Assange Is Free, But US Spite Will Chill Reporting for Years
The deal shows how eager the US government is to both save face and remain a threatening force against investigative reporters.
FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.


The deal shows how eager the US government is to both save face and remain a threatening force against investigative reporters.


US journalists invoke the First Amendment a lot, but not so much when it extends to regular folks saying NO to the US government.


A key witness against Julian Assange has recanted his testimony, but this blow to the US case has received zero media coverage.


Through their efforts to discredit Assange and WikiLeaks, corporate media have snugly aligned themselves with the contemporary brokers of US imperial power against a journalistic movement that, over the last decade, has presented them with their most significant challenge.


Whatever your view of Assange might be, it seems clear he shares virtually nothing in common with those in positions of influence in big media outlets, who have been only too happy to watch his demise.


Assange has already been arbitrarily detained for several years, according to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. Now Assange could be punished even more brutally if the UK extradites him to the US.


A piece that started as a factual news report was transformed into an allegation—after it went viral and was picked up across international media.


The problem is that the Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” column is often not in the business of checking facts, but instead offers its own judgements and opinions under the imprimatur of factchecking.


Meet the Press’s Chuck Todd asked WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange a total of eight questions, all of which were about alleged foreign hacking of the DNC, never asking about the substance of the leaks.


In this moment of well-earned glory, why would the primary party responsible for the Panama Papers go out of its way to take a swipe at WikiLeaks, and, by extension, a prisoner of conscience?


Ecuador’s media law represents something more complex than an attempt to bully critics. The Organic Communications Law attempts to treat the news media like a public good or service, with regulations intended to benefit citizens. It calls on each outlet to develop a code of ethics, calls for swift correction of errors, and requires national outlets to have ombudsmen to deal with public complaints.


Attacking Edward Snowden’s character with an amateur understanding of mental health medicine not only distracts from the the secret mass surveillance of U.S. citizens, it also further marginalizes an already highly stigmatized portion of our society.


The New York Times reports that Wikileaks’ “journalistic reputation was…undercut by two prominent articles published by the New York Times.” But if anyone’s journalistic reputation was hurt by those articles, it was the Times’.


To Washington Post columnist Walter Pincus, something about NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden just doesn’t smell right. Lucky for him he gets space in a prestigious newspaper to work out his hunch–apparently without any editors or factcheckers to get in his way.


The Washington Post, clearly missing its old left-wing Latin American target, sneers that “replacing the deceased Hugo Chavez as the hemisphere’s preeminent anti-U.S. demagogue” is Correa’s mission.


Snowden, in Marshall’s view, is the kind of leaker who belongs in prison: “I do not see how you can’t prosecute Snowden.” For Marshall and other journalists who fundamentally identify with the state, it’s OK to help journalists to debate surveillance policy—it’s just not OK to try to change it.


In most places, a record like Bob Beckel would probably lead your employer to tell you to take your act elsewhere. But if you’re running a right-wing propaganda network, he’s a pretty valuable “leftist” to keep around.


There seems to be an expectation in the Assange case that a dissident must take refuge with a government with a sterling human rights record. This message is conveyed by journalists whose own country has detained, harassed and killed their journalistic colleagues.


Portraying Assange a ‘nut job’ says little about Julian Assange–and plenty about the corporate media.


You get an impression from the headline and thrust of the Times piece that would lead you to believe that Assange consorts with anti-Semitic Holocaust deniers, gets angry when they are exposed as such and alleges that a Jewish conspiracy is out to get him.

FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation. We work to invigorate the First Amendment by advocating for greater diversity in the press and by scrutinizing media practices that marginalize public interest, minority and dissenting viewpoints. We expose neglected news stories and defend working journalists when they are muzzled. As a progressive group, we believe that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information.
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201
New York, NY 10001
Tel: 212-633-6700
We rely on your support to keep running. Please consider donating.