Journalism is NOT a Crime!

Post-holiday greetings, all.

While looking for something on tv, there was a special on Al Jazeera America on the hazards facing journalists today, with a special focus on three of their journalists now held in jail in Egypt for more than a year.  "Journalism is not a crime" is their phrase used to rally support for their colleagues.

They also had a segment on the subject of the new film, Rosewater, Maziar Bahari, and the film's director, Jon Stewart.  Mr. Bahari, a journalist and filmmaker, was jailed in Iran, interrogated daily, and was also tortured.  He was finally released after 118 days.  His family memoir formed the basis for the film.

There was also a segment on some of the statistics on jailed journalists kept by the Committee to Protect Journalists. There is a great summary of the data at their website.  They count 220 jailed journalists worldwide, the second worst total since they've been keeping the statistics.  Reporters Without Borders also has some data on their homepage, which is worth viewing.

All of us should be concerned that Freedom of the Press is observed worldwide.  That includes our own country.  We should take note of how journalists were treated in Ferguson, and how the government is fighting almost all efforts to be transparent and accountable.  Mr. Bahari's book was originally titled:  Then They Came for Me.  That is, of course, a reference to a "golden oldie" quote, whose message we should definitely heed. (and you might like to visit my take on it - here  ).

UPDATE: 

Developments in case of Al-Jazeera journalists held in Egypt

Read Any Good Banned Books Lately?

Nothing like being right on top of things.  I just saw that this has been "Banned Books Week", which has many sponsors and endorsers, including the American Library Association and the American Booksellers Association.  Well, there's still today to go!

There have been read-outs of selections from banned or challenged works, and people can even submit videos for a "virtual read-out." 

There are two lists you may wish to peruse: one of frequently banned classics and another of frequently challenged books (21st Century list).

Full disclosure:  I haven't read many of these.  Very few actually.  I did read Animal Farm in high school; wasn't all that impressed with it and remember very little.  I did start reading 1984 but never read the whole thing.  I also started Catch-22 but didn't get very far as I found it made little sense to me.  As far as what's on the challenge list: I started My Sister's Keeper as it was one of our One Book, One College selections one year, and I didn't like it one bit.  Didn't make it to the end, which I think must be a pretty bad one.  I also have I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings which I'm sure is quite good (I really should read it one day...).  However I also did start reading The Glass Castle  by Jeannette Walls (it was also a One Book, One College selection).  I found it very intriguing.  For some reason I haven't finished it - and I was curious as to "what happens next..." - so I think someday I will pick it up again.  And I must shout out to Ms. Walls, who was so very gracious when she signed my copy.

The lists also give reasons for challenges.  One of the most prevalent is "not appropriate to age group."  While I don't agree with censorship, we probably should be somewhat sensitive to content given to say, below high school level students.  Giving alternate reading assignments or holding off on some books until the students are a bit older might be some alternatives.

For older students and of course, adults: have you read any good banned books lately?

Can This Supreme Court Ever Get it Right?

Well, the outrages just keep on coming, don't they?  The Supreme Court declined to review the case of James Risen, NYT reporter who might face jail for protecting a source.  This is especially troubling as it seems his testimony really isn't needed to pursue the case against the source!

In how many ways is this wrong?  How can a Free Press (yes, capitals are deserved) do its job without protecting sources which often might face retribution, prosecution, or even other dangers?  How can the press serve the public in making transparent government misconduct if sources are afraid to talk to the media?  How is allowing only government sanctioned reporting in the public interest?  And why do we have to keep fighting this battle?

As you ponder those questions, here are two quotes which are germane:

First: Justice Hugo Black in the Pentagon Papers case (NYT v. United States) -
"Both the history and language of the First Amendment support the view that the press must be left free to publish news, whatever the source, without censorship, injunctions, or prior restraints."

Second: from James Alexander in the Weekly Journal printed by John Peter Zenger back in the 1730's -
"The loss of liberty in general would soon follow the suppression of the liberty of the press; for it is an essential branch of liberty, so perhaps it is the best preservative of the whole.  Even a restraint of the press would have a fatal influence.  No nation ancient or modern has ever lost the liberty of freely speaking, writing or publishing their sentiments, but forthwith lost their liberty in general and became slaves."
You can find out more about the Zenger trial here .

Now back to the case of Mr. Risen.  Many organizations have voiced support for him.  The Freedom of the Press Foundation has a fine post about his case on its blog.  In whatever ways we can, we need to support him.

Developments in China

Did you notice that China is placing new restrictions about what news can be posted on websites? Read about it here.

I'm dismayed that the Chinese government feels the need to restrict the access of its citizens to all information. Let's be vigilant and make sure that we keep access open here in the U. S.. Remember that what someone doesn't want you to read may very well be something you absolutely should read!

Blogging is Subversive?

Wow- a three-fer today.

I was just browsing through some blogs tonight and came across an item in one referencing something I'd just vaguely heard about.

In China, they are now requiring that all blogs be registered (though apparently, this wasn't easy to do) - one requirement of which is the removal of links not approved by the Chinese government (this even includes their friends' websites!) Apparently blogspot blogs are being blocked from use - as well as those of some other providers. Also, Microsoft is censoring text used by Chinese bloggers - words such as "democracy" or "human rights" are not to be used (Yahoo! and Google have been censoring as well). You can read about some developments here .

As a blogger myself, and a firm believer in free speech, I am very troubled by such developments. We can only imagine what it feels like to have your free expression controlled or totally blocked. We had also better be concerned that in current repressive atmosphere which has so little regard for civil liberties that this does not happen here!

Another Outrage Du Jour

This administration's attitude toward scientific information troubles me. There was Phillip Cooney who edited passages of a global warming study to diminish the link between greenhouse gases and global warming. Now scientists who have retired from the Bureau of Land Management report that a scientific analysis was changed. Specifically, passages critical of relaxing grazing regulations for cattle were eliminated or altered. Read their story here.

I feel that it is very important that decisions affecting our precious biosphere be based on a) truthful information and rigorous science, and b) a true concern for protecting our environment. Native Americans (I'm part Delaware) always have a reverence for Mother Earth. We - and our decision makers - need to remember that in the words of one Native American, "What we do to the Earth, we do to ourselves."

It seems to me that this administration falls short on adhering to both of the above criteria. We need to demand that our decision makers be held to higher standards than altering scientific reports to support a conclusion that they support for some reason, even if the data does not.

Happy Birthday, Thomas Jefferson!

I know it's getting late in the day, but Happy Birthday, nevertheless to our Third President. He reminded us that freedom of speech "cannot be limited without being lost."

Let's remember some more thoughts of Jefferson's as his birthday celebration winds down:

"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people...They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."

"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

Those are excellent observations that all of us should remain mindful of.

On or around his birthday, the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression gives out the "Muzzles" to those who have tried to stifle free expression. Go here - or use the link in the side bar - to read about the 2005 Muzzle awardees. I found the story of the high school valedictorian who stood up for her right to free speech against the school who earned a Muzzle very inspiring.

Journalism Under Fire

I truly believe that an independent judiciary is crucial to our system of government. I believe that a free and independent press is as well. That's why I hope the courts would lighten up and not force journalists to reveal confidential sources. Jim Taricani, a Rhode Island reporter was just freed today after serving a sentence of home confinement for not revealing a source. I believe that if a source needs confidentiality, this should be honored. Sometimes, that is the only way the person may feel comfortable about providing information. Without this type of information, often the public would not be completely informed. I want a press that is not afraid to investigate and question everything, especially the government!

Here's another article about recent developments in this area. I hope that we all will support the establishment of a federal shield law for journalists.

We Need More Openness

For anyone who hasn't read the reports, here are two more articles highlighting the trend of this administration toward media manipulation and stifling dissent. The first is by Helen Thomas, a very respected journalist. The second is by Ron Hutcheson of Knight Ridder.

When someone first told me that (at least some) audience members in Bush's campaign events had to sign loyalty oaths, I didn't believe it. However, this has been fairly well documented. I can't believe more people aren't outraged about this. Helen Thomas also mentions some questionable media practices by the Bush camp which have recently come to light. This makes me wonder why the media are so compliant! I can't remember where I read it now, but I read an article contrasting the coverage of protesters against the administration and protesters for Terri Schiavo having her feeding tube reinserted. Groups protesting administration policies barely get noticed, while the other group was given quite a lot of coverage. We need a good, free and independent press; I hope that more journalists will stand up to ensure that Americans have full and correct information with which to make decisions.

Open access to independent information, and open discussion, including dissent, are essential for democracy to work. Have we forgotten this? We preach democracy around the world; the best advertisement for it would be its full practice here at home.