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.
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.
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.
Which, presumably, is why the Obama Administration has brought charges against more journalists (6) than all other administrations combined (3)?
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
* 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
I reject your premise. Good people do not seek power in the first place.
That's not to say there are no good people with power. But those who have it almost always have it forced upon them by the circumstances of the moment, and when the moment has passed, they try to get rid of it as quickly as possible.
...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!
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
Romney challenged Ted Kennedy, an absolutely sure losing proposition since everybody knew The Swimmer would keep his fat ass in that seat until he died. But Romney still managed to get 40% of the vote, which is incredible.
For governor of MA, Romney was trailing in the polls up until the end against a strong opponent.
No. McCain lost.
sig: sauer
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.
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.