do: Become a Useful Idiot. Stone's new documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass, uses newly declassified and reexamined footage to present a case that conspiracy theories about the president's death are actually “conspiracy facts.” And it creates a big debate on Useful Idiots. Watch the pod, watch the doc, then let us know: do you agree with Matt, Katie, or Oliver? Who really killed President John F. Kennedy? Plus, this week's Dems and Republicans Suck finally breaks Matt, leading to an impassioned stump speech of the good of all Americans. Once we stop laughing, we're pretty sure we'll realize he's telling the truth. It's Oliver Stone on Useful Idiots. Don't miss this one. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

See the ad-free episode at http://usefulidiots.substack.com Your two favorite Russiagate addicts are back and feeling very vindicated. We watch as Adam Schiff, the Washington Post, and more slowly realize their facts were only conspiracy theories. Now we're just waiting for a resounding “Great job, Matt and Aaron!” Aaron Maté of The Grayzone's Pushback has spent years putting in journalistic work to track down facts, read thick dossiers, and interview top suspects who were ignored by the entire US government and press. Now, he has answers. Our guess is that not many others on the left will be covering this one. So stick around with us and we'll get to the bottom of it, the Useful Idiot way. Plus, Biden's royal fart, Big Bird gets vaccinated, astronauts in diapers, and a tale of two penises: one terrible, one beautiful. It's all this, and more, in this week's episode of Useful Idiots. And stay tuned for the extended interview with Aaron on Monday. Why ads? Useful Idiots announced we're donating a large portion of revenue to the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press to help independent journalists with things like legal fees. A couple ads means more money for them. But, to support them yourself and get an ad-free episode, subscribe today on substack. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Subscribe at usefulidiots.substack.com for an ad-free listen and extended interview On this week's show, award-winning journalist David Sirota justly rips Democrats for not only selling out the American people but for enabling Right Wing authoritarianism: “Democrats get elected promising to help people, promising various programs to directly help people. And then you get into power and you shield your corporate donors who don't want that change. You choose your corporate donors and you betray your promises to voters. What you're saying to voters is that democracy doesn't matter. And if you do that, there's going to be a lot of voters who say, ‘Look, I just voted for you. I just used democracy to put you in power. You're saying we got to get Donald Trump out of here because he's not helping people. I have to support you only because of democracy. You're proving to me that democracy doesn't matter.'" If Dems keep wasting their time in power, they're going to stop holding power and push people into the arms of people like Trump, which is what happened in 2016. Listen to this interview with the exceptionally interesting, intelligent and prolific David Sirota, and then listen to Meltdown on Audible. Plus, Dems are cutting everything Dem voters want in their bill, and so much more vaccine debating. And don't worry, there's some poop stuff in here too. Heads up: this week, we have begun donating a large portion of our profits to the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press to help independent journalists in need. To help this, we're starting ad reads this week. If you want to donate to indie media (and not have to hear ads), become a subscriber today to hear our chat with David about an important study about the Weimar Republic and the rise of Nazism. And NO we're not comparing Trump to Hitler. It's all this, and more, on the Halloween episode of Useful Idiots. Check it out. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices