Inside the Assange court hearing and why the case threatens press freedom
Discussion highlights implications of Assange prosecution for journalism in US and globally
Discussion highlights implications of Assange prosecution for journalism in US and globally
Barring the platform would set a precedent for all sorts of future censorship, including bans on foreign news sites
President Biden has said that journalism isn’t a crime. But the DOJ seems to think otherwise
Quote on press freedom impact of today's Assange decision
Most analyses of Monday’s Supreme Court argument in Murthy v. Missouri, the case about government pressure on social media content moderation, agree that the justices are likely to rule that the government can influence platforms’ moderation decisions. But when it comes to alleged threats to “national security,” some justices seemed willing to let the government go even further by coercing — or even requiring — takedowns.
Iowa senator can further his legacy of supporting whistleblowers and First Amendment freedoms
Public records and freedom of information laws are fundamental for government transparency. But when journalists fight for access to wrongfully withheld records at the state and local level, the public is paying the price, according to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker. Over the past year alone, local governments have paid journalists at least $1.6 million in attorneys fees — all of which was financed by taxpayers — following public records lawsuits.
Cornyn and Cruz have complained about spying on journalists before. Now they can help outlaw it
U.S. Press Freedom Tracker highlights costs of government secrecy to taxpayers
If the Burke prosecution succeeds, it will encourage the powerful to use a federal computer hacking law to attack reporting that embarrasses them or exposes their wrongdoing.