Contracts for public notices revoked to retaliate against press

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]) .

Charges against ‘Cop City’ protesters frame everything from talking to journalists to using encryption as evidence of criminality. Chad Davis

‘Cop City’ indictment threatens press freedom

We wrote for the Intercept about the threats to press freedom posed by Georgia prosecutors’ outrageous indictment of 61 people involved to varying degrees in the protest movement against the police training facility that critics refer to as “Cop City.”

The indictment frames holding anti-establishment political views — or even just criticizing cops — as evidence of involvement in a criminal conspiracy. Prosecutors stoop as low as alleging the conspiracy began the day George Floyd was murdered in 2020, for no discernable reason besides giving racists an excuse to high-five each other. Cop City was first proposed in 2021.

Against that backdrop, we explained, the implications of the indictment for press freedom may seem like an afterthought, but the threat “is real and shouldn’t be ignored. Any source considering talking to a journalist about a protest or controversial cause couldn’t be blamed for thinking twice after reading the indictment,” which lists as evidence of the purported conspiracy everything from protesters talking to the media to publishing anti-establishment literature to using basic digital security practices that shield them from surveillance. Read the full article here ([link removed]) .

Public notice contracts revoked to retaliate against the press

We explain ([link removed]) on our blog how two disturbing trends involving local newspapers’ contracts to publish public notices threaten the public’s right to know.

The first is government officials retaliating ([link removed]) against media outlets whose coverage they dislike by threatening or actually revoking contracts to print public notices. The second is changing laws that require public notices to be published in newspapers altogether. Last year in Florida, for instance, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law ([link removed]) that gives local governments the option to provide public notices on their websites, rather than in community newspapers.

While public notices aren’t usually the most scintillating part of the news, they’re key to newspapers’ financial survival and an important source of information for the public. Government officials denying public notice contracts is a pernicious attempt to censor the press through a financial freeze-out.

Federal courts roll back remote access to trials

We’ve long called for greater public access to court proceedings through cameras in the courtroom and other forms of remote access. Now, the Judicial Conference — a policymaking body for federal courts — has revised ([link removed]) its broadcasting rules for civil and bankruptcy cases to allow for live audio access to nontrial proceedings without witness testimony.

This change improves the previous rules, which didn’t allow for any remote audio access ([link removed]) . But it doesn’t go far enough. During the COVID-19 pandemic, an emergency exception to the rules let the public listen remotely to full civil trials, including witness testimony, for the first time. The success of that experience shows there’s no reason to limit remote audio access now.

That’s why Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), Fix the Court, and a coalition of other civil society and news media organizations urged ([link removed]) the Conference to maintain the same level of access now that the pandemic public health emergency has ended. It’s a shame the Conference rejected that reasonable request.

What we’re reading

SC Supreme Court rebukes judge who let killer go, praises press and attorney general ([link removed]) . praises press and attorney general. If not for a tip from a whistleblower, the press and the public would never have known about a secret court order in South Carolina that unlawfully let a killer go free. As the state’s Supreme Court noted, “This case reminds us of the critical importance of open courts and the reasons court orders may not be sealed.”

When police kill and use victims’ rights laws to stay anonymous ([link removed]) . We recently wrote ([link removed]) about the national trend of police misusing victim’s rights laws to shield the names of officers involved in on-duty altercations or shootings from the press. The fatal shooting of a pregnant woman in Ohio is the latest example. Cops are public officials, and the public interest in transparency and accountability easily outweighs the purported privacy interests of police.

Judge reverses course on 2020 protest settlement because police union doesn’t like it. ([link removed]) It’s not particularly surprising that a police union would object to a settlement requiring the New York Police Department to make some effort to stop unlawfully arresting and assaulting ([link removed].) protesters and journalists. But it is alarming that a judge with reported connections to the union’s lawyer would revoke her approval of the agreement just days later. Hopefully, the settlement will be quickly reinstated.
[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])
.