Journalists and public shut out from Google antitrust trial

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]) .

Body camera footage ([link removed]) shows police slamming journalist Lucas Mullikin to the ground and arresting him after he asked for the badge number of an officer who previously assaulted him. Unlike arrests of journalists from major news outlets, the story has gotten little national attention.


** A journalist was assaulted and arrested. Where’s the outrage?
------------------------------------------------------------

A video posted last week showed police in Yuma, Arizona, arresting ([link removed]) freelance journalist Lucas Mullikin ([link removed]) after he lawfully recorded a violent arrest and asked for the badge number of an officer who shoved him away from the scene and threw him to the ground.

Police have since released bodycam ([link removed]) footage that confirms that Mullikin did not obstruct the arrest he was filming. It also shows that, contrary to police claims, Mullikin was not arrested for ignoring orders to back up (and those orders were illegal ([link removed]) anyway) but for requesting the badge number after being assaulted. Remarkably, police made those claims in voice-over narration of the same video that proved them false.

The press should not let police gaslight the public about what their own video shows. But we’ve heard crickets from the same national media that (rightly) extensively ([link removed]) covers ([link removed]) arrests of journalists from mainstream outlets. The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker ([link removed]) has dozens of examples ([link removed]) of other journalist arrests that went mostly unnoticed. It’s unfortunate that so many major news outlets only seem concerned with police harassment of journalists when the victim is one of their own. That needs to change. Read more on our blog ([link removed]) .

Journalists and the public shut out from Google trial

Reporters ([link removed]) and courtwatchers ([link removed]) have been doing their best ([link removed]) to inform people about the Google antitrust trial, despite an ever-growing list ([link removed]) of anti-transparency measures ([link removed]) styming access. But as we explain on our blog ([link removed]) , if the federal judge presiding over the case, Amit Mehta, doesn’t act soon to stop this tsunami of secrecy, people may be left mostly in the dark about the biggest antitrust lawsuit of the 21st century.

Mehta has repeatedly yielded to Google and other tech companies’ demands to close trial proceedings, criticized the government for posting public documents online, and barred the broadcast of witness testimony. It’s a shame to see a judge defer to corporate secrecy demands.

Mehta can still step up and fulfill his role as the protector of the public’s interest in open court proceedings, but he needs to do it soon, before the trial flies by under a cloud of secrecy.

In defense of aggressive small-town newspapers

Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) Director of Advocacy Seth Stern writes in the Columbia Journalism Review ([link removed]) about a disturbing narrative that emerged in the aftermath of the police raid on Kansas’s Marion County Record: that the Record was asking for trouble through its “aggressive” approach to small-town journalism.

Stern explains that this misguided belief emerged “not because newspapers like the Record are crossing the line by agitating small-town officials [but] because those officials have grown unaccustomed to healthy scrutiny. And perhaps some of their constituents have forgotten the benefits of a robust Fourth Estate.”

In the era of news deserts ([link removed]) , aggressive small-town journalism is more important than ever. Papers like the Record that are still able to pull it off despite all the challenges ([link removed]) facing local media these days should be applauded, not questioned.


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

Australian, Latin American Leaders Demand End To Assange Prosecution During US Trips ([link removed]) . “Sometimes it is very hard to be a friend of the United States when the United States is prosecuting an Australian citizen for basically being a journalist," said one of several Australian senators pushing the U.S. to stop prosecuting Julian Assange. As we’ve said time ([link removed]) and time again ([link removed]) , the Biden Justice Department must drop the case against Assange.

ACLU Urges Congress to Strike Down Dangerous Legislation Threatening to Destroy Digital Privacy and Free Speech Online ([link removed]) . More than 60 organizations, including FPF, sent a letter urging the Senate to reject the STOP CSAM Act, a bill that would expose apps and websites that offer strong encryption and don’t surveil users to potential liability for hosting child sexual abuse materials. As an organization that works with journalists on their digital security, we know reporters and whistleblowers rely on encrypted services to communicate privately and securely. Destroying encryption isn’t the way to promote online safety.

Civil Liberties Advocates’ Statement on PCLOB Section 702 Report ([link removed]) . A new report ([link removed](002).pdf) by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, or PCLOB, on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act sheds light on abuses that have allowed the government to access communications of thousands of Americans, including journalists. We’ve previously called ([link removed]) on Congress to reform Section 702 to end warrantless spying on journalists and others. The PCLOB report serves to underscore the need for reform.
[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])
.