Search

Presents an article about the relations between U.S. military troops in Afghanistan and journalists covering the war. Experiences of journalists who were seeking protection from a U.S. military base in Gardez, Afghanistan; Way in which Afghan troops treated reporters under their protection; Response of military officials to requests of protection for journalists.

This article focuses on how China will cope with an invasion of 20,000 foreign journalists for the 2008 Olympics. China has a government-controlled domestic press and is known to be somewhat heavy-handed in dealing with foreign reporters who break its often ill-defined and ambiguous regulations. The Chinese government has added to the uncertainty by issuing new press regulations that require the international state-run Xinhua news agency to distribute information to Chinese consumers. These rules, which could allow Xinhua to censor news distributed within China, may have been aimed at media companies hoping for a share of the potentially lucrative Chinese market.

This article focuses on the 2004 State of the First Amendment survey, conducted by the First Amendment Center in collaboration with American Journalism Review. The poll shows a recovery from a post-September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks low in public support for the First Amendment in general, but U.S. citizens remain critical of the professionalism and ethics of the people and organizations that deliver the news. In the minds of too many U.S. citizens, freedom of the press is the least popular of the five freedoms protected by the First Amendment, only 15 percent mentions the press when asked to list those five freedoms. More alarming, four in 10 U.S. citizens believe the press has too much freedom. The news for the press is no better in responses to questions that have been asked in previous surveys. For example, while journalists and their critics continue to debate the promiscuous use of anonymous sources, 70 percent this year said they support the right of journalists to keep sources confidential. However, that is 15 points below the 85 percent who said so in 1997. Those who do not believe journalists should be able to keep their sources confidential doubled during that period from 12 percent to 25 percent. Journalists and their advocates need to find new and better ways to deliver that story to the U.S. public. These findings in the 2004 State of the First Amendment survey lend a new level of urgency to that assignment.

This article examines the issue of journalists being served subpoenas to testify against their confidential sources. To further the debate, RonNell Jones, of the University of Arizona, is trying to quantify the problem and provide hard data where there is none. Jones has created a survey for newspaper editors to answer regarding any subpoenas they are aware of. The 24-question survey begins with a set of queries aimed at all news organizations, including those that have not received subpoenas. These focus on newsroom policy on confidential sources, perceptions of the impact of subpoenas and whether the legal climate for the news media has changed. The next section addresses the number of subpoenas the news organization has received, who issued them and for what reason.

This article presents the author's opinion on the role and responsibility of the media as it relates to matters of politics and democracy. He feels the media did not display the requisite level of scepticism when presented with the claims by the administration of George W. Bush in regards to Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. He also denounces the trend to reporting a story without fact-checking, then allowing the other side to refute it. Doing so only give the appearance of objectivity because the journalist has allowed himself to be manipulated by lies.

This article comments on the U.S. government's case against Judy Miller of the New York Times and Matt Cooper of Time as of April 2005. The author illustrates what it feels like in the matter of the government versus the press. The nation's ascendant conservative elements won their power fair and square. Now they are aggressively advancing their political agenda, and, according to the author, that is fair too. That is the way the game is played. The author notes that what troubles him is the part of their playbook that advocates open season on journalists. The author points out that he and other U.S. journalists bear a lot of responsibility for this sorry state. They have seen some spectacular ethical lapses, which further erode media credibility. They have arrogance issues. And the author thinks it is essentially true that they are out of sync with Middle America's values and mores. The author admits that he does not know the answer, but he does not think it is a federal shield law. According to him, journalists are not priests, and there are times when they should comply with prosecution request. In conclusion, the author maintains that courage is something every working journalist needs, especially today.