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

A video posted last week showed police in Yuma, Arizona, arresting freelance journalist Lucas Mullikin 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 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 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 covers arrests of journalists from mainstream outlets. The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker has dozens of examples 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. 

Journalists and the public shut out from Google trial

Reporters and courtwatchers have been doing their best to inform people about the Google antitrust trial, despite an ever-growing list of anti-transparency measures styming access. But as we explain on our blog, 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 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, 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 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. “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 and time again, 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. 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. A new report 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 on Congress to reform Section 702 to end warrantless spying on journalists and others. The PCLOB report serves to underscore the need for reform.