Technology
Why free speech advocates are worried
Now that Julian Assange’s stay in the Ecuadorian embassy in London has come to an end, First Amendment advocates are worried about how his prosecution could affect the rights of journalists.
The Wikileaks co-founder is wanted in Sweden for allegations of sexual assault. But it’s not that charge that worries free speech advocates. It’s the fact that the U.S. Department of Justice filed charges against Assange for “conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer.”
That is, the DOJ is formally charging Assange for encouraging Chelsea Manning to acquire classified documents (that Assange would later publish on Wikileaks) by breaking into a government computer system.
Journalists and free speech advocates worry that the “computer intrusion” charge could open the door for the government to go after news publications. As the Columbia Journalism Review put it:
“Going forward, journalists will need to be vigilant. Assange’s case is specific, but the way the Justice Department responds to his arrest could have serious implications for all of us.”
“Journalists will need to be vigilant”
Ben Wizner of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project got more specific:
“Any prosecution by the United States of Mr. Assange for Wikileaks’ publishing operations would be unprecedented and unconstitutional, and would open the door to criminal investigations of other news organizations. Moreover, prosecuting a foreign publisher for violating U.S. secrecy laws would set an especially dangerous precedent for U.S. journalists, who routinely violate foreign secrecy laws to deliver information vital to the public’s interest.”
The charges specifically relate to breaking into a government computer network, not the act of publishing. However, as Freedom of the Press Foundation Executive Director Trevor Timm points out, the specifics of the case concern all journalistic activities.
“While the Trump administration has so far not attempted to explicitly declare the act of publishing illegal, a core part of its argument would criminalize many common journalist-source interactions that reporters rely on all the time,” Timms said. “Requesting more documents from a source, using an encrypted chat messenger, or trying to keep a source’s identity anonymous are not crimes; they are vital to the journalistic process.”
It’s true, the indictment doesn’t attempt to make publishing a crime. That’s obviously a good thing. But the ENTIRE thing is based on a journalist’s interactions and discussions with a source. No other action is alleged. So it’s still worrying to me.
— Trevor Timm (@trevortimm) April 11, 2019
Others worried whether the conspiracy charge was pretext for prosecuting the press.
There’s no allegation that they successfully broke into SIPRnet, and the seriousness of Assange’s effort is unclear, so I think people can reasonably argue the charges are pretextual and chilling. It’s an argument that will have to look past the face of the indictment tho.
— southpaw (@nycsouthpaw) April 11, 2019
Some, like the New York Times‘ Sheera Frankel, pointed out that Assange crossed a line “no serious journalist” would when he allegedly helped Manning attempt to break into government computers.
It amazes me how many people on here think journalists regularly ask sources to hack computers/steal information for them. This is a line no serious journalist would ever cross, and is a far cry away from a source coming to you with information they obtained on their own.
— Sheera Frenkel (@sheeraf) April 11, 2019
Despite Assange’s tense relationship with journalists and arguable lack of journalistic ethics, some caution that any prosecution of journalistic activities — even of a highly controversial figure like Assange — could still have far-reaching implications for the freedom of the press.
“Whether or not you like Assange, the charge against him are a serious press freedom threat and should be vigorously protested by all those who care about the First Amendment,” Timms said.
First Amendment protects the freedom to publish, an act, not some invented class of people called journalists. Otherwise, the government decides who is a journalist, which means who deserves protection and who doesn’t. Down that road lies tyranny.
— Justin Miller (@justinjm1) April 11, 2019
wild that people replying to this kind of stuff with “assange is not a journalist” don’t seem to realize that the government could easily make that same argument for nearly anyone https://t.co/60HyJXqV63
— Ashley Feinberg (@ashleyfeinberg) April 11, 2019
My views on the risk to journalism in prosecuting Assange haven’t changed. If you can prosecute for publishing material in the public interest, you hand Trump a tool for criminalizing a free press. And I assure you Trump’s people know that. https://t.co/Whh3DyvPi5
— Adam Serwer? (@AdamSerwer) April 11, 2019
Threats to journalists are at an all-time high, and the public’s faith in the media is just now recovering from a 2016 all-time low. So everyone who cares about press freedom in the U.S. should be paying close attention to what happens to Assange next.
-
Entertainment6 days ago
WordPress.org’s login page demands you pledge loyalty to pineapple pizza
-
Entertainment7 days ago
Rules for blocking or going no contact after a breakup
-
Entertainment6 days ago
‘Mufasa: The Lion King’ review: Can Barry Jenkins break the Disney machine?
-
Entertainment5 days ago
OpenAI’s plan to make ChatGPT the ‘everything app’ has never been more clear
-
Entertainment4 days ago
‘The Last Showgirl’ review: Pamela Anderson leads a shattering ensemble as an aging burlesque entertainer
-
Entertainment5 days ago
How to watch NFL Christmas Gameday and Beyoncé halftime
-
Entertainment4 days ago
Polyamorous influencer breakups: What happens when hypervisible relationships end
-
Entertainment3 days ago
‘The Room Next Door’ review: Tilda Swinton and Julianne Moore are magnificent