Freedom of the Press Foundation welcomes Azmat Khan to its board

View this email in your browser ([link removed])
Dear friend of press freedom,

Here are some of the most important stories we’re following from the U.S. and around the world. If you enjoy reading this newsletter, please forward it to friends and family. If someone has forwarded you this newsletter, please subscribe here ([link removed]) .

Credit: Londres (Reino Unido),18 de Agosto 2014. The rejection of Julian Assange's appeal of his extradition brings him one step closer to being tried in a U.S. court for obtaining and publishing confidential documents from sources like investigative journalists do every day.

Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) is highly disappointed ([link removed]) by the U.K. High Court’s rejection of Julian Assange’s appeal of his extradition to the United States on Espionage Act charges. Assange may have additional legal remedies to attempt to avoid extradition, but the Biden administration should moot the issue by ending the prosecution immediately.

The idea of Assange, or anyone, being tried in a U.S. court for obtaining and publishing confidential documents the same way investigative reporters do every day should be terrifying to all Americans. If Biden lets this case proceed, future administrations will surely use the unconstitutional authority that Biden is claiming under the Espionage Act to criminalize journalism they don’t like.

10 years after Snowden revelations, more work needed to protect whistleblowers and journalists

This week marked 10 years since whistleblower and longtime FPF board member Edward Snowden, working with journalists at The Guardian and The Washington Post, revealed alarming mass surveillance by the NSA.

The ramifications of Snowden’s disclosures and the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalism surrounding them continue to this day, although the government certainly has not stopped ([link removed]) either surveilling Americans or prosecuting whistleblowers.

As we wrote on our blog ([link removed]) , when the government breaks the law, it should expect whistleblowers to tell the press and the press to tell the public. It has no one to blame for the fallout but itself. Whistleblowers and the journalists they work with should be the subjects of admiration, not indictments. But, as Snowden’s fellow whistleblower and FPF board member Daniel Ellsberg explained ([link removed]) to Politico, we’re still a long way from reaching that goal.

Freedom of the Press Foundation welcomes Azmat Khan to its board

FPF is thrilled to welcome ([link removed]) award-winning journalist Azmat Khan as the newest member of its board of directors ([link removed]) .

Khan is an investigative reporter with The New York Times Magazine and the Patti Cadby Birch Assistant Professor at Columbia Journalism School, where she directs the Simon and June Li Center for Global Journalism. Her multipart series in the Times, The Civilian Casualty Files ([link removed]) , was awarded the 2022 Pulitzer Prize in International Reporting.

“Courageous accountability journalism in the public interest requires equally courageous defenders of the press who innovate to meet new threats,” Khan said. “For more than a decade, the Freedom of the Press Foundation has been at the forefront of this work.

“We are so excited to welcome Azmat to the Freedom of the Press Foundation’s board,” said FPF board President Rainey Reitman. “Azmat’s remarkable investigative journalism has changed how we think of data-driven war reporting … Azmat epitomizes how independent journalism can hold governments to account.”

Demand that Fox News reveal confidential source underscores need for PRESS Act

Another week, yet another story ([link removed]) highlighting the need to pass the PRESS Act and protect journalists and their confidential sources. As we highlighted on our blog ([link removed]) , last week a judge raised the lack of a federal shield law ([link removed]) in response to the efforts of Fox News and its former reporter Catherine Herridge to fend off demands to reveal confidential sources. The demand was made by a plaintiff in a civil lawsuit against the FBI.

Compelling reporters to reveal confidential sources threatens the public’s right to know by discouraging sources from speaking to the press and diverting newsroom resources from reporting. Forty-nine states have recognized as much by passing reporter’s privilege laws, but the PRESS Act unfortunately failed ([link removed]) in the last Congress. The judge’s questioning in this case demonstrates the bipartisan ([link removed]) need for the certainty that the PRESS Act would bring.

Upcoming trial of journalists only tip of anti-press iceberg in Asheville

Asheville Blade journalists Veronica Coit and Matilda Bliss are scheduled for a jury trial on June 12, after a judge declined to dismiss the charges arising from their Christmas 2021 arrests while covering a homeless encampment sweep. The prosecution’s theory, that closing a public park allows cops to operate in secret and arrest journalists who try to record them, is absurd.

But, as we explained on our blog ([link removed]) , the prosecutions aren’t Asheville authorities’ only press freedom violation. Police appear to have concealed from a judge that Bliss was a journalist so that law enforcement could obtain a warrant to search their phone in violation of federal law. Police also barred Bliss and Coit from city parks for a year in retaliation for their newsgathering.

Bliss and Coit should be acquitted and then they should sue — although we don’t envy the lawyer who has to fit so many First Amendment violations into one court complaint.


** What we’re reading
------------------------------------------------------------

Prison agency rescinds censorship policy after New York Focus reporting ([link removed]) . The agency for New York state’s prisons has rescinded rules “blocking incarcerated writers and artists from publishing their work,” following reporting from the New York Focus and pressure from groups like New York Civil Liberties Union and PEN America. The agency was right to take back these outrageous and unconstitutional rules, which never should have been issued in the first place.

A reporter investigated sexual misconduct. Then the attacks began ([link removed]) . A state judge ordered New Hampshire Public Radio to let him review transcripts of its interviews with sources, including those who had agreed to speak anonymously. The order is part of a libel lawsuit filed against NHPR after it published an investigation ([link removed]) into alleged sexual misconduct by the founder of a network of addiction rehab centers. NHPR reporters and their families have also had their homes vandalized. Reporters should never face physical threats for doing their jobs, and the legal system shouldn’t be weaponized to try to silence them and their sources.

The coming fight over American surveillance ([link removed]) . There’s no question the government has abused its authority under Section 702, a law authorizing warrantless surveillance of foreigners outside the U.S. but actually used to spy on activists, journalists and politicians inside the country. We need fundamental changes to 702 to end the flood of private information about Americans from flowing into the hands of the FBI and intelligence agencies.

San Jose limiting public’s access to city records ([link removed]) . San Jose, in its effort to try to limit transparency, is using the tired old excuse that it’s too “burdensome” to respond to public records requests. Under a new proposal, the city will instruct requesters on how to narrow their requests. It’s also trying to limit the effectiveness of appeals when requests are denied. The idea that the city should decide what records the press and public should ask for — and how requests should be crafted to limit them — is "deeply troubling" for the region’s journalism leaders and for us.

Judge agrees to unseal names of those who helped George Santos make bond ([link removed]) . A judge has ordered the names of three people who put up a $500,000 bond for George Santos to be unsealed. The names never should have been sealed in the first place, and the judge was right to recognize that there is no legitimate reason for secrecy.


** Subscribe to our digital security newsletter
------------------------------------------------------------

FPF has a new weekly newsletter on digital security and journalism! It’s a short update on digital security news, what you can do about it, and other news from our team. Subscribe here ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]

============================================================
Copyright © 2023 Freedom of the Press Foundation, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website.

Our mailing address is:
Freedom of the Press Foundation
49 Flatbush Ave, #1017
Brooklyn, NY 11217
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.