Slashdot Mirror
Fearing Government Surveillance, US Journalists Are Self-Censoring
binarstu writes "Suzanne Nossel, writing for CNN, reports that 'a survey of American writers done in October revealed that nearly one in four has self-censored for fear of government surveillance. They fessed up to curbing their research, not accepting certain assignments, even not discussing certain topics on the phone or via e-mail for fear of being targeted. The subjects they are avoiding are no surprise — mostly matters to do with the Middle East, the military and terrorism.' Yet ordinary Americans, for the most part, seem not to care: 'Surveillance so intrusive it is putting certain subjects out of bounds would seem like cause for alarm in a country that prides itself as the world's most free. Americans have long protested the persecution and constraints on journalists and writers living under repressive regimes abroad, yet many seem ready to accept these new encroachments on their freedom at home.'"
Tell them to come to the UK and they can see _real_ journalism in action.
In America, you have Ferengi style capitalism and call it "freedom".
In the UK, we are certainly not perfect, but we also have capitalism, but with a social conscience, because we understand that in the long run, our way of doing things leads to more freedom for a greater number of people
We also have a habit of telling people who would harm us to go and procreate with themselves. In America, a few thousand people are sadly killed and you cower in terror and throw away everything which made you so respected.
In the UK, we have 7/7/2005 and then the citizens of London rode the tube in a large display of defiance sending a giant f***-you to the terrorists. Your journalists need to come over here and experience _our_ way of life.
Oh, and Edward Snowden, a true American hero, trusted a _British_ newspaper to reveal the truth.
That fact makes me proud to be British.
When my father was a Luftwaffe Soldier/POW in US custody, he saw a German POW's foot being overrun by a US Army (or Army Air Force) truck on purpose. "To make the POW confess the killing of a downed US airman.
So, torture is NOT new for U.S. forces.
nearly one in four has self-censored for fear of government surveillance
That's not exactly what the report said, and I'm just skimming the thing here.
http://www.pen.org/sites/default/files/Chilling%20Effects_PEN%20American.pdf
28% have curtailed or avoided social media activities, and another 12% have seriously considered doing so;
24% have deliberately avoided certain topics in phone or email conversations, and another 9% have seriously considered it;
16% have avoided writing or speaking about a particular topic, and another 11% have seriously considered it;
16% have refrained from conducting Internet searches or visiting websites on topics that may be considered controversial or suspicious, and another 12% have seriously considered it;
13% have taken extra steps to disguise or cover their digital footprints, and another 11% have seriously considered it;
3% have declined opportunities to meet (in person, or electronically) people who might be deemed security threats by the government, and another 4% have seriously considered it.
Boiled down: about one-third of the American press are chickens, about two-thirds are not.
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
Not get molested at airports. Protest without being required to have a permit or sent off to a free speech zone. It's not something I'd personally like to do, but there are many drugs that are illegal. The fourth amendment is being consistently ignored. There are constitution-free zones around the border. Those are just some things that are a problem at the moment. You obviously didn't try very hard if you couldn't think of one problem.
I'd also like to not have my communications spied on by the government.
Carry a pocket knife into a government building. Ride the subway without being searched. Keep my fucking shoes on at the airport. Apply for a job without having to prove my citizenship. Not buy health insurance. Go to Canada without having to carry my passport like we could do for 99% of American history. Write DRM-cracking software. Smoke a joint if I feel like it (I don't actually want to do that, but many do, and who am I to deny them?)
Shall I go on?
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Unless you are a few years older than I am, I doubt that you remember living in a "FREE AMERICA". During the McCarthy days, you were "free" to associate with card carrying communists, of course, but the moment any of the McCarthyites found out about it, you would be dragged through an ugly media trial. After your character had been thoroughly destroyed, you were then free to actually join the party. A lot of black folk might chime in here, to remind you of the many ways that they were "free". In my lifetime, black people were denied service in white restaurants, denied seating at the front of buses, and denied access to necessary public spaces such as restrooms.
I believe that what you actually mean is, you can remember a time when you were completely unaware of civil rights violations all around you. I also remember such a time. Life was wonderful when I was five years old, and my greatest achievements included learning to ride a two-wheeled bike, and passing the test to get into first grade.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
In Boston, at every subway station, the police set up a checkpoint one day a year and search everyone who goes through it. They do this a) to remind the citizens who is really in charge b) to keep up the security theatre that brings them Federal dollars and c) to establish a history of conducting dragnet searches so a future plaintiff cannot claim a "reasonable expectation of privacy."
If there is an American city that has a subway system and does NOT perform this annual charade, please let me know. I would be surprised but please to hear about it.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
"Which, by the way, is itself a misunderstanding about an amendment whose goal was to ensure a militia roughly in the same sense as the Swiss army."
Just no. As a student of our country's history I can tell you that you are simply wrong about this. That's a distortion -- a small but very important distortion -- of what the words mean.
The Second Amendment says that because a "well-regulated militia" is necessary for defense, the right of The People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed... so they can fight off the "well regulated" militia if need be.
The "people's militia" is not "well-regulated". Well-regulated means "trained, disciplined". That's an army. The "people's militia is not trained or disciplined.
That might seem like a small difference but it's very important, and that difference was recognized just a few years ago by the Supreme Court when it struck down D.C.'s gun ban. (As it had been recognized in previous SCOTUS decisions, as well.) The right to bear arms is an individual right, not one belonging to a "militia".
Your little misunderstanding about what the Second Amendment means is: a delusion.
Minor quibble, but I think simply saying "constitution free zones around the border" is a dramatic understatement since only the government thinks of the border of something as one hundred fucking miles from the actual edges of the US. Most Americans live in constitution free zones.