First Amendment: Freedom of the Press
In the twenty-first century, what does it mean to report the "news."
This freedom is a cornerstone of our country that we often take for granted.
The ability to report the “news.” Having the contents of said news be factual and hard-hitting in opposition to corporations, government (all facets), the general layman, or other news outlets themselves. This ability is not guaranteed in other parts of the world, while it’s true that there are other countries with “freedoms.” There is no other country like the USA regarding freedoms and civil liberties. The ability to speak up about injustices and do it publicly is central primarily to America. That’s not to say there’s no other place where people feel injustices or persecuted; instead, that’s to point out that no other country can call people out on the carpet, both on a commercial level and an individual level. Classically speaking, the freedom of speech and the press’s ability have been closely intertwined for almost as long as the institution of said freedoms.
So much so that there was this discussion on the matter.
"Some have raised the question of whether the free speech clause and the free press clause are coextensive, or whether one reaches where the other does not. It has been much debated, for example, whether the “institutional press” is entitled to greater freedom from governmental regulations or restrictions than non-press individuals, groups, or associations. Things Justice Stewart has argued: “That the First Amendment speaks separately of freedom of speech and freedom of the press is no constitutional accident, but an acknowledgment of the critical role played by the press in American society."
Freedom of the press.
Yet another factor to be aware of within the confines of those working for the press.
Sources! If you’re handing out the confidential information of your sources outside of press-related circles, you may not be in business very long. Especially if you’re an “investigative journalist.” Covering those stories requires a level of confidentiality that I believe other press sectors don’t necessarily have. Look at the “Watergate scandal,” for example. What would’ve happened to the source if he had been exposed during that time? I don’t have absolutes, but I can tell you it wouldn’t have been beneficial for the source to be outed.
However, Our freedoms in this regard are being eroded, and if we’re not paying attention, we may wake up to the U.S.S.A or “The people’s republic of America.”
And no, neither one of those is great for the American people! From one sovereign citizen to another, I’m not going to go belly up to a police state! No one truly knows what will become of this once-great nation. But I can tell you one thing for sure, for many law-abiding citizens, following along with a totalitarian country is not in our plans whatsoever.
Even people who once held High clearance positions in the government and had access to exceedingly detailed documents and classified programs turned the tables and said NO! I’m not going to be a part of this!
Such people as Edward Snowden.
But he was smart enough to realize after working in high-level governmental positions that he wouldn’t have a fair shake at being heard before a judge, much less a jury. No, he did the intelligent thing and Involved the press. But with his understanding of classified programs, he knew he had to approach this precipice cleverly. After all, telling the world that the government was spying on ordinary citizens and tapping into computer webcams routinely without prior authorization would be committing suicide to try to go through the courts. And as history would tell us, he was one hundred percent correct on how they would react. He was in exile for several years in Russia, just recently becoming a citizen.
He recently wrote a book within the last few years: Permanent Record.
The book details numerous aspects of his work within the agency and other details of his life. The U.S government promptly filed a lawsuit against him. But not to stop publishing the book; it was to make sure he didn’t receive a dime from publishing the book.
Edward Snowden lawsuit.
Well played, government well played, hit people where it counts… In the wallet!
Unfortunately for the powers that be, more and more people are waking up from their blissful ignorance and are becoming more aware that our country is not what it once was at its inception.
And Snowden’s testimony was just the catalyst for waking people up faster.
But had he not taken such measures and gone through the channels, he did. We might not have ever heard what he had to say.
Since then, he has been up to a few things, such as this venture
Freedom of the Press Foundation.
Here’s a portion of the original interview with Edward Snowden
The weight and breadth of the moral responsibilities of a journalist, especially an investigative journalist. It is quite heavy. You are the one responsible for breaking news stories. You are the one responsible for raising awareness among the general populace.
With that said, much of the associated press isn’t interested in the truth these days.
There are those out there still picking up the mantle of responsibility.
But nowadays, you get more reliable news from independents and freelancers alike.
As stated at the beginning, this individual freedom is foundational to our country, but sadly we’re losing that battle as things progress under the current administration.
If you speak out against the establishment, you’re an “insurrectionist” and must be dealt with swiftly.
Here’s an excerpt from this website
constitutionus.com
”Freedom of the press provides publishers complete control over the ideas and opinions or any information they wish to publish. This freedom also includes the right to refuse to publish something and be free from any coercion.
The provision of the freedom of the press creates a vibrant marketplace to field ideas with a wide range of opinions. A free press provides a platform for both the free expression of ideas and the dissemination of information.”
Henceforth a free and “unrestricted” populace should be able to voice their concerns over corruption and raise questions of a fair and inquisitive nature without fear that their government will come banging down their doors to silence their voice.
Here’s yet another quote from the same site:
”Therefore, the First Amendment freedom of the press sets up an environment of creating a watchdog of government activities.
This environment is critical to maintaining a democracy, where the free press holds the government accountable for its actions, serving the needs of the people and not the government.”
However, what we see today is quite startling!
One recent incident, especially.
”MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell told The Daily Beast on Tuesday night that the FBI seized his cellphone while he was at a Hardee’s restaurant.”
You ask why did this happen in the first place? He was an outspoken supporter of the trump administration and vocal about his viewpoint and the viewpoint of many. That believes the 2020 election was stolen and fraudulently elected the current puppet administration > Biden/Harris.
The government and powers that be wanted to send a message loud and clear that dissent would not be tolerated. In this new America. Where the rule of law no longer applies to those at the top, and if you vocalize dissent against the current administration in any way, shape, or form, you will be penalized for it!
Buckle up, folks, because it’s about to get bumpy. Between the roll-out of “Executive order 14067.” Recent speeches by Biden, the censorship we feel as citizens of the once-great nation. The associated looming prospect of a “social credit score system.”
And a host of other talking points.
Tucker Carlson on Mike Lindell's FBI raid
This is what we have to look forward to with a “social credit score”