Journalists say rights are ignored
WASHINGTON — First, there was the news that the Justice Department had secretly seized telephone records of reporters at The Associated Press.
Reports later surfaced that the department had investigated a Fox News journalist as a potential criminal for doing his job.
Those actions by President Obama's administration are part of an unprecedented crackdown on classified national security leaks.
And that has led journalists, First Amendment scholars and groups that advocate for government transparency to question how much the White House values a free press.
“The scope of this action calls into question the very integrity of Department of Justice policies toward the press and its ability to balance, on its own, its police powers against the First Amendment rights of the news media and the public's interest in reporting on all manner of government conduct,” according to a recent letter to Attorney General Eric Holder from 52 media organizations, including McClatchy.
Obama said he is trying to strike a balance between the media's First Amendment protections against government censorship and national security interests.
But his administration has aggressively prosecuted whistle-blowers under the 1917 Espionage Act.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- New heart failure drug works much better than current treatment, study finds
- Obama backs off immigration vow
- Pilot in Atlantic Ocean crash lost consciousness, Coast Guard says
- Cleveland welcomes server farms
- Squashing stereotypes has women learning carpentry
- University of Wisconsin researchers work to customize vegetables for specific uses
- Mom charged in girl’s death in line for $1M from her trust fund
- Judge reaffirms Texas’ ‘Robin Hood’ system of school funding unconstitutional
- U.S. waffling on ISIS feeds confusion among possible allies
- Astronomers get look at birth of huge galaxy
- New heart drug seen as significant breakthrough