Precarious times for press freedom
The practice of journalism has rarely been more critical — or at greater risk — in the United States. Never before has a president of this nation so aggressively attempted to delegitimize and even threaten established news organizations that produce stories that undermine the narrative he is trying to create. Public distrust of the media did not begin with the election of Donald Trump, but his constant drumbeat of “fake news” and claims of fabrication have only galvanized it.
Yet through the fog of Trump’s rhetorical war, several national news organizations — most notably the Washington Post and New York Times — have been doing a great public service with their investigative reporting of the allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election and the many false statements from the Trump White House. If left to the dispatches issued from Trump and his surrogates, Americans would be under the mistaken impression that his son Donald Jr.’s summer 2016 meeting with the Russians was all about adoptions, millions of people voted illegally in 2016, the U.S. murder rate was the highest it’s been in nearly a half century, and his inauguration crowd was the largest in history.
The list goes on and on. The Washington Post Fact Checker has calculated an average of more than four false or misleading statements since Trump took office.
What is especially disturbing is that Trump does not merely chastise his critics and watchdogs in the press. As a candidate and now president, he has proposed tangible restraints on press freedom that would be in open conflict with the First Amendment.
He recently suggested that network news has become “so partisan, distorted and fake” that the networks’ licenses should be challenged and revoked “if appropriate.” As a candidate, Trump suggested that the nation’s libel laws should be expanded to make it easier for public figures to sue news organizations. He also darkly hinted that he would go after Amazon’s sale-tax status as retribution against founder and CEO Jeff Bezos, who also owns the Washington Post. As president, he pressed the FBI director to jail reporters who publish classified information.
The good news is that the fact-challenged president’s threats are mostly hollow. The federal government does not license broadcast networks, only individual stations. There are no federal libel laws; they are set by the 50 states.
Still, the president is setting an unmistakable tone that the First Amendment doesn’t really matter.
“It’s frankly disgusting that the press is able to write whatever it wants to write,” Trump has said.
Americans should think about what the world looks like where journalists are censored, intimidated or silenced by those in power. Journalists are being routinely killed by repressive regimes in Russia and the Philippines. Critical reports of government wrongdoing in India have led to defamation lawsuits and attacks by mobs. In Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has presided over a relentless crackdown on press freedom, with journalists being rounded up and imprisoned, since a failed coup attempt last year. It included the recent conviction in abstentia on terrorism charges of the Wall Street Journal’s Ayla Albayrak, who had been working in Turkey. The Journal’s editor in chief called the charges “unfounded” and the conviction “wildly inappropriate.”
More than 100 journalists have been killed in Mexico since 2000, many by the ruthless factions in the drug trade, and the most favorable interpretation of the government response has been ineffectiveness. Journalists have been tortured or killed at the behest of local officials. A federal office established to prosecute crimes against freedom of expression has resulted in just a few convictions over the past six years.
Last week in Malta, Europe’s smallest member state, investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was killed when a bomb placed beneath her car was detonated remotely. Caruana Galizia had drawn the ire of a wide range of politicians, bankers and criminal elements with her exposes on money laundering and myriad other cases of malfeasance. The audience for her blog often exceeded the combined circulation of the nation’s newspapers. Malta Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, whose financial dealings were the subject of Caruana Galizia’s reporting, has asked for FBI assistance in the investigation into her death.
And so it goes around the world. These are dangerous times for many pursuers of the truth about what their governments are doing. It’s imperative to note that the imprisonment of and violence against journalists is only part of the toll on freedom. The unseen damage is the stories of public interest that were stopped or never initiated because of the atmosphere of intimidation.
The United States obviously is nowhere near those levels of suppression of press freedom. But this is no time for complacency. The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker has reported that there have been 31 arrests and 30 attacks on journalists so far this year. Reporters covering protests or rallies have become especially vulnerable, according to the Tracker’s research. It brings to mind the way Trump whips his crowds into a frenzy with his hate-themedia rhetoric at his rallies, which has resulted in legitimate concerns from journalists at the scene.
The First Amendment cannot be taken for granted in an era where the ostensible leader of the free world seethes that journalists have the freedom to report what they want.