‘It’s Information Warfare Against Journalism, Against the Public’
"The state now wants to make sharing unapproved information a crime," DSWright writes at FireDogLake. "Which is to say the stakes in the Barrett Brown case could not be higher."
“The state now wants to make sharing unapproved information a crime,” DSWright writes at FireDogLake. “Which is to say the stakes in the Barrett Brown case could not be higher.”
The author explains:
The government is pressing charges that carry up to 100 years in prison against Brown mostly for the “crime” of doing journalism. Which seems to be a pattern as the Obama Administration targets reporters along with whistleblowers. Only journalism that flatters the powerful is legal, journalism that brings truth to power is suspect. Leaks of classified information are fine if they are approved, treason if unapproved. Brown’s journalism was not only not state approved, it embarrassed the powerful and now he’s in jail.
The majority of the time Brown faces is for sharing one hyperlink. In a chat room, he posted a link to the customer database of Stratfor Global Intelligence hacked by Anonymous. That’s it.
Links are important; they are the fabric of the World Wide Web. In 2011, a State Dept. diplomat lost his top-secret clearance because he linked to WikiLeaks. (It’s worth mentioning that Quentin Tarantino is now suing Gawker for sharing a link to a leaked script.) Brown’s case could establish a chilling precedent in the U.S., one where technology reporters are even more afraid of linking to data dumps released by hackers than they already are.
… Yet, as of now, the corporate/mainstream media are essentially ignoring the case. Instead of shining a spotlight on such an open attack against a free press there is a practical blackout of information. Passing references to the case appear in elite media as if the case is irrelevant to the future of journalism, just some exotic happening in fly-over country that involves a nobody.
Read more here.
— Posted by Alexander Reed Kelly.
Wait, before you go…If you're reading this, you probably already know that non-profit, independent journalism is under threat worldwide. Independent news sites are overshadowed by larger heavily funded mainstream media that inundate us with hype and noise that barely scratch the surface. We believe that our readers deserve to know the full story. Truthdig writers bravely dig beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that tells you what’s really happening and who’s rolling up their sleeves to do something about it.
Like you, we believe a well-informed public that doesn’t have blind faith in the status quo can help change the world. Your contribution of as little as $5 monthly or $35 annually will make you a groundbreaking member and lays the foundation of our work.
Support Truthdig
"Both well-meaning and more illicit-minded intelligence professionals basically realize [exposures of the inner workings of power] can't go on," the publisher and journalist tells the "On Contact" host in a discussion about attacks on such organizations as WikiLeaks.
Further enraging state residents, Michele Reagan acknowledged that many voters were given provisional ballots because their party affiliation had been changed without their knowledge.
A look back at some of our favorites from the reading stack.
Washington long has had an unholy alliance with one of the world's worst abusers. We must cut those ties.
As the surveillance state has harnessed the very technologies that were supposed to liberate us, a new book explores the shadowy world of Anonymous, an online "community" that has targeted corporations and governments guilty of perceived offenses against digital liberty.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.