Don’t distort Daniel Ellsberg’s legacy to disparage other whistleblowers

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]) .

United States Congress. Sen. Dick Durbin (right) and Rep. Kevin Kiley (left) are co-sponsoring the PRESS Act this year, in addition to last year's sponsors, Senators Ron Wyden and Mike Lee and Rep. Jamie Raskin.

The PRESS Act ([link removed]) , the best federal reporter’s shield bill we’ve ever seen, was reintroduced this week with bipartisan sponsorship in both the Senate ([link removed]) and House ([link removed]) . At Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), we’re going to do whatever we can to help it become law this year, and everyone who values press freedom should do the same ([link removed]) .

As we write in our analysis of the bill ([link removed]) , the PRESS Act is one the most important ([link removed]) pieces of federal legislation protecting First Amendment rights in modern times. It would forbid threatening journalists with crippling fines or jail time unless they cough up the names of their sources, with narrow exceptions in cases involving terrorism or the threat of imminent violence. It would also stop the federal government from spying on journalists through their phone and email providers and other online services.

The PRESS Act is a bipartisan bill ([link removed]) that, in the last Congress, passed unanimously in the House and came within a hair’s-breadth of becoming law before it was stopped by a nonsensical objection from a single senator ([link removed]) . This year, Congress must get the PRESS Act over the finish line and protect the journalists and confidential sources that Americans rely on to expose wrongdoing by government, private companies, and powerful individuals.

Stop distorting Daniel Ellsberg’s legacy to disparage other whistleblowers

FPF co-founder and legendary whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, who died last week, could not have been clearer ([link removed]) that he regarded 21st-century whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning as his equals. He often said he admired them for doing the right thing at a younger age than he did.

Yet on the day of his death, pundits David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart were already at work whitewashing his legacy by claiming his willingness to stand trial ([link removed]) made him a “better” whistleblower than, for example, Snowden. As we wrote on our blog ([link removed]) , it’s a nonsense take that Ellsberg himself repeatedly rejected ([link removed]) . He remained in the U.S. not because his principles compelled him to face an unwinnable sham trial under the Espionage Act but because staying bought him time to publicize the Pentagon Papers while on bail. That’s no longer an option for modern-day whistleblowers who are sure to be locked up pending trial.

If Brooks and Capehart think history’s greatest whistleblower was wrong about whistleblowing etiquette they should just say so. It’s unfortunate that they’re instead co-opting his moral authority to prop up tired talking points they must know he abhorred.

Rights orgs demand prosecutors drop charges against photojournalists

A coalition of ten press freedom and free expression organizations led by the Committee to Protect Journalists and FPF has called on ([link removed]) the Manhattan district attorney to drop a disorderly conduct charge brought against photojournalist Stephanie Keith ([link removed]) . She was arrested in May while photographing a vigil commemorating the killing of Jordan Neely ([link removed]) .

While New York Police Department officials claim ([link removed]) that Keith had interfered with other arrests during the vigil, the video of her arrest ([link removed]) shows nothing of the sort. Keith — who was wearing a press badge and holding a camera — was simply photographing newsworthy police actions. The district attorney should drop the charges and make clear that members of the media won’t be prosecuted in New York City just for doing their jobs.


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

Why the Pentagon Papers leaker tried to get prosecuted near his life’s end ([link removed]) . Daniel Ellsberg fought for an end to Espionage Act prosecutions of whistleblowers and journalists until the end of his life. That’s why in 2021, 50 years after he leaked the Pentagon Papers, Ellsberg leaked a different classified study to journalist Charlie Savage, in the hopes that the Department of Justice would charge him with violating the Espionage Act again and allow him to challenge its constitutionality. The DOJ never charged Ellsberg, even as it shamefully continues to use the Espionage Act against not only whistleblowers who leak secrets but Julian Assange, who merely published them.

Journalist arrested at Iowa protest takes case against cop to Eighth Circuit ([link removed]) . Mark “Ted” Nieters, a freelance photographer, is appealing the dismissal of his legal claims against the Des Moines police for violating his constitutional rights. Nieters was tackled, pepper-sprayed, and arrested by a Des Moines police officer while he was covering a protest over the murder of George Floyd. The police have taken the outrageous position that officers were entitled to violently attack and arrest Nieters because he was present covering the news after they’d ordered protestors to disperse. The Eighth Circuit should reject this argument and give Nieters his day in court, especially now that the Department of Justice has questioned ([link removed]) the constitutionality of ordering the
press to disperse at protests.

Covering Democracy: Protests, Police, and the Press ([link removed]) . In this new report published by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, Joel Simon analyzes law enforcement’s treatment of journalists during protests, relying in part on data from the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker ([link removed]) . Over and over again, journalists have documented police efforts to suppress protests and dissent, and they’ve suffered attacks and arrests for doing so. Police must be held accountable for these violations, and the law must protect journalists’ ability to do their job of informing the public.
[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])
.