Slashdot Mirror
CPJ Report: the Obama Administration and Press Freedoms
dryriver writes "Committee To Protect Journalists reports: U.S. President Barack Obama came into office pledging open government, but he has fallen short of his promise. Journalists and transparency advocates say the White House curbs routine disclosure of information and deploys its own media to evade scrutiny by the press. Aggressive prosecution of leakers of classified information and broad electronic surveillance programs deter government sources from speaking to journalists. In the Obama administration's Washington, government officials are increasingly afraid to talk to the press. Those suspected of discussing with reporters anything that the government has classified as secret are subject to investigation, including lie-detector tests and scrutiny of their telephone and e-mail records. An 'Insider Threat Program' being implemented in every government department requires all federal employees to help prevent unauthorized disclosures of information by monitoring the behavior of their colleagues. Six government employees, plus two contractors including Edward Snowden, have been subjects of felony criminal prosecutions since 2009 under the 1917 Espionage Act, accused of leaking classified information to the press—compared with a total of three such prosecutions in all previous U.S. administrations. Still more criminal investigations into leaks are under way. Reporters' phone logs and e-mails were secretly subpoenaed and seized by the Justice Department in two of the investigations, and a Fox News reporter was accused in an affidavit for one of those subpoenas of being 'an aider, abettor and/or conspirator' of an indicted leak defendant, exposing him to possible prosecution for doing his job as a journalist. In another leak case, a New York Times reporter has been ordered to testify against a defendant or go to jail."
Even South Park made fun of England's libel courts which are absurdly tilted in favor of whomever has the money and the power. Perhaps Obama can start suing them all there. Why not? It's not as if anyone cares whether we live in a tyranny or not.
Slashdot (/.) overwhelming supported Barak Obama's runs for President.
Slashdotters were warned that Senator Obama would do "bad things like this" if elected. (In the general news/media arena and here on Slashdot.)
Now the blessed, Slashdot Messiah is screwing you over.
Regrettably, it is a bittersweet truth--the sweet is that President Obama is screwing his devotees and followers of his Progressive (Leftist) Way and the better is that he is screwing everyone with his Royal Presidency.
"This is the most transparent administration in history." --Barack Obama http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/02/14/obama_this_is_the_most_transparent_administration_in_history.html
How's it working for you these days? There were plenty of people who were screaming that this stuff would be happening. Nobody listened. Maybe next time you will, but I doubt it. The American public is too busy watching American Idol to give a crap about anything important anymore.
This man has no ideas of his own, and virtually zero leadership cred. He got to where he is by selling out to those with money, and was elected to the highest position in the land with so few qualifications that it boggles the mind. He speaks OK (when his teleprompter works) and is capable of telling people what they want to hear. Of course when the powers that be want to clamp down on things that may reduce their power, he plays along. He's a spineless douchebag. He should go back to smoking pot and just hanging out. That's what his vision for America is anyway.
U.S. President Barack Obama came into office pledging open government, but he has fallen short of his promise.
Fallen short? Is that's what it's called when it's the most closed administration in recent history? Fallen short? Give me a break!
Today we are the police state that the likes of Obama told us we were under Bush. People really need to wake up.
Oh, but yeah, I know... it's Apple and the "XBone" that we need to worry about, right?
Could it be that Slashdot is rasist as fuck against a black president? No, it couldn't be that.
Grow up.
That isn't even a good troll. Crying 'racism' at any criticism of Obama is actually in and of itself racist. He gets plenty of criticism for his actions, not so much the color of his skin. You're the one who really should consider growing up.
There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Reporters didn't have access to classified documents in the Good Old Days either. And anyone caught leaking papers to the Soviet Union during the Cold War was in serious, serious trouble.
It's probably a lot easier to try someone under the Espionage Act today since you can deliver a large volume of information electronically and odds are there will be some electronic fingerprint on it pointing back to the leaker unless they're fully aware of all the security precautions. Fifty years ago, if you leaked the amount of data that would fit on a single CD-R to someone today, it would take up several boxes full of printed papers. ("Where are you going with that crate of papers, Ed?" "Uh....") But if you slipped a handful of papers into your briefcase a few at a time and gave them to someone at dinner, it'd be harder to trace the leak.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
Once the structure falls apart, once the cognitive dissonance between what we say and what we do becomes so indefensible, then we have no choice but to persecute dissent and stifle protest.
the government surveillance, crackdown on leaks, and persecution of journalists just shows how desparate america is to maintain the illusion of the land of the free and home of the brave. in reality we kill our own citizens, run torture camps, kidnap people we consider enemies, and maintain the highest incarceration rate in the world. we topple foreign governments, install dictators, sabotage existing governments attempts at independence and autonomy, and detain indefinitely without trial anyone we see fit. We had an entire slew of protests across the country called Occupy that ended with nothing but arrests and more surveillance. Nothing changed and nothing will.
the fastest way to stop the leaks and the leakers is to stop pandering to a minority constituency of plutocrats while paying lipservice to real americans, and get on with some real change. Arrest corrupt wall street bankers, shut down guantanamo, and for fuck sake stop sticking your dick in the middle east every six months for a boost in the opinion polls leading up to an election.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Channel 666.
If we were watched over by scrupulous eunuch atheist priests who lived in a walled off commune and never spoke to another soul wouldn't mind, but we are watched by public servants. The value of mass surveillance data inevitably means it will be abused. http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=386989
This just in: journalists equated with the Soviet Union. More at 11
* Hushing up Fast 'n Furious debacle by executive privilege.
* Gagging Benghazi witnesses, even forbidding them from testifying to Congress.
* Blaming Benghazi on a stupid YouTube video for weeks (right before the election -- we have to make the attack seem "spontaneous" so it looks our policies have ended terrorism), knowing full well that it's a lie.
I could go on all day, but I do have to actually work. Most of these things (all three of the cases I mentioned) happened before His reelection, so it was completely obvious to those of us who aren't idiots what kind of president this guy was/is. Now, time to wait for said idiots to try to deflect the issue by talking about how bad Republicans are (happens every time, as if these turds get their marching orders from On High; so predictable).
No, it isn't be that. Because nobody is talking about the color of his skin.
See, being a person who is working against your freedoms and trying to keep government activities a secret isn't an issue of the color of your skin.
It's an issue of your integrity and your campaign promises. If your president isn't working to improve or maintain your liberties, he's working against them.
We're not seeing a whole lot of 'audacity of hope' these days. We're seeing someone who is helping reduce your freedoms and curtail your press from telling people what it is they're actually doing when that might be illegal.
This is very much a "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" kind of thing.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Obama got the Nobel prize, not the Sakharov prize.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Wow, I be typing goodly today ...
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
There is a lot of dislike of Obama due to his race. There's no question about that. But that doesn't lesson the seriousness of legitimate criticism. For that matter, even if someone is motivated by racism to make a specific criticism it doesn't impact the validity of that criticism. To go full-Godwin, if Hitler said that 1+1=2 as part of an argument to kill all the Jews, it doesn't make 1+1=2 less true.
Yes. Many of us oppose Obama because of his color. We don't like Yellow-striped Reds (evil grin)
Indeed. A one-way mirror is still transparent. Just not both ways.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
...this is what happens when you have a President that makes your leg tingle.
Seriously, though, the press has ALWAYS done a better job covering Republican presidents, as their adversarial role is abundantly clear. Largely, Democratic presidents who ostensibly have the shared outlook, overall sympathies, if not outright vote of reporters (http://archive.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics.asp), have been covered much more gently and with (dare I call it) an almost collaborationist approach.
As politics have become more strident and divisive, it seems like the press itself has found itself more stridently taking a side, with Fox on the Right, and everyone else on the Left.
-Styopa
Whaaaat? You say a democrat came into office and made government bigger and more aggressive? That's simply absurd! How unprecedented!
There's a lot of like for Obama due to his race too. Do you think White Candidate Obama would have won?
How many people voted for Obama believing that he wouldn't use the executive powers expanded by the previous administration? How many were dumb enough to believe he'd actually try to roll them back?
Worse yet, how many are OK with their guy abusing his new authority?
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
No. McCain lost.
sig: sauer
When you have to deal with people who work for you and claim to be on your side and who you feel you should be able to trust only to find leaked confidential documents and conversations online and in the press ...can you blame the administration for tightening their safeguards and access by the media?
Yes, yes I can. Those documents should have been public from day one.
This isn't what he wanted. He believed in his mission of "Hope and Change".
Then why hasn't he done anything about it? Not one damn thing.
People want and demand transparency. But, it's these very same people who also want to screw him over every chance they get.
Maybe he shouldn't be doing shady dealings that he doesn't want made public. The President is a public servant, he doesn't get privacy in his official capacity. If he doesn't want to get "screwed over" he shouldn't violate the Constitution.
If they let him do his job and not worry about him trying to explain his every move in explicit detail when he takes a shit, he might be more forthcoming.
And why can't he explain his every move in explicit detail? Being a good leader means you have good reasons for the actions you take. Share them with us.
We asked him to end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and bring troops home.
Yes, and then he tried to get an extension on the SOFA with Iraq, yet another Obama lie. And we're still fighting in Afthanistan.
We then bitch about him using drones and violating sovereign turf of those nations who claim to be our "allies" so he can cut down on the number of needed body bags for brining our people home
He could just bring or people home alive, AND not send drones over. Complete withdrawal from the middle east is the best policy.
Am I thrilled by the lack of transparency? No. But, this is our doing by not supporting the person elected into the office to do a job and second guessing everything he does rather than coming together to help solve the problems. Partisan politics be damned.
No, this is our doing by electing a corrupt piece of shit into office. A good President would be proud of his decisions, and be eager to share them with the people he was elected to serve.
You're such a fucking sycophant. Blame the victim (the American people) for the bad behavior of their abuser. Remember when Iraq war protesters were called "unamerican" because they opposed the President? You're doing the exact same thing.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
By 15, mean 0, right? I see that in the 1980s a service member and a CIA agent were prosecuted for selling information to the Soviets. I'm not finding any journalists being prosecuted until Obama.
People say, I am am beginning to agree, that voting for the incumbent office holder is throwing your vote away. If that is the case, then you only have two choices: The main party challenger or the third party challenger.
Therefore, voting for the third party is not throwing your vote away. Its voting for one of your only two options for not throwing your vote away.
You cannot reform or even influence the federal government. It is too big, too entrenched, too corrupt. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying to themselves or to you.
The only practical option is succession. If you live in one of the fifty states, advocate for succession. You can't fight the beast, but you can withdraw your 1/50th of support for it, and when enough other states do the same, the beast will vanish into angry, disbelieving smoke.
The Obama administration is paranoid obsessive about controlling the press and spouting half-truths, and career journalists have branded Obama as the least accessable president they have ever encountered.
Sure they like to flout that Obama has conducted more interviews than any president before him. But Obama intentionally selects outlets where he can evade scrutiny. His "interviews" have largely been on entertainment shows. When preparing for the precious few press interviews, Obama selects journalists who are least likely to challenge him. The administration exploits social media and prepared videos/press releases to evade scrutiny. At his "press conferences" in the WH he abruptly leaves the podium after delivering his prepared statements to ignore journalists trying to confront him with questions. WH spokesman Jay Carney shows an evasive disposition that has resulted in increasing confrontation from an increasingly skeptical and frustrated press.
Obama has admitted that he intends to punish his political enemies. Intimidation, harassment, and retaliation are tools frequently deployed, witness the IRS singling out conservative groups and other federal agencies targetting businesses and individuals who have either criticized the administration or contributed funding to opposition movements. Dr. Ben Carson was endured his first ever IRS audit less than four months after delivering a speech critical of the administration, with a visibly steaming Obama sitting two seats away from him. The Rev Billy Graham was audited after he endorsed Mitt Romney during the 2012 campaign.
Obama had the mainstream press in his pocket until they learned of his betrayal when the DoJ ordered the search of phone records of Associated Press organizations. Their eyes were finally opened to the manipulations of the administration and they have turned on him. Not all of the news outlets have followed suit but they are changing their stripes one by one.
Obama (and Hillary) were disciples of Saul Alinsky, whose "Rules for Radicals" book encourages ad hominem tactics, deception, harassment, any means necessary to accomplish an agenda. Indeed, Saul Alinsky dedicated his book to Satan.
For those of you who voted for a new hope, you have no idea of the deception that was handed to you.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
then you should have nothing to hide. That they make such big efforts to actively hide everything (even to the point of rerouting the president of Bolivia plane just for suspecting that Snowden may be there) means that they did, and probably keep doing, something very wrong. And it must be far bigger than anything we know they are doing (not mass snooping or subverting internet security protocols, not favoring big corporations, no giving chemical weapons to syrian rebels to blame the government, etc), and at difference of the current situation, should be something that if disclosed it really would have most of the population very upset.
I have a dream, that one day all the little factual posts on Slashdot will not be marked troll because of the color of the moderators politics.
Charge of racism offensive to Obamacare critics
Louisiana state Sen. Karen Carter Peterson last week took to the chamber’s floor to declare opponents of President Barack Obama’s “signature legislative achievement” are motivated by race.
“I have talked to so many members both in the House and the Senate, and you know what? You ready? You ready? What it comes down to? It’s not about how many federal dollars we can receive, it’s not about that. You ready? It’s about race,” Peterson said. “I know nobody wants to talk about that. It’s about the race of this African-American president.”
After Calling Obamacare Critics Racist, LA Legislator Says 'I Didn't Call Anyone a Racist'
Mainstream Scream: Martin Bashir accuses Obama scandal critics of racism
Are Obama's critics racist? Jimmy Carter thinks so
A Modern Timeline of Liberals Claiming That Opposition to Obama = Racism
There is plenty more that could be posted on this topic.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
That is insightful.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
No, I blame individuals like you who have opposed the man from the moment he was elected for most of the problems we are now facing. It doesn't matter if he does good or bad, it's people such as yourself who find the bad in everything - there must be a hidden agenda.
You elect people to represent you who hold the country hostage because they don't like legislation that is, Constitutionally, law of the land. As a result, many are out of work and services cut.
You say we should just pull out of the countries we have been fighting in. Lovely. Except out of the mess comes a bigger one. Now, we can't even see it coming because our intel methods have been exposed and people laud Snowden as a hero.
You blame THIS president because he is the one in office when it was exposed. Surprise - these programs go back before 1966. Each administration has just added to it a little more.
You have yet to show where he violated the Constitutiion. Yet, it's very clear that Congress is nearly about to violate the 14th.
Do I think the man is he messiah? No. But, I think the demonizing the far right has done has shown their character. Obama has not been permitted, from day one, with carrying forth his promised agenda because of the allegiance the right has made, not to this country, but to the Koch brothers and their election money.
If many republicans voted their conscience vs their wallets, things would be a lot better off. Same goes for democrats who vote to the left because there is nothing in the middle. And, if things were exposed while non-partisanship ran the gov't, the problems would be solved without bickering - even if that meant impeachment. Right now, that can't happen .
So much for "hope and change". What it meant was Obama hoped the populace didn't find out what he planned for change. He's now down to a 37% approval rating. I wonder what other presidents have gotten that low? That we need government, laws, and regulations is a given, but we don't need big government nor do we need more than a tiny fraction of the laws and regulations thrust upon us. This administration is working to eliminate the freedom given to us by the Constitution and Bill of Rights starting with open attacks on the first and second. They are working to make it illegal for someone to tell us when the government breaks the law and doesn't follow the constitution, so they can do as they wish, "behind the curtain". Promised an open and transparent administration. It's amazing that there are enough that have yet to see the truth for him to have anywhere near 37%.
I was taught many decades ago to never judge a person by their race, but rather by what they do. I don't care what color or sex the president is. I don't like Obama because, he lied to us, promised lots, delivered none, made Bush look good by taking his faults and making them far worse. He's a master of blaming others for his failures and taking credit for others successes. He manipulates things so it is always appears to be the "other guys fault" He is the epitome of the Chicago politician. Ask his teaching colleagues what kind of person he was (when they could find him). Check his voting record (when he did rarely show up) and stances when a Senator. I don't like him because he is the epitome of a corrupt politician who does not want the best for the country. His apparent goal "Dreams From My Father" and "The Amateur" are to lower us to the level of third world countries. Should we default on the debt the US dollar is likely to loose its place as the currency standard. If that happens things will really get expensive. We'll be paying 7 an 8 dollars a gallon for gas like they do in Europe and that will directly affect the cost of food and travel. Actually, it'll affect the cost of just about everything.
No a White one would have not won and we'd be far better off.