Author: Project Censored

  • testing

    The post testing appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • In August, 2022, two important acts of resistance hinted at a sea change in attitudes toward invasive surveillance technologies. First, New York University’s Brennan Center sued the Department of Homeland Security for violating a Freedom of Information request regarding how the agency utilizes social media to monitor U.S. citizens. Days later, it was announced that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is suing data brokerage company Kochava for the sale of geolocation information that may violate the privacy of women seeking reproductive health care. 

    In The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires, technology scholar Tim Wu argues that throughout U.S. history, communication technologies progress in a cycle from a universally accessible medium that brings pandemonium and creativity, to an homogenized, sanitized, and pasteurized vehicle that serves industrial interests. At the start of the cycle, the public has a positive view of the medium, believing it will deliver a utopian future, but by the end of the cycle, the public is left with skepticism and scorn toward the medium. 

    Digital technologies have followed this trajectory, going from an information super highway that promised individual autonomy to a monopoly of platforms that surveil and exploit users. Indeed, responding to the revelations from whistleblowers and investigations that revealed the ways in which tech companies mislead the public, amplify false information on their platforms, engage in inconsistent content moderation practices, knowingly exacerbate mental health issues for users (particularly young girls), ignore privacy concerns when it comes to sharing user data, and prioritize profits over user safety, users have soured the public on tech companies. Only 34% of the public has a positive view of big-tech companies. 

    Surveillance technologies in schools do not seem to foment the same collective ire. Students, families, administrators, and community members are deeply concerned about the inclusion of these invasive technologies in classrooms. Within moments of publishing an article on the connection between surveillance technologies and book burning, we received copious messages from concerned readers with examples of educational surveillance infractions in their communities noting that they feel isolated in their knowledge of surveillance invasion and powerless in how to respond. 

    Schools use digital technology such as facial recognition software and school issued devices to monitor students’ social media use, mental health, mood, and almost every movement on campus. Big-tech companies have long tried to enter the classroom, and have found success by offering economic incentives to educators and ‘free’ devices for students such as laptops and Chromebooks. Big-tech has exploited loopholes in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 and Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), by adding and collecting data from monitoring tools to all school issued devices. Under the auspices of helping schools Gaggle, GoGuardian and Securely offer packages to filter content on school issued devices.

    These data collected from these devices can be sold to third parties such as the U.S. Military and intelligence agencies, both of which are known to receive and share data with big-tech. Student data also becomes available through data breaches, which occur frequently –1850 breaches since 2005, or about 108 per year. Data can be used by law enforcement to prosecute students, data brokers and advertisers to predict or modify student behavior, stalkers to target individuals, and by powerful institutions to disrupt activism. 

    The shift to online learning during the COVID-19 saw privacy advocates voice concerns for teacher and student privacy, but the subsequent response has ramped up student surveillance. For example, a Washington State a program aimed at screening young people for mental health concerns was sharing extremely sensitive information captured from the students with third partners. Unfortunately, most current pushback is largely weak and toothless legislation. This is typified by a Maryland proposed policy that aimed to set boundaries for data collection, but left students vulnerable to data breaches. 

    As a 2019 judgment against Google reveals, there is little incentive to end problematic practices.  Even when legislation holds companies financially responsible for compromising user privacy, – such as Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (COPPA) or California’s Children’s Online Safety Bill– the profits made from collecting and analyzing student data far outweighs the fees paid for the violation. 

    Some of the student awareness and frustration with digital surveillance in schools has actually thwarted the learning process because they practice resistance in the form of less classroom engagement and self-censorship. In a rare example of resistance, in August, 2022, a federal judge ruled that Cleveland State University violated the U.S. Constitution when it allowed instructors to use video and other third party software to scan a student’s home while taking an exam. The lawsuit was brought about by Aaron Ogletree, a matriculated student, and represents a major win for students and privacy in schools.

    It remains to be seen if these are the early stages of the final phase of Wu’s cycle, but these collective efforts represent significant resistance to big-tech’s efforts to normalize surveillance and user isolation. 


    Nolan Higdon is a Project Censored national judge and university lecturer at Merrill College and the Education Department at University of California, Santa Cruz.

    Allison Butler is vice president of the Media Freedom Foundation and director of the Media Literacy Certificate Program in the Department of Communication at the University of Massachusetts Amherst


    Image by José Miguel from Pixabay

    The post Entering the Resistance Phase of the Surveillance Education Cycle: Finding Ways to Protect Privacy in Schools appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • This week, Eleanor Goldfield digs into mining – past and present. First, author and organizer Mitch Troutman discusses his latest book, The Bootleg Coal Rebellion: The Pennsylvania Miners who Seized an Industry. Mitch shares the importance of remembering and sharing a radical past, as he puts it: nothing was ever inevitable and that history is taught best when it gives us agency in the present. He also explains the role of media in uplifting the miner’s struggle, something more difficult to recognize in today’s media landscape. Next, Eleanor talks with Jamie Kneen from Mining Watch to discuss the fallacy of green growth vis a vis lithium – a metal that many are saddling with utopian hopes for the future while the reality screams of neocolonialist extraction in line with other precious metals in a global capitalist market. Kneen highlights the importance of scale in discussing a livable future as well as the dirty fallout from lithium mining.

    The post The Past and Present of Mining appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • Celebrating Banned Books Week, September 18-24

     

    This September marks the 40th anniversary of Banned Books Week, an annual celebration of the right to read. Book challenges and bans are at an all-time high. During the week of September 18-24, events across the United States will take place, organized around the theme “Books Unite Us–Censorship Divides Us.” Project Censored is a longtime supporter and proud cosponsor of Banned Books Week.

    Mickey Huff hosted a special Project Censored Show radio episode celebrating Banned Books Week, featuring Betsy

    banned books

     Gomez, coordinator of the Banned Books Week Coalition; Cameron Samuels, a student who made headlines for championing a right to read campaign in Texas and Banned Books Week’s first Youth Honorary Chair; Jordan Smith, digital editor of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund; and Nico Perrino, executive vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).

    On September 15, Project director Mickey Huff moderated a Constitution Day panel at Diablo Valley College on academic freedom, cancel culture, and the recent surge in book challenges and bans across the United States. The panel featured Nico Perrino of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), Betsy Gomez of the Banned Books Week Coalition, and Nolan Higdon, coauthor with Huff of Let’s Agree to Disagree: A Critical Thinking Guide to Communication, Conflict Management, and Critical Media Literacy.

    Finally, Mickey penned an op-ed “Banned in the USA” calling for unequivocal condemnation of censorship and attacks on academic freedom, urging people to read more banned and challenged books and encourage others to do the same.


    Thanks and Best Wishes to Our Magnificent Summer Interns

    Interns

    As the calendar turns to September and the school year resumes, we say goodbye and thank you to the Project’s Summer 2022 interns, Kate HorganAnnie KorugaSam Peacock, and Lauren Reduzzi.

    During the past months they helped to create an international database of English-language newspapers, contributed research to the Project’s forthcoming yearbook, created striking visuals and crisp copy for our social media outreach (which you may have seen on our Instagram or Facebook pages), and conducted ongoing research on news coverage of community gun violence–to note just some of the highlights from their outstanding contributions to the Project’s work.

    We’ll miss Kate, Annie, Sam, and Lauren, even as we wish each of them all the best in their continued studies.


    Project Censored on Censorship and Surveillance at Word Up Bookshop

    Veronica Santiago Liu, Heidi Boghosian, Andy Lee Roth, and Michael Tencer

    Pictured in this image from left to right: Veronica Santiago Liu, Heidi Boghosian, Andy Lee Roth, and Michael Tencer

    On August 27, Heidi Boghosian and Andy Lee Roth spoke on censorship and surveillance at Word Up Community Bookshop/Librería Comunitaria, in Washington Heights, New York. Veronica Santiago Liu, the former editor of the Censored yearbook series, who helped found Word Up, moderated the conversation. Boghosian, Roth, and Liu discussed how censorship and surveillance intertwine to limit public debate, fuel intolerance, and amplify pressures to conform, while emphasizing that none of these counter-democratic outcomes is inevitable. By organizing together, first to inform themselves and then to act, communities can effectively resist censorship and surveillance. Among those in attendance was Michael Tencer, editor of the Censored yearbook series from 2018-2021 and a dear friend of the Project.

    For those interested in a taste of the event, Mickey Huff’s interview with Boghosian and Roth for the Project Censored Show is archived on the Project’s radio webpage.


    Dispatches: Project Censored in the News

    The Project’s Dispatches series continues to provide timely insights and perspectives on current media topics. In the past month, it has featured Kathleen Minelli and Steve Macek’s report on how Corporate Media Has Failed to Report Accurately on the Threats to Women’s Reproductive RightsNolan Higdon’s analysis of The Alex Jones Playbook, and Andy Lee Roth’s account of two somber anniversaries in journalism, The Deadly Business of Reporting Truth.

    In addition to the Project’s regular Dispatches, the corporate news media have also published two recent articles by Project Censored authors. On August 25, the USA Today published Allison Butler and Nolan Higdon’s Strangers Are Spying on Your Child. And Schools Are Paying Them to Do It; and, on September 2, the San Francisco Chronicle published Nolan Higdon’s op/ed, Zuckerberg Interview With Joe Rogan Was a PR Stunt.


    The Project Censored Show

    The Project Censored Show has produced episodes on

    Trader Joe’s employees’ unionizing efforts, featuring Sarah Beth Ryther (an episode that is also available on the Project’s YouTube channel here); and Clayton Weimers of Reporters Without Borders on The Confluence of Surveillance and Censorship and Violence Against Journalists, an episode which also includes Heidi Boghosian, author of “I Have Nothing to Hide”: And 20 Other Myths About Surveillance and Privacy, and Project Censored’s Andy Lee Roth.

    Additional shows included discussions featuring Eleanor Goldfield, Samantha Blanchard, and India Walton on Music, The Clash Between Capitalism and Art, and Solutions to the Student Loan Debt Crises; and Kevin Gosztola, author of the forthcoming book Guilty of Journalism, and Rebecca Vincent of Reporters Without Borders, on the  Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival and an update on Julian Assange.

    You can help Project Censored spread the word about news censorship and the importance of independent journalism by subscribing to the Project’s YouTube channel here!


     

    Looking to the Future…

    The 3rd annual Critical Media Literacy Conference of the Americas (CMLCA) will take place from October 21-23 in Oakland, California. Conference sessions and panels are free and open to the public for registered participants. The conference

     program is available here and you can register to attend at this link.

    We couldn’t be more excited about the upcoming release of The Media and Me: A Guide to Critical Media Literacy for Young People, the second title jointly published by The Censored Press in partnership with Seven Stories Press.

    We aren’t the only ones who are enthusiastic about the book. Here is some advance praise for The Media and Me:

    “We have needed a book like this for a long time! The Media and Me is an exciting invitation to think critically about the media that surround us. It makes a powerful call for action, to change our media system. This is a book that everybody should read.”

    —David Buckingham, professor, Loughborough University and King’s College London, UK

    “Project Censored’s decades-long efforts to promote critical media literacy are finally extending to even younger audiences—needed now more than ever!”

    —Veronica Santiago Liu, Word Up Community Bookshop/Librería Comunitaria

    The Media and Me is essential to help young adults think more critically and question the very media they use every day.”

    —Jeff Share, co-author, The Critical Media Literacy Guide: Engaging Media and Transforming Education

    The Media and Me challenges educators and students to think differently about the media they encounter and consume. Texts like this one are crucial in a world that is awash in messages that we are otherwise left to navigate without so much as a lifejacket.”

    Michael A. Spikes, lecturer & curriculum specialist at Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism, Media, and Integrated Marketing Communications

    The Media and Me is due in October and available for pre-order now.

    The post THE PROJECT CENSORED NEWSLETTER – September 2022 appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • For the first segment of this week’s show, Mickey talks with Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges shares some of the stories from his newest book, The Greatest Evil Is War. The book is based on interviews with dozens of victims of war, including families of soldiers, wounded veterans, and civilian survivors of battle. Hedges lays out the many costs of war, and having seen it up close, calls for its unequivocal end across the world. In the second half-hour, historian Peter Kuznick explains the often untold historical legacy of the recently-deceased former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Kuznick says that Gorbachev not only brought vital reforms to the USSR, but made unprecedented arms-reduction proposals that might have put the world on course to complete nuclear disarmament, had the Reagan Administration not rejected the ideas. Both guests call out the horrors of war and the need for a seriously rejuvenated global movement for peace.

    Notes:
    Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer-Prize-winning journalist with a long career as a foreign correspondent around the world, including battle zones like Iraq and the Balkans. His books include War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, Death of the Liberal Class, America: The Farewell Tour, and his new work The Greatest Evil Is War. Peter Kuznick is Professor of History at American University in Washington DC, and also directs the Nuclear Studies Program at that institution. He and Oliver Stone co-wrote The Untold History of the United States.

    Image by Annette Jones from Pixabay

    The post The Many Costs of War and the Legacy of Mikhail Gorbachev appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • By Mickey Huff

    In her best-selling novel Speak, young adult author Laurie Halse Anderson wrote, “Censorship is the child of fear and the father of ignorance.” Since the American Library Association (ALA) and Association of American Publishers helped launch Banned Books Week (BBW) forty years ago, that dysfunctional family of censorship has unfortunately grown larger and more vociferous. Across the United States, this past year has brought a staggering increase in book challenges, bans, and other attacks on the right to read and academic freedom.

    Most efforts to curtail access to books involves younger readers at schools and public libraries. There are recurrent themes to such challenges that result in the muting of voices from outside the so-called “mainstream” of American society. According to the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, the top ten most challenged books in recent years are by or about marginalized peoples, including BIPOC and LQBTQIA+ authors and characters; these books typically address complex, challenging issues such as sexuality, abuse, and violence; or they simply use profanity. Some of the books reference traumatic realities in people’s lives, others question the societal status quo on issues from police violence to heteronormativity or identity politics. Regardless, all are important works of literature, including many artistic and broadly appealing comics that have something to teach us, especially in educational settings. However, increasingly, parents and local community members around the country disagree.

    In Spring 2022, PEN America published findings from its first ever Index of School Book Bans, a comprehensive count of more than 1,500 instances of individual books banned by some 86 school districts in 26 states, between July 2021 and March 2022, impacting more than two million students. The ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom reported fielding 729 book challenges in 2021 alone, targeting nearly 1,600 titles at schools and universities. Both organizations clearly state that the number of reports received are only a fraction of the challenges and potential bans that occur, many of which result in books being removed from shelves, in breach of existing policies, without fanfare or public knowledge, and often under a cloud of fear among librarians, faculty, and staff.

    This rise in censorship comes at a time when the United States is in the throes of a larger moral panic epitomized by a corrosive “cancel culture” that spans the political spectrum from right to left. Although educators and concerned citizens have sounded the alarm, cancel culture has also galvanized students to fight back on the front lines, in classrooms and at school board meetings. Cameron Samuels did just that in their suburban Houston school district this past year as a high school senior, with great success. Starting as a lone voice decrying parental challenges to books at their school, Samuels gradually built a coalition of students, engaging the school board and broader community, and creating a “FReadom Week” initiative that distributed more than 700 banned titles. The campaign Samuels led kept many challenged books on the shelves at the school’s library, garnered national attention, and led to Samuels being recognized this year as BBW’s first ever Youth Honorary Chair.

    But challenges to books are not the only issue facing students and our schools. There has also been an increase in legislative efforts to curtail curriculum, controlling what can and cannot be taught, in at least 36 states. Another PEN America study, “America’s Censored Classrooms,” measured a 250 percent increase over the past year in what the study refers to as Educational Gag Orders, state legislative efforts to restrict “teaching about topics such as race, gender, American history, and LGBTQ+ identities in K–12 and higher education.” They include not only the infamous “Don’t Say Gay” law and Stop WOKE Act in Florida (which several other states are mimicking), but also legislative attacks on critical race theory (despite it seldom being taught in K-12 classrooms) and requirements to enforce the teaching of more “patriotic” (read: acritical) assessments of American history, whatever that may be. All of the bills were launched by Republicans in their respective states, with only one Democratic sponsor among them. While many in the GOP denounce cancel culture on the left, they seem to be perfectly fine controlling what can be read, discussed, and taught in the nation’s schools.

    Moving forward, one thing is clear: although the country is divided on many topics and issues, cancelling views or perspectives with which one disagrees is not the solution. Open dialogue, discourse, and debate hold the answers to our current conundrum. Opposing censorship and supporting academic freedom must be bipartisan issues. It is one thing to prohibit one’s own child from reading a specific book, shortsighted and ineffectual as that prohibition may be; it is another thing altogether to extend that forbidding desire to the public at large, depriving others of hearing the many wondrous and diverse voices that comprise our society. Children should not be taught to fear ideas different than their own, and adults should not let ignorance guide their civic engagement.

    For its 40th anniversary, the Banned Books Week Coalition’s theme is “Books Unite Us: Censorship Divides Us.” Indeed, as we survey today’s contentious political climate, we would all do well to pick up, read, and share a banned book or two. Doing so, we might discover amazing things about each other—not to mention ourselves. We can learn how to “agree to disagree,” while honoring the higher ideals of an open society, free expression, and the right to read. Censorship anywhere is a threat to “FReadom” everywhere. Celebrate Banned Books Week September 18-24, but stay vigilant and keep reading and sharing banned books every week throughout the year.

    Mickey Huff is director of Project Censored, president of the Media Freedom Foundation, and a professor of history and journalism. He is co-author of the critical thinking textbook Let’s Agree to Disagree, as well as the forthcoming The Media and Me, and is co-editor of Project Censored’s State of the Free Press 2022. Project Censored is a long-time member of the Banned Books Week Coalition.

    The post Banned in the USA appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • On this Project Censored Show, host Mickey Huff dedicates the hour to Banned Books Week 2022 (Sept. 18-24). Now in its 40th year, Banned Books Week is an annual event celebrating and promoting the freedom to read, and resisting efforts to ban books from library shelves, especially in school settings. Mickey’s four guests bring a variety of perspectives to the program, but are united in their opposition to censorship and staunch advocacy of the freedom to read. Project Censored is a longtime co-sponsor of the Banned Books Week Coalition.

    Notes:
    -Betsy Gomez is coordinator for the Banned Books Week Coalition.
    -Cameron Samuels is a recent high school graduate and activist from the Katy Independent School District near Houston, Texas. Cameron was named the Youth Honorary Chair of Banned Books Week (the first time the title has been awarded) for actively opposing book banning in the District as a student there.
    -Jordan Smith is the digital editor at the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund.
    -Nico Perrino is Executive Vice-President at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, formerly known as the Foundation for Individual Rights In Education, an organization specializing in protecting academic freedom.

    Image by Pretty Sleepy Art from Pixabay

    The post Banned in the USA: Banned Books Week Celebrates its 40th Anniversary as Book Bans and Challenges to Academic Freedom Surge appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • The latest Project Censored Show features a recording of a panel discussion from this summer’s Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival, held in Washington DC. Mickey and Project Censored’s Associate Director, Andy Lee Roth, moderated a discussion with journalist Kevin Gosztola and Rebecca Vincent of Reporters Without Borders. This panel, “Guilty of Journalism: The Political Case Against Julian Assange” examined how the imprisonment and prosecution of Assange for his work with WikiLeaks will have a negative impact on journalists and publishers. The final ten minutes of the show is an update with Kevin Gosztola explaining to Mickey the latest developments in the Assange extradition case.

    Notes:
    Kevin Gosztola is an independent journalist, and the publisher of ShadowProof.  He’s also the author of “Guilty of Journalism: the Political Case Against Julian Assange,” to be published in early 2023 by The Censored Press. Rebecca Vincent works at Reporters Without Borders, a non-profit organization that advocates for press freedom worldwide.

    The post Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival and an Update on Julian Assange appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • On the first half of this week’s show Eleanor speaks with musician, producer, and songwriter Samantha Blanchard – talking to her about the exploitation of artists in today’s often cookie cutter market, the sad trope of paying dues, and the harsh clash between capitalism and art – which is in fact just human emotion. They also discuss an upcoming EP of hers which covers several Elvis songs, his legacy, and the responsibility of white artists in regards to the black, and indigenous artists who they borrow from, and who largely never got their due.

    On the second half of the show, Eleanor speaks with organizer India Walton about the student loan debt crisis. India shares her thoughts on the Biden administration’s latest announcement, as well as the road ahead. They discuss how those closest to the problem are closest to the solution, including canceling student loans, free higher education, and everything else under the sun.

    The post Music, The Clash Between Capitalism and Art, and Solutions to the Student Loan Debt Crises appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • By Kathleen Minelli and Steve Macek

    In the weeks since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the corporate media has been saturated with analyses and reports about the implications of the ruling for women’s lives and health. Legal observers have weighed in on the conservative majority’s reasoning in the case. The impact of the ruling on the 2022 midterm elections has been discussed endlessly. The state-by-state battles over legislation and state-level constitutional amendments banning abortion have been covered exhaustively, as have efforts by women’s rights groups and medical providers to ensure that women get the reproductive health services they need. 

    Yet, in the decades leading up to the Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson, the establishment press overlooked a number of important stories about the rightwing—and in some cases, neo-fascist—push to outlaw abortion, not to mention the steps many states and federal agencies had already taken to restrict women’s access to reproductive health services in the U.S. and around the world. 

    Consider the link between the anti-abortion movement and armed right-wing nationalist and white supremacist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Christian Identity movement, Gun Owners of America, and other “militia” groups. Feminist publications such as On the Issues and other independent news outlets reported on the connection between the militant right and anti-abortion organizing back in the 1990s. One example highlighted in this coverage was “the conviction in July 1996 of three members of the Oklahoma Constitutional Militia (which included a Christian Identity “prophet” and his followers) for conspiring to blow up abortion clinics, along with the Southern Poverty Law Center, and other civil rights targets.”

    But the affiliations between the radical right and the anti-abortion movement did not end in the 1990s. In recent years, prominent Republicans have embraced the so-called “great replacement” theory, the racist fantasy that white people in the U.S. are being deliberately marginalized thanks to unregulated immigration from majority non-white countries, and see legal abortion as part of a long-term plan to decimate the country’s white population. Both Donald Trump and Tucker Carlson have paid lip service to this delusional theory and endorsed authoritarian, pro-natalist polices. Even further to the right, virulently anti-Semitic pastor Rick Wiles has claimed that there would be no abortion in America were it not for “powerful, influential, rich Jews.” 

    As Alex DiBanco detailed in a February 2020 article in The Nation, fascist and alt-right groups from Abolish Human Abortion (AHA)—whose logo resembles some of the new swastika-like symbols favored by white supremacist groups—to the neo-Nazi Traditional Workers Party have infiltrated the anti-abortion movement. Writing in Ms. Magazine, feminist scholar Carol Mason explained that extremist anti-abortionists were “in the mix of white supremacists, paramilitary militia and conspiracy believers who stormed the Capitol in Washington, D.C.” while militant anti-abortion groups including Operation Save America cheered on the insurrection via social media.  

    The corporate media have belatedly awoken to the influences of racist ideology and far-right activists on the organized opposition to women’s reproductive rights. On May 15, 2022, MSNBC interviewed Dorothy Roberts of the Penn Program on Race, Science and Society about the racist “great replacement theory” that informs the most extreme anti-abortion rhetoric and action. “Underlying anti-abortion rhetoric and action is the idea that white women should be having more babies to build up the ‘white nation’,” Roberts explained. Since the horrific, racially-motivated May 12, 2022 mass shooting in Buffalo, New York, the Washington Post has been raising the alarm about the popularity of the “great replacement theory” among Republican politicians and conservative commentators. But independent media outlets—including The Intercept, The Nation, and Ms. Magazine—have conducted the most sustained and detailed reporting on connections between the racist right and the anti-abortion movement. 

    Every year, Project Censored—the media-monitoring organization, established in 1976, to which we both contribute—releases a list of 25 significant news stories that have gone underreported by commercial, for-profit media. A 1996 story about the link between militias and the anti-abortion movement was on the Project’s list back in 1997. Last year’s list included a story on how the Trump administration not only reinstated but tightened the restrictions of the “global gag rule,” blocking international NGOs providing abortion services from accessing US government funds. Earlier versions of the top 25 list highlighted alternative media’s reporting about the jailing of women who had suffered miscarriages under punitive state-level anti-abortion laws and stories about how mergers between secular and Catholic hospitals eroded both abortion and family planning services.

    The Supreme Court’s decision to eliminate federal protection for women’s control over their own bodies has sparked widespread outrage—and, finally, a flurry of establishment new coverage. 

    But history shows that the corporate media are not reliable guardians of women’s reproductive rights. As Project Censored’s monitoring of underreported stories shows, independent media, especially independent feminist outlets such as Ms. Magazine and Rewire News Group, do a much better job of reporting on reproductive health issues than most corporate outlets. If you are looking for a forewarning of the next brazen assault on women rights, and what reproductive rights activists are doing to forestall it, you’d be much better off reading Ms. or other independent news outlets than relying on CNN or The New York Times.  


    Kathleen Minelli is a senior at North Central College with a major in Writing and minor in Business and Entrepreneurship. She is a contributor to State of the Free Press 2023, Project Censored’s forthcoming  yearbook. She will be pursuing her master’s degree in Writing after graduation.

    Steve Macek is Professor and Chair of the Department of Communication and Media Studies at North Central College.  He is a coordinator, along with Andy Lee Roth, of Project Censored’s Campus Affiliates Program and a contributor to State of the Free Press 2023.

    The post Corporate Media Has Failed to Report Accurately on the Threats to Women’s Reproductive Rights appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • In the first half of the show, Mickey talks with attorney and author Heidi Boghosian and Project Censored associate director Andy Lee Roth about the confluence of surveillance and censorship, and how that impacts journalism. Many people believe they have nothing to hide online, but that myth is dispelled by today’s guests as they address everyday precautions citizens can take to defend their privacy online. Later, Clayton Weimers of Reporters Without Boarders joins the discussion with Mickey and Andy to address the rising incidences of violence (or threats of violence) against journalists, how they should be confronted, and the impacts they have on a free press and society at large.

    Notes:

    • Heidi Boghosian is executive director of the AJ Muste Institute, and former executive director of the National Lawyers Guild. Her most recent book is I Have Nothing to Hide, And 20 Other Myths About Surveillance and Privacy.
    • Andy Lee Roth is Associate Director of Project Censored, co-editor of the Project’s annual volume of censored stories, and co-coordinator of the Project’s Campus Affiliates Program. He has published widely on media issues, including most recently, The Deadly Business of Reporting Truth.
    • Clayton Weimers directs the Washington DC bureau office of Reporters Without Borders, an international institution which works to protect journalists around the world; it also publishes the annual “Press Freedom Index” ranking of countries around the world on press freedom issues.

    Hosts: Mickey Huff and Eleanor Goldfield

    Producers: Anthony Fest and Eleanor Goldfield

    The post The Confluence of Surveillance and Censorship and Violence Against Journalists appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • By Nolan Higdon

    In August 2022, a Texas jury ruled that internet personality Alex Jones pay $49 million for defaming the parents of the victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre. Starting a decade earlier, Jones had claimed that the shooting was a hoax. He argued that crisis actors played the victims and the children never existed. The decision was met with relief from the loved ones of the victims and ideological opponents of Jones.  

    MSNBC, the Washington Post, CNN, and other legacy news media outlets gleefully reported on the verdict, denouncing Jones as a propagandist who peddled falsehoods as part of what Jack Shafer of Politico called “the lie economy.” The celebration ignored that, during his more than two decade run as a source of information for radio listeners and internet users, Jones and the legacy news media have shared approaches for peddling propaganda disguised as legitimate journalism. 

    After the trial, independent journalist Russ Baker pointed out that the rise of Jones’ media empire was rooted in some reality– that he would report on actual abuses of power and corruption that those in the legacy media would not. However, these valid reports – which were always few and far between and accompanied by a multitude of falsehoods and baseless stories which reduced them to a drop of dye in the ocean – were non-existent by the later stages of Jones’ career. 

    Although he was preceded by propaganda pioneers like Matt Drudge, Jones quickly surpassed his competitors and revolutionized the art of spreading false information on the internet to accumulate millions of dollars of wealth. Since its creation in 1999, Jones’ Prison Planet and InfoWars internet content stoked audiences’ grievances and suspicion with false and baseless claims about 9/11, FEMA, frogs’ sexuality, chemtrails  gay juice boxes, Jade Helm 15, and lizard people 

    In 2016, as fears over fake news grew into a moral panic, media scholars argued that the U.S. needed critical news literacy education. Critical news literacy teaches students how to think like journalists, evaluate and analyze sources, separate fact from opinion, interrogate the production process of information, and investigate the politics of representation. It is a facet of critical media literacy which centers on interrogating issues around power in media. According to scholars Douglas Kellner and Jeff Share, critical media literacy education focuses “on ideology critique and analyzing the politics of representation of crucial dimensions of gender, race, class, and sexuality; incorporating alternative media production; and expanding textual analysis to include issues of social context, control, and pleasure.” Critical news literacy education not only empowers students to determine the veracity of information, but to interrogate the power dynamics expressed in media content. 

    Media users would be wise to not only apply a critical news framework to Alex Jones, but all news media. A critical approach reveals that Jones and the legacy media share a similar playbook of tactics and conflicts of interest that result in problematic reporting. For example, critical news literacy teaches audiences to investigate the motives behind the creation of media messages. When it comes to Jones, he was motivated in part by wealth accumulation. Jones went from radio to the internet exploiting the moral panic over Y2K – which assumed that an alleged computer error would reset calendars to 1900, instead of 2000, collapsing civilization and launching nuclear war, all because a calendar malfunction. On the evening of December 31, 1999, Jones InfoWars program, which was founded that same year, made baseless claims that nuclear war was occurring and the world was ending, and then would cut to commercials trying to sell products to survive the dystopia about which he had just falsely reported. 

    As the Y2K episode illustrates, audiences should be wary of conflicts of interest such as a story that motivates audiences to purchase a product or vote a certain way. These conflicts of interest are not limited to Jones. Corporate legacy media suffers from them as well because corporations have economic and political interests that shape their reporting. For example, the Washington Post has a conflict of interest when it reports on its owner Jeff Bezos, considering that he holds ownership of Amazon and Whole Foods, or the candidates and political parties to which he donates.

    Another area where critical news literacy is useful is when it comes to determining if the person reporting the news is actually a journalist. Jones is not a journalist. In fact, during his divorce trial, Jones’ lawyer admitted that Jones was a “performance artist” that is “playing a character” on InfoWars. The comment was revelatory as far as answered the question: Does Alex Jones believe the nonsense he spreads? The answer is apparently no, and audiences should not either. 

    Jones is not a pioneer when it comes to playing an expert in news media who actually peddles vapid talking points as well informed opinion. That describes the majority of people in legacy news media, where pundits know how to sound like experts, but offer very little substance and almost rarely are actual journalists themselves. Many of them are propagandists for a political party who swap government jobs for media posts that allow them to shill for their party. This includes Karl Rove of Fox News Channel,  Rick Santorum CNN, Jen Psaki of MSNBC, and David Axelrod at CNN. Just as court records revealed that Jones is a performance artist who should not be trusted, in 2020, Rachel Maddow was sued by One America News (OAN) for defamation after making the baseless claims that OAN was “paid Russian propaganda.” However, the court ruled against OAN arguing that a “reasonable viewer” would know that Maddow is not a journalist and only offers opinion.

    A critical media literacy lens also reveals that Jones and legacy media both take actual facts and spin them to justify baseless narratives. For example, after Hurricane Sandy in 2012, the federal government constructed FEMA camps, and his news outlets did interview someone who was staying in the camp, but Jones then referred to them as death camps and falsely claimed that people were being forced into them. The narrative does not match the actual facts of the story.

    Similar chicanery happens in corporate legacy media. One of the most famous was the case of Nicholas Sandmann. While in Washington D.C. a photo was taken of a Native American elder standing next to Sandmann, who was there on a school trip. In the photo, Sandmann was wearing a hat with the Trump slogan “Make America Great Again.” Legacy news media reported that the picture showed Sandmann harassing the elder. The press reports were so egregious that within in a month Sandmann began a series of lawsuits against NBC Universal, ABC, CBS, USA Today, the New York Times, Rolling Stone, CNN, and the Washington Post. While some were dismissed, the latter two settled out of court with Sandmann for an undisclosed amount and $250 million respectively in 2020.

    Critical news literacy is also about examining how representations in media messages normalize ideology. Jones has described himself as libertarian, but actively campaigned for Donald Trump, even hosting Trump for a welcoming interview in 2015. In the general election he peddled canards about Hillary Clinton including the now infamous Pizzagate narrative, which claimed that the presidential candidate was operating a pedophile ring out of Comet Ping Pong, a Washington pizza restaurant. Jones paints a binary world of us versus them, righteous and villain.

    Legacy news media also use their platform to elevate their party or candidate at the expense of their opponent. Just like Jones, this caricature and oversimplification of the world is made possible by false reporting. For example, since 2016, legacy media personalities have tried to delegitimize Trump’s 2016 victory and presidency by shamelessly peddling baseless and false stories about the involvement of Russia in U.S. politics, known as Russiagate. Similarly, Fox News Channel and other right-wing news outlets’ peddled the false story that Biden stole the 2020 Presidential Election with the help of Dominion voting machines. Once Dominion threatened to sue them for untrue reporting, which would force them to defend themselves in court with evidence, the stories on Dominion disappeared rapidly. 

    Critical news literacy is needed, not just for those who encounter Jones or a Jones-like figure, but all of the propagandists posing as journalists. False information is only dangerous when people uncritically accept it as fact and act upon it. It can motivate otherwise decent people to do horrible things. It can make a veteran lose their life while storming the U.S. Capitol, a father shoot up a pizza restaurant, a professor harass grieving parents, and individuals turn to horrific acts of violence.

    If we had a media literate society when Jones’ InfoWars launched 23 years ago, one has to wonder if we would have had more substantive discourses about policies and the trajectory of the nation. Jones, with his loud voice and seemingly buffoonish behavior, makes an easy foil for those looking to deride the state of American democracy. However, as any critically news literate person will attest, Jones is one of the many media figures at the numerous media outlets who have chosen to spread false messages that divide and stupefy the electorate. 

    The post The Alex Jones Playbook appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • Back to School

    The Summer of 2022 seems to have flown past and a new school year is already imminent. We at Project Censored couldn’t be more excited, because the start of the Fall school term will coincide with the publication of The Media and Me, the Project’s guide to critical media literacy for young people (and everyone else who cares about the links between freedom of information, freedom of expression, democracy, and human rights).

    The Media and Me is already receiving rave reviews, such as this one from author Henry Giroux: “Media have taken on an enormous power today in educating young people, often in ways that are repressive while limiting their ability to be critically engaged cultural producers. The Media and Me is an engaging and invaluable resource for writing young people back into the script of empowerment and democracy. It should be read by everyone who believes they have a future that does not repeat the tyranny of the present.”

    The Media and Me will be published on October 25th, but you can pre-order a copy from Project Censored today.

    In the meantime, we invite teachers, students, and others with hungry minds to check out some of the educational materials available at no charge from the Project Censored website, including:

    • The Teaching Guide for State of the Free Press 2022, which suggests how teachers can use the most recent Project Censored yearbook to help students understand the significance of news media, evaluate the scope of press freedom in the United States, and  appreciate media activism as an opportunity for community engagement and social responsibility; and

    • The Project’s Validated Independent News program, which engages college and university students in direct, hands-on research of important but under-reported news stories.

    The “Classroom” page of the Project website also features additional resources and testimonials from teachers and students. The Project also helped create and continues to support the Global Critical Media Literacy Project’s Educator’s Resource Guide, a compilation of classroom-tested lessons and exercises available at no charge from the GCMLP website.


    Kevin Gosztola and Project Censored on Assange, WikiLeaks, and Whistleblowers

    On July 26th, Project Censored hosted a panel on Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, featuring Kevin Gosztola of Shadowproof and Rebecca Vincentof Reporters Without Borders. The panel, which took place remotely via Zoom, was part of the 10th annual Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival, held in Washington, D.C., July 25-31. Project Censored’s Mickey Huff and Andy Lee Roth joined Gosztola and Vincent in discussion about the UK and US governments’ cases against Assange, what’s at stake for journalists and citizens if the US successfully prosecutes Assange, and the challenges Gosztola, an independent journalist, and Vincent, who has led RSF’s campaign on behalf of Assange, have faced in following Assange’s case.

    The Censored Press and Seven Stories Press will publish Gosztola’s forthcoming book, Guilty of Journalism: The Political Prosecution of Julian Assange, in February 2023.

    The 2022 Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival also included a screening of Project Censored’s most recent feature-length film, United States of Distraction: Fighting the Fake News Invasion (2020), shot and produced by Project Censored students, with editing and narration by Abby Martin. The film was screened on National Whistleblower Appreciation Day as part of the Summit’s Hollywood Pitch Lab workshops.


    Project Censored’s Dispatches in the News

    In July, Project Censored launched Dispatches from Project Censored: On Media and Politics, a bi-weekly column providing timely analysis of the latest media industry news, the state of the free press, and the intersection of media and politics. Topics addressed so far include analyses of the latest congressional legislation aimed at funding media literacy education; why the return of Chris Cuomo, a former CNN program host, ought to be met with skepticism; and what the scandal involving USA Today’s Gabriela Mirandacan tell us about corporate news. You can keep tabs on the latest Dispatches from Project Censored here.

    In addition to the launch of the Dispatches series, in July Project Censored also published The Case Against NewsGuard, by Nolan Higdon and Susan Maret.


    The Project Censored Show

    This past month, Eleanor Goldfield hosted attorney Mark Loudon-Brownwho discussed the implications of a recent Supreme Court decision that narrowed 6th Amendment rights such that a person convicted of a crime cannot cite ineffective legal representation in state court as grounds for appeal to the federal courts. Eleanor also analyzed recent efforts by the two major US political parties to restrict third-party representation on the ballot and constrain grassroots activism. Mickey Huff joined Eleanor in a conversation with esteemed historian David Goldfield to discuss the rise in censorship around “uncomfortable” topics in history textbooks and what that portends for academic freedom and teaching history in general. Finally, Eleanor interviewed journalist Mirna Wabi-Sabi to address food waste as a colonialist and capitalist paradigm and highlight how global systems, not only individual habits, need to change in order to find solutions to the climate crisis.

    In addition to the new programs, video versions of a number of recent Project Censored Show episodes are now available via the Project’s YouTube channel, thanks to Adam Armstrong, who coordinates the Project’s communication and outreach, and summer interns Kate Horgan and Sam Peacock. Find video of The Project Censored Show and more content here.

    You can help Project Censored spread the word about news censorship and the importance of independent journalism by subscribing to the Project’s YouTube channel.


    Third Annual Critical Media Literacy Conference of the Americas Set for Oakland in October

    The 3rd annual Critical Media Literacy Conference of the Americas (CMLCA) will take place in Oakland, California, from October 21-23, 2022. Project Censored is a proud cosponsor of the conference and many of us will be participating in events across the program. Registration for the CMLCA is open through September 7th. True to the inclusive commitments of the event’s organizers, there is no charge to register. Find more about the CMLCA here. A full program of events, panels, and presenters will be available soon.

    The post THE PROJECT CENSORED NEWSLETTER appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • By Andy Lee Roth

    Violence is the most basic and blunt form of press censorship. To kill or imprison a journalist is to silence the public’s source of news. To date, 33 journalists around the world have been killed this year and another 494 are currently imprisoned, according to Reporters Without Borders (RSF). Put another way, thus far in 2022, on average, once per week somewhere in the world a journalist is killed for reporting the news.

    Sometimes these cases make headlines, as was true in October 2018 when Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi Arabian journalist who reported for the Middle East Eye and the Washington Post, was murdered by agents of the Saudi government, and in May 2022 when Palestinian American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh was killed—almost certainly by Israeli soldiers—in the occupied West Bank while reporting for Al Jazeera.

    More often, however, the killing or imprisonment of journalists occurs without significant news coverage. As Project Censored has previously reported, attacks on journalists are a global phenomenon, which the establishment press in the United States often fails to cover adequately. Journalists working in the United States are not immune to violent assault or arrest either, as the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker meticulously documents.

    August 2022 marks the somber anniversaries of two cases that epitomize the threats to reporters and the impunity (so far) of those who would silence them.

    On August 14, 2012, Austin Tice was abducted in Syria, where he was working as a freelance  reporter for McClatchy, the Washington Post, CBS, and other news outlets. Tice, a US Marine veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, received numerous accolades for his reporting from Syria, including the prestigious George Polk Award for war reporting.

    Tice is one of 43 journalists that RSF identifies as being held hostage in Syria, in addition to another 31 who remain imprisoned there.

    For ten years, Tice’s family has petitioned the governments of the United States and Syria to “make every possible diplomatic effort to bring Austin safely home.” This August, during a campaign supported by RSF, the Washington Post, and many other news organization to mark the tenth anniversary of Tice’s abduction, President Joe Biden issued a statement on Tice’s captivity. Although Tice’s family has had previous communication with Biden, including a May 2022 meeting with the president, this was the first time that Biden referred to Tice by name in public. However, as Clayton Weimers, the executive director of RSF’s US office, told me, “What’s missing from Biden’s statement is a clear commitment to direct negotiations” between the US and Syria.

    On August 26, 2017, Christopher Allen, a journalist with dual US-UK citizenship, was killed in South Sudan. Allen, a freelancer whose reporting was published by the BBC, Vice News, the Telegraph, and Al Jazeera, was embedded with opposition forces at the time of his death. Sources told the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) that government troops deliberately targeted Allen. Although a 2018 Columbia Journalism Review report disputed claims that Allen wore clothing that identified him as a press member, he was unarmed and carrying a camera—a sign he was present as a reporter, rather than a combatant. “Taking photographs and reporting events is not attacking. It is journalistic work done by civilians, who are protected under international law,” said Angela Quintal, CPJ’s Africa Program Coordinator in New York.

    Five years since Allen’s death, and despite credible allegations of war crimes having been committed against him, including the treatment of his body after his death, there has been no official investigation into the circumstances of his killing, either by South Sudanese authorities or any other law enforcement agency.

    In the context of a civil war dating back to 2013, which has displaced 2.3 million people, journalists working in South Sudan face extraordinary threats. As the CPJ has documented, authorities there have closed and obstructed access to news outlets, arrested journalists, and expelled reporters. In August 2015, South Sudan’s president, Salva Kiir, publicly threatened to kill journalists for reporting “against the country.” Since 2014 at least ten journalists including Allen have been killed while working in South Sudan, according to RSF.

    Allen’s case has received virtually no news coverage in the United States. His family continues to call for a criminal investigation into his death—including the possibility that it involved grievous breaches of international humanitarian law—by South Sudan authorities and the US Department of Justice and FBI.

    Lack of news coverage entails a lack of public knowledge and engagement, which in turn contributes to what RSF, the CPJ, the International Press Institute, and others have described as a culture of impunity for those who kill, harass, or intimidate journalists. Threats to journalists—significant in their own right—also undermine fundamental rights to freedom of information and freedom of expression.

    “When we don’t impose real consequences for crimes against journalists, perpetrators only grow bolder,” Clayton Weimers of RSF says. “The United States has an obligation to fight to free Austin Tice and for justice for Christopher Allen not only because they’re American citizens, but because not fighting for them puts every media worker in greater danger.”

    Reporting the truth has always entailed risks. But the global scope of impunity for those who would silence journalists by killing or imprisoning them compounds those risks, making journalism a potentially deadly business. Resolute efforts to ensure Tice’s release and justice for Allen are important steps in chipping away at that culture of impunity and ensuring better protections for journalists everywhere.

     

    Image by Engin Akyurt from Pixabay

    The post The Deadly Business of Reporting Truth appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • The recent reporting on the Uber Files—a series of 124,000 communications, dated from 2013 until 2017, that Mark McGann, one of Uber’s top lobbyists, leaked to The Guardian—has shed light on the company’s strategies to gain global prominence during its nascent years. McGann and the many reporters working on the project through the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists are commendable for their efforts to bring this history to public attention. Still, the reporting elides a much larger story about the rise of a new model of labor relations being implemented throughout the globe, and workers’ efforts to stop it.

    Founded in the wake of the global financial crisis, Uber Technologies worked to take advantage of widespread unemployment, decades of neoliberal policymaking, and advances in geolocative and algorithmic technologies to “disrupt” the locally owned and highly regulated global taxi industry. With a lean model that pushed capital expenditures and risks onto its workforce, Uber and “the gig economy” upended transportation throughout the world. By the time Uber went public in 2019, it had established a firm global presence and a valuation of $76 billion.   

    The Uber Files reporting shows that Uber broke into tightly regulated markets by subsidizing cheap rides and offering bonuses to drivers with investor cash, only to eliminate those subsidies and slash driver pay once they established market dominance. To maintain operations, the company bought off academics to spin lawmakers and the media. Uber representatives had secretive meetings with Emmanuel Macron and convinced Joe Biden when he was vice president to amend his speech at a World Economic Forum meeting. When regulatory threats did come, the company used a “kill switch” to hide information from the authorities. 

    Uber doesn’t just break laws or act unethically. Their entire premise, in the words of an Uber operative, is “just f—ing illegal.” Some argue Uber is “not a business proposition” but “a political coup…to seize control of a portion of urban transport infrastructure from the voters and taxpayers.” 

    But more fundamentally, Uber’s entire model has been about breaking—if not smashing—labor law (and worker power) through systematic misclassification. Despite the power Uber exercises over its workforce, they deem drivers “independent contractors” to exempt themselves from minimum wage and other workplace protections. As an organizer with Rideshare Drivers United, I’ve heard repeatedly how Uber regularly changes the terms of work in response to ever-shifting supply of drivers and demand from passengers with no mileage rate too low. In the meantime, they charge their workforce extortionary commissions, often well over 50 percent, supposedly for providing the service of connecting drivers to passengers. 

    This assault on labor rights is part of the broader white supremacist, authoritarian attack on democracy. As the app-based workforce is largely comprised of BIPOC workers, Uber continues the history of racialized workers locked into second-class labor categories and denied collective bargaining rights. Uber keeps these drivers working often over 60 hours a week, chasing “surges” and “bonuses” based on data collected through surveillance technologies, in the hopes that they will clear a net income after paying for gas, car maintenance, and insurance. In the meantime, taxi drivers have gone into enormous debt and in some cases have been driven to suicide. Upon hearing of potential threats to Uber driver safety from French taxi drivers, former CEO Travis Kalanick expressed glee over the intra-class conflict he fomented: “violence guarantees success.”

    Kalanick’s departure in 2017—when the Uber Files end—did not curtail Uber’s extremism. Since just before their 2019 IPO, Uber has persistently slashed driver pay to demonstrate to investors that they might, at some point, become profitable. Acknowledging that misclassification is essential for their viability, the platform giants spent record breaking sums to rewrite the laws they had already broken, while striking deals with labor unions in Washington State, New York, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, to exempt app-based workers from employee rights.

    These collaborations, though, have not extinguished the struggle for labor rights. As the media have largely overlooked Uber’s illegal activity, they have also given short shrift to the ways drivers have self-organized on every continent where Uber has extended its tentacles. Drivers around the world struck on the eve of Uber’s IPO. In California, they have fought against the draconian Proposition 22, which locks app-based workers into a second-class category. Drivers in other states have struggled to prevent similar laws from going on the books. In Europe and the UK, drivers have fought for data rights in the courts, while maintaining a persistent presence in the street. Increasing gasoline prices prompted Uber drivers in South Africa to strike for three days in March 2022, while even the threat of recent strikes in India has prompted government action. 

    The Uber Files only seem like a huge revelation because the media have been asleep at the wheel. The same economic logics and technological transformations that enabled Uber’s corporate extremism also helped bring about journalism’s “market failure” following the 2008 financial crisis. As gig work platforms sought to “disrupt” the service sector, social media platforms such as Facebook disrupted so-called “old media” and their advertising models. Algorithms enabled advertisers to reach ever-more targeted audiences at ever-cheaper rates. By 2016, Uber accounted for half of all ground transport; Facebook, Google, and Amazon today receive half of all advertising revenue. Consequently, local newsrooms– the very outlets that might have served as forums for debating the merits of transportation regulations– have been gutted by private equity firms and hedge funds, or closed, leaving news deserts. Major outlets such as the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post have become the property of individual billionaires, whose hostility to labor is perhaps only rivaled by Uber itself.

    The Uber Files are largely unsurprising to drivers, but they are proving a powerful tool in the struggle for justice in the gig economy. In France, taxi drivers are calling for a parliamentary inquiry into Macron’s dealings with the company. Italian taxi drivers, who had been opposing liberalization, went on strike, contributing to Prime Minister Mario Draghi’s resignation. 

    Members of the U.S. Congress, however, introduced the Worker Flexibility and Choice Act with bipartisan support. Backed by Uber and the Coalition for Workforce Innovation, the bill would allow workers to opt out of minimum wage and overtime protections in exchange for so-called “flexibility.” While it has little chance of passing during this Congress, its introduction should alert the entire labor movement—and the media– to the looming threat of corporate extremism.  

    Journalism may be the first rough draft of history, but it still needs to be on deadline. Fortunately, workers and citizens may still have a say in what the second draft looks like. If there was ever a time for journalists to pay attention, it’s now. 


    Brian Dolber (bdolber@csusm.edu) is Associate Professor of Communication at California State University San Marcos. He is the co-editor of The Gig Economy: Workers and Media in the Age of Convergence (Routledge, 2021) and a volunteer organizer with Rideshare Drivers United. A former co-chair of Union for Democratic Communications, he is a contributor to Project Censored’s State of the Free Press 2022.   


    Image by Craig Clark from Pixabay

    The post Sleeping at the Wheel: The Uber Files, the Media, and the Coup Against Labor Rights appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • For the first half of the show, Eleanor Goldfield looks into unionizing workers at a Trader Joe’s store in Minneapolis and what issues they are facing. She speaks with organizer Sarah Beth Ryther about the efforts as part of growing nationwide movement of organized workers. Then we hear a rebroadcast of a conversation recorded last year between Mickey Huff and Andy Lee Roth, the associate director of Project Censored, about how big tech companies are increasingly turning to proprietary algorithms (instead of human editors) to decide what material they post on their platforms, ultimately determining the news we see.

    Notes:
    Sarah Beth Ryther is an employee at the Trader Joe’s store in Minneapolis, MN and a leader in the campaign to organize workers at that store. Andy Lee Roth is Associate Director of Project Censored, co-editor of the Project’s annual volume of censored stories, and co-coordinator of the Project’s Campus Affiliates Program. He has published widely on media matters, including the article discussed from The Markaz Review on “The New Gatekeepers.”

    The post Trader Joe’s Employees Unionize Featuring Sarah Beth Ryther appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • By Nolan Higdon

    The return of Chris Cuomo to television is the latest reminder that there is little accountability to speak of in corporate news media. Chris was ousted at CNN in late 2021 amidst an ethics investigation that claimed he utilized his position at the cable news juggernaut to consult his brother, then governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo. At the time, the governor was facing a series of sexual misconduct allegations. Chris was using his professional connections to identify what reporters knew about the allegations, and then using that information to consult Andrew on how to respond, all while hosting Andrew on his daily CNN program. In July 2022, Cuomo returned to television to promote his podcast The Chris Cuomo Project. Cuomo appeared on Dan Abrams show on NewsNation (where Cuomo recently secured a position and I have served as an expert guest) and Real Time with Bill Maher.

    Cuomo’s appearances – both of which were with close friends, Maher and Abrams – were clearly an attempt to rebrand himself from unethical propagandist to fearless journalist. Cuomo explained that he was an optimistic person who was not bitter about what had happened at CNN. Looking back on his departure from CNN he said “I feel like I lost a sense of purpose for a while because of how things ended.” Cuomo’s recollection concealed that he was clearly bitter, so much so that he threatened a lawsuit against CNN and demanded $125 million in restitution for the damages to his reputation. 

    Nonetheless, Cuomo claimed that he wanted to serve the American people with his podcast and broadcast program by breaking the hyper-partisan frame used in most reporting. This is rich coming from someone whose success is owed to a CNN program that preached to the Democratic Party choir by ritually lampooning Trump.

    Chris also took the opportunity to rewrite the historical record on what happened at CNN. Chrisversion of events is that he used his professional contacts to consult his brother, it was unethical, but anybody would do the same for their family. Fair enough, but still unethical, and that is not the entire story. He also utilized his platform – with the approval of CNN leadership – to effectively campaign for his brother. Andrew appeared frequently on Chris’ show where they performed lighthearted sketches that humanized Andrew, such as debating who their mother loved more or Chris bringing in a giant Q-tip as a prop to mock the size of his brothers nose. This fed into media narratives at the time that claimed that Andrew was Americas governor” during the COVID-19 pandemic and a potential presidential contender in 2020.

    The jovial segments were propaganda, distracting from the corruption of Andrew Cuomo’s reign as governor. At the time, Andrew was forcing nursing homes to take COVID-19 patients when hospitals were full. This raised the chances of spreading the virus to the most vulnerable – older and sick people. Moreover, Andrew was concealing from the public the actual number of deaths that this policy caused. To make matters worse, Andrew granted immunity to nursing homes – known as a liability shield – for their mismanagement of care after they donated to his campaign. The cute segments with his brother concealed the deadly crisis Andrew’s corruption had wrought on New York’s most vulnerable citizens. In addition to re-writing history about the impact of his CNN reporting, Chris failed to report that CNN fired him, in part, due to his sexual misconduct.

    Sadly, Chris Cuomo’s return to news media after being exposed as a propagandist does not make him an outlier. For example, Judith Miller was rewarded for lying to New York Times readers to garner support the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq with a job at Fox News Channel. Brian Williams, who manufactured stories of being shot down in a helicopter in a war zone, was given a brief respite before returning to MSNBC. Similarly, Bill O’Reilly remained at Fox News Channel after falsely claiming he was an earwitness to the gunshot suicide of Lee Harvey Oswald associate, George de Mohrenschildt. Rachel Maddow was rewarded with a $30 million annual contract from MSNBC after fear mongering about Russia, often baselessly for years, known as Russiagate. Even those who made a career out of lying in government are often welcomed guests in corporate media: Oliver North of Iran-Contra fame (Fox News Channel), and Karl Rove who perpetuated the Weapons of Mass Destruction lie (Fox News Channel).

    Audiences lack of faith in news media has not been lost on the industry. Case in point, in an effort to address the credibility gap in news media, the New York Times ran a July 2022 series titled I Was Wrong About” which actually underscored rather than addressed the problem. The series saw opinion writers admit they had been wrong about somethings. Paul Krugman apologized for his work on inflation. Michelle Goldberg did the same about Al Franken, David Brooks on Capitalism, Zeynep Tufekci wrote about The Power of Protest, Farhad Manjoo wrote about Facebook, and Gail Collins wrote about Mitt Romney.

    Rather than restore faith in legacy media, the articles reveal the ways in which dominant legacy media manufacture consent of the public for elite opinion, even when it is baseless. For example, Bret Stephens professed that his sin was chiding Trump supporters rather than understanding the disruption to their communities. In the article he admits that his judgment was clouded by the groundless claims regarding Russiagate. While it is great that someone in dominant legacy media admits that the Russia fear mongering was overblown, it does nothing to repair the careers of those who were shunned for holding the same opinion four years earlier. Nor does it alleviate the fact that four years of Russia fear mongering distracted from other stories – including substantive ones regarding corruption in the Trump administration. Worse, Stephensatonement does not change the fact that baseless Russian conspiracies remain acceptable and digestible excuses to dismiss and marginalize pundits and policy makers from the left and the right of the ideological spectrum.

    In terms of manufacturing consent for elite opinion, Stephens cannot hold a candle to Thomas Friedman. With four decades worth of options, one has to wonder how Friedman chose only one topic for the I Was Wrong About” series. He has been wrong about so many issues from domestic policy to education to the international economy. In 2000, he incorrectly proclaimed that Colin Powell would not be challenged or overruled in the George W. Bush Administration. In 2001, he encouraged readers to keep rootinfor Putinbecause he would lead Russia to be a democracy and U.S. ally. Within the first months of the Afghanistan invasion, Friedman told readers that America has won the war in Afghanistan,” the Taliban are gone,” and the talk of civilian casualties was nonsense. Discussing what Friedman has been wrong about is more of a dissertation topic than an op-ed.

    In his article for the I Was Wrong About” series, Friedman admitted that he was too optimistic in believing that China would become a free and open society once they adopted the free market and global trade. Friedmans article was not exactly revelatory as others in news media had noted previously that he was wrong on the issue of China. Regardless, Friedmans articles primed readers to accept free trade and other global policies that not only failed to deliver a more democratized world as promised – indeed democracy is threatened around the globe – it also did not improve and in some cases worsened economic conditions for the majority of U.S. citizens. Rather than hold writers like Friedman accountable for the damage caused by misleading the public to adopt elite opinion, they are lauded for admitting they were wrong. 

    These articles and Cuomo’s homecoming illustrate that corporate media personalities are not accountable to the public. They are accountable to the elites they serve. It is elites, not the public, who can provide them with a privileged platform and improved material conditions regardless of the magnitude or frequency of their errors, corruption, or ineptitude. To be clear, errors in journalism are expected and that is why corrections are a standard part of reporting. However, errors should only be excused when the circumstances mislead the reporter, not when the reporter misleads the people, gets caught, and feigns surprise. This is what happened to Chris Cuomo. Cuomo was not ousted for temporary lapse in judgment or an error that any rational person would make. He was ousted for abusing his privilege and position to serve elite interests. That does not make him a reputable media figure in the tradition of respectable journalism, but it does make him a quintessential prototype for corporate media.

    The post Elite Lapdogs Always Welcome in the Corporate Media appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • This week on the Project Censored Show, Eleanor and Mickey begin the hour in conversation with esteemed historian Dr. David Goldfield, who is a long-time academic and author who has just recently been asked by publishers to censor some of the shocking and uncomfortable aspects of his work so as to not “offend anyone.” As he puts it, if you offend no one, you teach no one. Eleanor, Mickey and David highlight the importance of never censoring the past, lest we distort our present, and thereby condemn our future to one built on falsehoods. In the second half of the show, Eleanor is joined by journalist Mirna Wabi-Sabi to discuss food waste as a colonialist and capitalist paradigm…moving beyond the argument for individual responsibility for climate change and incorporating global systems in our understanding of both the problem, and indeed, the solution.

    Image by Hermann Traub from Pixabay

    The post Censoring How We Teach the Past Threatens our Present and Future; and Understanding Food Waste and Climate Change in a Global System appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • Eleanor Goldfield hosts this week’s show. This past May, the US Supreme Court narrowed the protection of the Sixth Amendment, by ruling that a person convicted of a crime cannot cite ineffective legal representation in state court as grounds for appeal to the federal courts. In the first half of today’s program, attorney Mark Loudon-Brown explains the implications of that decision. Then in the second half-hour, Eleanor explores some of the ways big-party power brokers attempt to block third parties from the ballot, as well as constrain the influence of grassroots activists.

    Notes:
    Mark Loudon-Brown is a senior attorney at the Southern Center for Human Rights, and previously was a public defender in New York City. He holds law degrees from New York University and Georgetown University.

    The post Protections of the Sixth Amendment and Third Party Ballot Issues appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • Project Censored at the Global Media Forum in Germany

    In June, Steve Macek represented Project Censored at the 15th Deutsche Welle Global Media Forum in Bonn, Germany.Steve n Jackie Boat Sponsored by Germany’s publicly-owned international broadcasting service, Deutsche Welle, the conference was attended by more than 2,000 reporters, activists, and academics who spent two days examining the state of journalism worldwide and debating topics that included what to do about fake news, the media’s coverage of Africa, repression of journalists around the globe, and the challenges of reporting during wartime. The highlight of the conference was a keynote address by Filipino journalist and 2021 Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Ressa, founder of the investigative news website Rappler, which is known for its uncompromising reporting on government corruption in the Philippines.

    Macek discussed the work of Project Censored as part of a well-attended panel on “Agenda Cutting” sponsored by the Project’s German sister organization, the News Enlightenment Initiative. Also on the panel were Belorussian journalist and journalism professor Katja Artsiomenka, Munich University researcher Yosuke Buchmeier, and Deutsche Welle’s Head of News, Max Hofmann. The Initiative’s Dr. Hektor Haarkötter, a professor of communication at the Hochschule Bonn-Rhein-Sieg, moderated.

    The conference was not all business, however. At the conclusion of the final day’s programming, attendees got to take a dinner cruise on the Rhine, complete with a live band, dancing, and an unlimited supply of the local beer.

    While in Germany, Macek made connections with a number of researchers affiliated with the News Enlightenment Initiative, including longtime Project Censored judge Peter Ludes. Project Censored and the Initiative are now planning to collaborate on a number of new joint ventures, including, possibly, developing an annual list of the top ten underreported news stories internationally.


    Dispatches from Project Censored: On Media and Politics

    The Project is pleased to announce its new bi-weekly column, which launched earlier this month. Every two weeks one ofNolan Higdon Project Censored’s experts will offer cogent analysis of the latest media industry news, the state of the free press, and the intersection of media and politics. With this new endeavor, Project Censored aims to amplify critical voices that are too often ignored by the corporate media. Each column is available for media outlets throughout the world to run free of charge.

    First up was “From Fake News to Junk News: Gabriela Miranda is the Symptom, Not the Problem,” in which Nolan Higdon turned a critical eye on the latest case of journalistic malpractice to rock the media world with documented cases of literal fake news published by USA Today. Higdon and Project Director Mickey Huff followed up with commentary on the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court.

    In “Did Dobbs Help the Left Rediscover How Political Change is Made?” they noted how pressure from progressives led to a Biden executive order on the issue, illustrating that abortion rights might have been protected if they were not taken for granted by party leaders.

    With the launch of “Dispatches from Project Censored,” readers can expect a biweekly dose of the thoughtful criticism and hard-hitting analysis that the Project has delivered for almost fifty years. The columns are freely syndicated and have been republished by Salon, Counterpunch, ScheerPost, and many other outlets. Special thanks to our publicist Lorna Garano for all her promotion of the Project’s work.

     


    10th Anniversary of the Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival in Washington, D.C.

    On Tuesday, July 26, at 9am Pacific time, Project Censored’s Mickey Huff and Andy Lee Roth engage Kevin Gosztola, managing editor at Shadowproof, and Rebecca VincentReporters Without Borders, in conversation about the extradition case of Julian Assange and Gosztola’s forthcoming book, Guilty of Journalism: The Political Case Against Julian Assange (The Censored Press with Seven Stories Press, February 2023). Specifically, this video panel at the 10th annual Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival in Washington, D.C., addresses the impact of Assange’s case on whistleblowers and journalism more broadly, noting the extraordinary chilling effect that will hamper an already tepid, so-called free press. Protecting whistleblowers and organizations such as WikiLeaks is essential for journalists to expose corruption and inform the public in ways that lead to meaningful civic engagement.


    The Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio

    This past month, legendary theologian and philosopher John Cobb discussed the Living Earth Movement, and explained why we need international political cooperation, rather than confrontations, for humanity to change its behavior and create harmony with all other life on the planet. Author Adam Bessie and illustrator Peter Glanting joined Mickey to explore themes from their forthcoming graphic book, Going Remote: A Teacher’s Journey, which addresses the far-reaching consequences of replacing classroom teaching with remote instruction and increased technology during the coronavirus pandemic.

    Co-host Eleanor Goldfield discussed Pride Month with award-winning journalist and organizer, Jen Deerinwater, a bisexual, Two Spirit, multiply-disabled citizen of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. Their conversation addressed the radical roots of Pride celebrations, misconceptions about them, and the increasing corporatization of them.

    In another program, Goldfield addressed the colonialist and racist realities of the so-called conservation movement as well as other human rights and climate justice matters. She was joined by Fiore Longo of Survival International, and Jimmy Dunson, co-founder of Mutual Aid Disaster Relief. They also critiqued the notion of “green capitalism” and highlighted the importance of community preparedness for extreme weather driven by climate chaos. Whistleblowers were a major theme on several shows.

    Tom Devine, legal director at the Government Accountability Project, joined the program to discuss whistleblowers’ contributions to society, the retaliation they often endure, and the legal protections they need. Devine was joined by Frank Serpico, a legend for his role in exposing police corruption, as well as Rick Parks, a whistleblower on the 1979 Three Mile Island meltdown, and Robert MacLean, who was fired from the Transportation Security Administration after criticizing dangerous shortcomings in post-9/11 airline security procedures. Mickey also got an update on the Julian Assange case from Kevin Gosztola and looked at the fallout from the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, and other media matters with Nolan Higdon.

    The post THE PROJECT CENSORED NEWSLETTER July 2022 appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • In January 2022, The American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the second largest labor union for teachers in the U.S., announced that it “launched a national partnership with a leading anti-misinformation tool NewsGuard (AFT, 2022).” NewsGuard was created in response to the moral panic over fake news, or disinformation, which began during the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election and was magnified during Donald Trump’s presidency and the COVID-19 global pandemic (Higdon, 2020). The fear over fake news has led teacher unions like the AFT, as well as schools and universities, to adopt NewsGuard’s tools for the purpose of training students to identify mis- and disinformation (NewsGuard, 2022).

    Educators and educational organizations and institutions would be wise to refuse any endorsement of the NewsGuard browser extension. The extension, branded as the “Internet Trust Tool,” distracts from the ways in which NewsGuard’s leadership and mission operate counter to the principles of democratic education and interests of organized labor. At best, NewsGuard is a questionable tool for information seeking, research, and literacy, and is at odds with the long-term interests of students and faculty.

    NewsGuard’s Advisory Board raises concerns about the organization’s commitment to education and organized labor. The Board consists of former U.S. government officials and journalists associated with agencies known for producing false news; for example, board members such as Tom Ridge served in the Department of Homeland Security and General Michael Hayden at the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency (Higdon, 2020; Maret, 2018; NewsGuard, 2021a; Phillips, 2018). In addition, the Advisory Board includes individuals who publicly defended the use of propaganda such as former U.S. State Department official Richard Stengel (Norton, 2020).

    The list of advisers also includes opponents of organized educators such as the former United States Secretary of Education under Barack Obama, Arne Duncan (NewsGuard, 2021a, 2021b; Nelson, 2014). While CEO of Chicago Schools, Duncan worked to weaken teacher unions (Nelson, 2014). As the United States Secretary of Education, Duncan also implemented a series of policies that led to teacher unions, such as National Education Association (NEA), to oppose him and the Obama administration’s education policy (Nelson, 2014). Duncan’s Race to the Top program sought to weaken teacher unions through competitive grants, charter schools, and standardized tests which served (Nelson, 2014; Ravitch, 2013, 2015, 2016).

    In addition to the clear conflicts of interest on their Advisory Board, NewsGuard’s modelruns counter to the goals and processes of democratic education. Although studies (Higdon,2020) and long term programs embedded within educational institutions (e.g., Big 6) have shownthat critical news literacy is the most effective way to mitigate the influence of false information,AFT chose to support NewsGuard (2021c, 2021d) which offers “trust ratings” that labelcontent through color coding and what is termed a “Nutrition Label.” This simplistic approachhas not only proven ineffective (Aslett, et al., 2022), but diminishes the complexity andinterconnected ways of establishing credibility and veracity of information in terms of authority,context, history, framing, nuance, and weighing perspectives. For example, a 2018 Gallup pollfound that a green rating assigned by NewsGuard (e.g., CNN,Fox News) may be perceived as untrustworthy and some sources that individuals findtrustworthy are assigned a red shield (Oremus, 2019). Further, news outlets that are traditionally accuratein their reporting can and do report false stories. For example, The New York Times  has a green rating on NewsGuard, but published false stories that led the U.S. to support an invasion of Iraq in 2003 (Higdon, 2020; Sussman 2020).  More recently, The Washington Post, which also has a green rating on NewsGuard, lost a multi-million dollar lawsuit to the 16-year-old Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann for falsely reporting that the teenager was antagonizing a Native American elder in Washington, D.C. (Kim, 2019).

    These examples illustrate that NewsGuard’s approach is an intellectually vapid solution masked as literacy. Educational institutions – that include teachers and librarians – should provide students with a set of skills in which to question, frame, evaluate, investigate, and analyze content from a wide variety of sources. This approach, known as critical media literacy, empowers students to be autonomous media users, where the NewsGuard approach leaves students dependent upon shadowy tools that act as arbiters of truth and falsity. As educators, normalizing these tools in educational spaces runs counter to our mission to empower students to engage the marketplace of ideas and use critical thinking to distinguish fact from fiction.

    Furthermore, educators and institutions who normalize NewsGuard must consider the ways in which they are exploiting students in the classroom. As Shoshana Zuboff (2019) notes, surveillance capitalism seeks to commodify human behavior through artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies that collect and analyze data for the purpose of producing customized content and experiences that nudge and direct human behavior. Corporations have long viewed the classroom as a lucrative space, and in the age of surveillance capitalism, Big Tech sees the classroom as a vast untapped resource of student data (Higdon & Butler, 2021). Supporting NewsGuard is complicity in this trajectory of exploitation. It is a trajectory where educators dogmatically list truths and falsehoods for students, while normalizing their surveillance and exploitation.

    Based on existing scholarship and available evidence, educators and educational organizations and institutions would be wise to avoid association with NewsGuard.

    References

    AFT. (2022). AFT partners with NewsGuard to combat misinformation online. https://www.aft.org/press-release/aft-partners-NewsGuard-combat-misinformation-online

    American College of Research Libraries. (2015). Framework for information literacy for higher education. https://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/issues/infolit/framework1.pdf

    Aslett, K., Guess, A. M., Bonneau, R., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. A. (2022). News credibility labels have limited average effects on news diet quality and fail to reduce misperceptions. Science Advances, 8(18). https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.abl3844

    Gallup, Inc. (2018). NewsGuard’s online source rating tool: User experience. https://www.NewsGuardtech.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Gallup-NewsGuards-Online-Source-Rating-Tool-User-Experience-1.pdf

    Higdon, N. (2020). The anatomy of fake news: A critical news literacy Education. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.

    Higdon, N., & Butler, A. (2021). Time to put your marketing cap on: Mapping digital corporate media curriculum in the age of surveillance capitalism. Review of Education,  Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 1-21.

    Kim, E.K. (2019). Nick Sandmann on encounter with Nathan Phillips: “I wish I would’ve walked away.” NBC Today, January 23. https://www.today.com/news/nick-sandmanninterview-today-show-s-savannah-guthrie-encounter-native-t147242

    Maret, S. (2018). The public and its problems: “Fake news” and the battle for hearts and minds. In M. Huff & A. Roth, Censored 2019: Fighting the fake news invasion (pp. 243-266). New York: Seven Stories Press.

    Nelson, L. (2014). How the Democrats alienated teachers’ unions. Vox, July 8. https://www.vox.com/2014/5/16/5683260/how-the-democrats-alienated-teachers-unions

    NewsGuard. (2021a). Advisory board. https://www.NewsGuardtech.com/our-advisory-board/

    NewsGuard. (2021b). Introducing: NewsGuard. https://www.NewsGuardtech.com/how-it-works/

    NewsGuard. (2021c). NewsGuard FAQ. https://www.NewsGuardtech.com/NewsGuard-faq/

    NewsGuard. (2021d). Rating process and criteria. https://www.NewsGuardtech.com/ratings/rating-process-criteria/

    NewsGuard. (2022). “A powerful news literacy tool for schools and libraries.” https://www.newsguardtech.com/industries/schools-and-libraries/

    Norton, B. (2020). Biden appointee advocated using propaganda against Americans. Consortium News. November 18. https://consortiumnews.com/2020/11/18/election-2020-biden-appointee-advocated-using-propaganda-against-americans/

    Oremus, W. (2019). Just trust us. Slate, January 25. https://slate.com/technology/2019/01/newsguard-nuzzelrank-media-ratings-fake-news.html

    Phillips, P. (2018). Giants: The global power elite. New York, New York: Seven Stories Press.

    Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America’s public schools. New York, New York: Vintage.

    Ravitich, D.(2015). Arne Duncan’s Race to the Bottom: Our national test fixation isn’t just bad for kids — it doesn’t even work. Salon, October 28. https://www.salon.com/2015/10/28/arne_duncans_race_to_the_bottom_our_national_test_fixation_isnt_just_bad_for_kids_it_doesnt_even_work/

    Ravitch, D. (2016). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York, New York: Basic Books.

    Reuters. (2022, March 4). British ad group WPP to leave Russia following Ukraine invasion. Yahoo! https://sports.yahoo.com/british-ad-group-wpp-says-161317839.html

    Stump, S. (2014, December 10). Ex-CIA chief Michael Hayden on torture report: “I didn’t lie and I didn’t mislead Congress.” Today. https://www.today.com/news/ex-cia-director-michaelhayden-torture-report-i-didnt-lie-1d80349126

    Sussman, G. (2020). Making enemies: the mainstream media spectacle and US foreign policy. Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, 19(1-2), 138-156.

    Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for the future at the new frontier of power. New York: Profile Books.

    The post The Case Against NewsGuard appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • In July 2022, David Keppler, writing for the Associated Press, warned that as “trust wanes, conspiracy theories rise,” and people in the U.S. are increasingly “rejecting what they hear from scientists, journalists or public officials.” After years of complicating and exacerbating the threats posed by disinformation through failed policies of censorship, the federal government seems to be coming to the realization that education is the best hope for mitigating the influence of disinformation on a democracy. As Keppler’s article was being published, The Digital Citizenship and Media Literacy Act & The Veterans Online Information and Cybersecurity Empowerment Act were introduced by members of the U.S. Congress to provide federal aid to media literacy education in the U.S. 

    Keppler’s article typified the moral panic over fake news, or disinformation, which began during the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election and was magnified during Donald Trump’s presidency and the COVID-19 global pandemic. In response to these fears, the federal government and private industry have collaborated to determine what is truth for the public. Through public denouncements, hearings, and the threat of regulation and or trust-busting, federal lawmakers have repeatedly pressured Big Tech to remove or censor content from their platforms that they deem false. 

    Meanwhile, companies such as Facebook and Newsguard, have capitalized on the moral panic, collaborating with people from the military-intelligence community to create problematic fact checking tools that purportedly determine fact from fiction for citizens. Big-tech has been found to not only remove false content from their platforms, but accurate content as well. For example, in October 2020, Facebook and Twitter famously removed a New York Post story from its platform about Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden, even though the story was not false, it was unverified. The removal later proved to be unwarranted as it authenticated by other media outlets including The Daily Mail and The Washington Post.

    For its part, the federal government created a Disinformation Governance Board (DGB) in 2022 that was headed by at first Nina Jankowicz who resigned in the face of public pressure, and then by former head of the Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff. Despite reassurances from the corporate media that only conservatives were spreading false information about the board, pundits on both the left and the right panned it as reminiscent of The Ministry of Truth from George Orwell’s classic dystopian novel 1984. The DGB, which the New York Times claimed would “monitor national security threats caused by the spread of dangerous disinformation,” was discontinued after objections across the political spectrum became difficult to ignore.

    Strategies that seek to censor content or define truth by decree are anti-democratic and do nothing to prepare citizens to determine the veracity of messaging contents. They do, however, complicate and worsen the spread of false information while simultaneously empowering known fake news producers: governments, industry, political parties, and establishment media outlets. 

    This has long been known by education scholars who have argued that critical news literacy education was the best antidote to disinformation. In July 2022, two congressional bills aimed to do just that were proposed: The Digital Citizenship and Media Literacy Act & The Veterans Online Information and Cybersecurity Empowerment Act. Collectively, they would provide $40 million to federal agencies to fund education programs to improve media literacy for American students from kindergarten through high school and for military veterans. 

    For decades, media literacy practitioners, scholars, and policy makers have worked tirelessly to make citizens aware of the existence and importance of media literacy education. Their goal was to do what countless other nations have done over the last forty years: add media literacy education to the curriculum in the U.S. The post-2016 moral panic over fake news advanced those efforts making Americans aware of the necessity of media literacy education. 

    The Digital Citizenship and Media Literacy Act & The Veterans Online Information and Cybersecurity Empowerment Act are promising steps toward funding media literacy education in U.S. schools. However, advocates need to be cautious that the bills do not become yet another opportunity for government and private industry to control information under the auspices of fighting fake news and promoting truth. Educators must ensure that they are offering students a critical news literacy not a corporate news literacy. Corporate-driven media—such as Facebook, Google, and Nickelodeon—discourages critical thinking while enhancing brand awareness and socializing students to adopt corporate ideologies.

    Conversely, critical news literacy, includes an analysis of power. It teaches students how to think like journalists, evaluate and analyze sources, separate fact from opinion, interrogate the production process, and investigate the politics of representation. According to scholars Douglas Kellner and Jeff Share, critical media literacy education focuses “on ideology critique and analyzing the politics of representation of crucial dimensions of gender, race, class, and sexuality; incorporating alternative media production; and expanding textual analysis to include issues of social context, control, and pleasure.” Critical news literacy education not only empowers students to determine the veracity of information, but to interrogate the power dynamics expressed in media content. 

    Education is the most promising solution to disinformation. It has much more promise than recent attempts to empower known fake news producers – government, corporations, political parties, and media outlets – to determine what is truth. Rather than empower entities or individuals to determine the veracity of information for its citizens, the U.S. would be wise to pass these bills so teachers and schools can empower the citizenry to determine fact from fiction for themselves. For their part, educators must resist corporate hegemony in the classroom. A critical news literacy education should be administered by well-trained educators whose goal is to teach students how to think, not what to think. These bills could be an important step in making these goals a reality. 

    The post Did Lawmakers Finally Figure Out That Critical News Literacy is the Antidote to Disinformation? appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • For the first half of this week’s show, Mickey brings on co-organizers and participants of the upcoming 2022 Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival in Washington, DC, including Marcel Reid, Michael McCray, and Marsha Warfiled. They make the case for a broader public understanding of what whistleblowing is, and why those who call out corruption need better protection and support given the retaliation they face for exercising what Daniel Ellsberg, of the Pentagon Papers fame, has called civil courage. In the second half-hour, Eleanor Goldfield and her guest look at the recent election in Colombia, which saw leftist candidate Gustavo Petro winning the presidency and the first Afro-Colombian, Francia Marquez, an environmental activist, win the vice-presidency. They discuss what this may means for the region and US influence and imperialism there.

    Notes:
    Michael McCray and Marcel Reid are the co-founders of the International Association of Whistleblowers and co-organizers of the Whistleblower Summit and Film Festival. McCray is also General Counsel for the Federally Employed Women Legal Education Fund. Reid is a former member of the Pacifica Radio National Board. Marsha Warfield is a nationally-known, comedian and actress, and will be hosting some events at the Whistleblower Summit. Gimena Sanchez is a staff member at the Washington Office on Latin America.

    Image by German Rojas from Pixabay

    The post Whistleblower Summit and the Recent Election Results in Colombia appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • This piece is a Bonus Op Ed to help kick off our new column; Dispatches from Project Censored: On Media and Politics

    By Nolan Higdon and Mickey Huff

    On July 8, President Joe Biden signed an executive order that directed the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to take steps to protect and expand access to medical abortion and contraception while ensuring that patients are eligible to obtain emergency care. In addition, the order seeks to push back against threats posed by surveillance in states outlawing abortion by directing federal agencies to take additional actions to protect patient privacy. The order was in response to a two-week pressure campaign by leftists who were frustrated by the Democratic Party’s tepid response the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned the 1973 Roe V. Wade ruling protecting abortion rights for women. Many threatened that they would not fund or vote for the Democratic Party unless leaders took action.

    The ways in which this pressure moved Biden from inaction to an executive order illustrates what activist scholars such as historian Howard Zinn long argued: one can’t be neutral on a moving train and change only occurs through sustained protest and agitation from the citizenry. Indeed, Lawrence O‘Donnell explained that when he worked for the Democratic Party, they ignored the demands from the left because many were never willing to actually withhold their votes on election day– ultimately succumbing to the fear tactics of the party’s ongoing “vote blue no matter who” propaganda campaign. As Biden’s recent executive order illustrates, those seeking to codify abortion rights need to agitate and annoy Democratic leadership to take aggressive action.

    Case in point, even though the decision was leaked a month ahead of time, Biden did not devise a plan to protect abortion rights following the Dobbs decision. Meanwhile, Republicans made plans years in advance, passing so-called trigger laws that automatically outlawed abortion in states once Roe V. Wade was overturned. The Democratic Party response was limited to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reading a poem, Vice President Kamala Harris tweeted a picture of herself watching pro-choice protests, Democratic members of Congress singing “God Bless America” on the steps of the U.S. Capitol, a vast fundraising campaign, and chiding the electorate for not “voting harder” for Democrats that allegedly allowed this all to happen. 

    Through podcasts, op-eds, street demonstrations, and more, progressives and leftists mobilized to pressure the Democratic Party to stop dithering on abortion rights and take substantive action, including removing the filibuster, packing the court, or adding abortion clinics to federal lands near states that outlawed abortion. They rebuked the Democratic Party in general and Biden in particular for serving as enablers of the Republican Party’s anti-abortion agenda. Leftists were met by Democratic Party apologists who took to social media to deflect and blame Bernie Sanders supporters, Susan Sarandon, and other so-called far-left types for taking down Hilary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, which they argued paved the way for Trump to appoint three Supreme Course Justices that were integral in overturning Roe V. Wade. However, these self-righteous social media users were outflanked by dozens of other Democratic Party apparatchiks, who echoed the critiques from the left.

    These included celebrities such as Debra Messing and “two dozen leading Democratic politicians and operatives, as well as several within the West Wing.” They complained that they were being asked to do more fundraising and voting, while the Democratic Party – which controls the Executive and Legislative Branches – dithered on abortion rights. Some even questioned if the president was capable of taking action. Some “mocked how the President stood in the foyer of the White House, squinting through his remarks from a teleprompter as demonstrators poured into the streets, making only vague promises of action because he and aides hadn’t decided on more.”

    Those protesting from the left were showing that any fundraising campaigns or voter drives would be moot until they had faith in Biden as a change maker. This was certainly difficult to imagine from Biden, who promised wealthy donors in 2020 that if he was elected president, “Nothing would fundamentally change.” However, these critiques seemed to put pressure on Democratic Party leaders. After the Dobbs decision was announced, Biden was reportedly making a deal to appoint an anti-abortionist to a lifetime judicial appointment, but as the pressure from progressives mounted, his rhetoric became more aggressive as he expressed his willingness to remove the filibuster to codify abortion rights. Time will tell, but further inaction likely does not bode well for the president.

    Despite the notable shift, that rhetoric has done little to mask previous inaction. As a result, the protests continue and his poll numbers continue to fall. Since Biden’s election, American’s confidence in the Office of the Presidency in general dropped 15 points, from 38% in 2021 to 23% in 2022 – 2 points lower than the Supreme Court. Further, Biden’s approval rating– 36% on July 6, 2022 – was just 2 points above Trump’s dismal 34% when leaving office. Translation–currently, some 64% of Democrats do not want Biden to run for a second term. 

    Elites never admit failure. The Democratic Party will conceal, but never confront, that they failed to protect abortion rights from the far right and the GOP. As a possible defeat may await Biden’s party this fall in the midterms, they will blame the other party or voters, never themselves, for promoting candidates and policies that will not keep them in office. This was already demonstrated in a July 10 interview on CBS where Vice President Harris claimed that Democrats were not at fault for the reversal of Roe because they “rightly believed” that abortion rights were settled law. This is rich coming from someone who served in the U.S. Senate with colleagues who openly appointed anti-abortionist judges and advocated for overturning Roe V. Wade. 

    The Democratic leadership will also never give progressive activists credit for forcing the party to try to protect abortion rights. Their disdain for progressives was illustrated by their efforts to undermine Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaigns and remove all funding for Nevada’s Democratic Party after a slate of democratic socialists were elected to lead the party. These efforts seem to communicate that risking a Republican Party victory is worth neutralizing progressive activists.

    It is not surprising that the White House communications director Kate Bedingfield, who said the Biden’s cabinet would “not to satisfy some activists who have been consistently out of step with the mainstream of the Democratic Party.” In reality, activists may not be in line with the neoliberal corporate leaders in the DNC, but they are not out of step with the mainstream, considering that their goal to protect abortion rights is supported by 60% of the electorate and 80% of those who are members of or lean toward the Democratic Party. Biden finally acted when he signed the July 8 executive order, which is hardly a substitute for codified abortion rights, but it illustrates that sustained protest of those in power is the only hope for making change. More protest and pressure will be needed to achieve a goal of passing legislation that codifies abortion rights.

    Moving forward, the party can continue to berate activists to deflect their failures, but the reality is that the activists are moving the party to action and should be embraced. There is still a long way to go, but this should be a lesson to those who support abortion rights or any other civil or human rights policy: to make change, one must protest and pester those in power, not just vote and hope. Rather than attack the left, Democratic voters should hold those in power accountable to their base and a majority of Americans. As early 20th century labor activist and songwriter Joe Hill once said in the face of defeat– don’t mourn, organize. Then agitate like hell for real change. Democracy is not a spectator sport. There is much to be done. Let’s get busy.

    NOLAN HIGDON is a Project Censored judge and lecturer at Merrill College and University of California, Santa Cruz.  His most recent publications include The Anatomy of Fake News: A Critical News Literacy Education (2020) and The Podcaster’s Dilemma: Decolonizing Podcasters in the Era of Surveillance Capitalism (2021, with Nicholas L. Baham III) and, with Mickey Huff, the coauthor of Let’s Agree to Disagree: A Critical Thinking Guide to Communication, Conflict Management, and Critical Media Literacy (2022).

    MICKEY HUFF is the director of Project Censored and president of the nonprofit Media Freedom Foundation. To date, he has co-edited 14 editions of the Project’s yearbook, including most recently Project Censored’s State of the Free Press (2022), with Andy Lee Roth. He is also co-author with Nolan Higdon, of Unites States of Distraction: Media Manipulation in Post-Truth America (and what we can do about it) (City Lights, 2019) and Let’s Agree to Disagree: A Critical Thinking Guide to Communication, Conflict Management, and Critical Media Literacy (Routledge, 2022).

    Re-publishing guidelines for this column can be found here.

    The post Did Dobbs Help the Left Rediscover How Political Change is Made? appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • This week’s program begins with an update from Kevin Gosztola on the Julian Assange legal case in the UK, including the recent ruling by the Home Secretary authorizing Assange’s extradition to the U.S. Gosztola explains why Assange didn’t receive an impartial hearing from the UK authorities and what this portends for press freedoms worldwide. In the second half-hour, Nolan Higdon looks at the recent Supreme Court opinion reversing Roe vs. Wade, and asks why national-level Democratic Party politicians never took preemptive action to protect abortion rights (the topic of a recent article he and Mickey co-authored at Salon). He and Mickey also discuss the state of the media, including the lessons from the rapid failure of CNN+, the cable network’s futile attempt to compete with new media by adding a streaming service that did little to garner a broader audience.

    Notes:
    Kevin Gosztola is the managing editor of ShadowProof. He has covered the Julian Assange legal proceedings in the UK from the beginning, as well as other press-freedom and whistleblower cases. Nolan Higdon is a university lecturer in media studies and history in northern California. He’s also the author of The Anatomy of Fake News, and is a frequent guest on the Project Censored Show.

    The post Julian Assange Case and Press Freedoms; Politics of Abortion Rights and the Democratic Party; Cable News Fail appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • On June 16, 2022, USA Today announced that it would remove 23 stories written by their breaking news reporter Gabriela Miranda from its archive. The decision came after an internal audit found that the stories were fake news. Miranda had included quotes attributed to the wrong person and in some cases non-existent individuals. A quick perusal of the stories reveals that Miranda was not an overzealous reporter cutting corners in the name of fearless journalism. Rather, she was an ambitious young reporter producing the very non-newsworthy clickbait that corporate legacy media rewards. Here a few choice examples:

    Quality journalism is newsworthy, meaning it is new, unusual, interesting, significant, and is a story of human interest.  For decades, scholars have warned that in its pursuit of profits, corporate legacy media had abandoned journalism. Today’s corporate news does not reward quality journalism; like the days of “yellow journalism” a hundred years ago, it promotes trivial content that can now go viral online. Forty years ago, Project Censored founder Carl Jensen referred to a revival of this type of content as “junk food news because just as fast food falsely appears to be decent food, junk food news is non-newsworthy, sensational garbage that appears to be sound journalism. 

    The audit of Miranda’s consent reveals that in corporate legacy news media, those interested in career advancement must produce junk food news even if they have to make it up. Plenty of young people in the industry recognize this reality. After leaving college in 2021, Miranda spent just over a year producing false content as a journalist at The Gainesville Times  and USA Today. Miranda is not an outlier. 

    Others such as the Washington Post’s Taylor Lorenz, whose age is in dispute but is believed to be in her mid to late 30s, has made a lucrative career peddling non-newsworthy content and sloppy reporting. Indeed, in her position as a feature writer at WaPo, Lorenz publicly identified the person who ran the Libs of TikTok account, leading to that user being doxxed. The episode illustrates that WaPo has veered a long way off from when its journalists were known for investigative reporting that took down a sitting president in Richard Nixon. Now, they laud their reporters for identifying insignificant social media users.

    Lorenz has not only been accused of reporting junk food news, but just like Miranda, she is accused of reporting falsehoods. In 2020, while at The New York Times, Lorenz was sued for defamation by influencer talent agent and entrepreneur Ariadna Jacob for “numerous false and disparaging statements.” The case is still pending. In June of 2022, it was revealed by the New York Times that Lorenz fabricated two interviews with YouTubers during the Amber Heard and Johnny Depp trial. As a result, Lorenz was demoted from her position as a feature writer at WaPo. 

    The junk food news from corporate reporters such as Miranda and Lorenz would be harmless if it did not distract audiences from quality journalism. This was made painfully clear on a June 2022 episode of Real Time with Bill Maher. Host Bill Maher, who seems up to date on every trivial matter reported by MSNBC, was flabbergasted when his guest, Krystal Ball, noted that the majority of government relief funds  allocated in response to the March 2020 stock market crash during the COVID-19 pandemic went to industry not individuals. Rather than disagree, Maher admitted he had no recollection of the crash or the funds allocated to industry. That helps explain why Maher was parroting the vacuous corporate legacy media talking point that the tiny part of government spending allocated to individuals was responsible for inflation. 

    Rather than take responsibility for developing a media system that rewards falsehoods and junk food news, corporate news media is largely defensive. For example, CNN developed Brian Stelter’s Reliable Sources which argues weekly that the network’s competitors are peddling in falsehoods, but CNN is a bastion of true journalism in the U.S. However, Stelter, at 36 years old, is yet another younger person enamored with peddling junk food news and falsehoods. For example, he buckled under pressure when Stephen Colbert, a late night comedian, inquired about how CNN had allowed host Chris Cuomo to excuse improprieties by his brother then New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. Stelter said it was a “conundrum” for CNN because nothing like this had ever happened before. He claimed “if we open the journalism ethics book, there’s no page for this.” In fact, journalistic codes of ethics always include language about how reporters need to be independent of conflicts of interest and avoid even their appearance. 

    Rather than rely on falsehoods as he did on Colbert, Stelter often just avoids questions about CNN’s journalistic failures.  In 2022, he shamelessly avoided a college student’s question about that cited specific examples where CNN’s reporting was inaccurate. Similarly, he reacted with confusion when a Yale University Professor, on his own program, made the case that CNN was a partisan network. 

    Just like the fall of Rome, the decline of American journalism is slow, but obvious to even the most nascent observer. The New York Times, who broke the USA Today story, is an interesting case study of this trajectory. Nearly, two decades earlier they – and the Boston Globe – published stories fabricated by Jayson Blair for years which included fables about the D.C. Sniper and U.S. invasion of Iraq. They seemed to have learned little from Blair because they soon published fake news stories abou non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq from Judith Miller, which helped sell the American public on invading Iraq in 2003. Even after they promised to recommit themselves to journalism following Trump’s election, the New York Times published a podcast called Caliphate, about a Canadian who joined Isis and lived to tell about it, which proved to be false. These stories illustrate the corrosive damage caused by corporate legacy media peddling fake news.

    It seems clear that today’s journalists want to be seen as brave truth tellers, but refuse to do the hard work that sound investigative reporting requires. They would rather fabricate stories and virtue signal on social media for more clicks, shares, and likes. Too many ambitious media figures rightly recognize that fabricating sensational content will advance their career in corporate legacy media. 

    Nolan Higdon is a Project Censored judge and lecturer at Merrill College and University of California, Santa Cruz.  

    Re-publishing guidelines for this column

    Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay

    The post From Fake News to Junk News: Gabriela Miranda is the Symptom, Not the Problem appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • This week on the Project Censored radio show, we sit down with Fiore Longo of Survival International to discuss the colonialist and racist realities of so-called conservation, not least of all in the case of our own country’s beloved national parks. Highlighting the current forced eviction of the Maasai from their ancestral lands, Fiore speaks to the need of shifting our paradigms on both eco-tourism and conservation, pointing out that removing tribal and indigenous peoples from an ecosystem not only harms the biodiversity of that place but perpetuates violence against these people. The so-called Global North’s perspective of tribal and indigenous peoples must change, not only for the sake of human rights but in a very real sense for the sake of biodiversity and climate justice. There’s no such thing as cuddly colonialism, there’s no such thing as green capitalism.

    Later in the show we’re joined by Jimmy Dunson, co-founder of Mutual Aid Disaster Relief to discuss the importance of community preparedness for extreme weather driven by climate chaos, as well as relational infrastructure. We also discuss his upcoming book Building Power while the lights are out – about mutual aid, disasters and dual power published by Rebel Hearts Publishing.

     

    Image by Pete Linforth from Pixabay

    The post The Realities of So-Called Conservation, and the Importance of Community Preparedness for Extreme Weather appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • This week’s program focuses on whistleblowers — their contributions to society, the retaliation they often endure, and the legal protections they need. Mickey’s guests for the hour include Tom Devine, legal director for the Government Accountability Project, a nonprofit organization that supports whistleblowers, and three historic whistleblowers who dared speak truth to power. We learn about the dangers and abuses these three men exposed over the past half century, and what reforms are needed to defend individuals who take the risks of becoming whistleblowers, and the journalists who help bring their stories to the public.

    Notes:

    Tom Devine is Legal Director at the nonprofit Government Accountability Project. Frank Serpico is a retired NYPD detective who became a household name after exposing widespread corruption within the department. His story was the subject of the 1973 Hollywood movie “Serpico.” Rick Parks is a nuclear engineer who worked at the damaged Three Mile Island power plant in 1979, and has spoken out about management’s and regulators’ failures to prioritize safety above utility profits. He is featured on the new Netflix docu-series “Meltdown: Three Mile Island” Robert MacLean was fired from the Transportation Security Administration after criticizing dangerous shortcomings in airline security procedures after 9/11.

    A National Whistleblower Summit will take place in July; more information can be found here.

    Show Transcript

    Mickey Huff: [00:00:00] Welcome to The Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio. I’m your host Mickey Huff. Today on the program, we focus on the importance of whistleblowers and the work of the Government Accountability Project. We’re joined for the hour by their legal director, Tom Devine, to discuss how whistleblower rights need to be upheld and greatly improved. We welcome three historic whistleblowers to the program to share their incredible stories of civil courage, including the legendary Frank Serpico on outing police misconduct, Rick Parks on averting total disaster in containment and cleanup efforts at Three Mile Island. Last but not least, we [00:01:00] welcome back Robert MacLean on TSA flight security after 9/11. Today, an hour honoring whistle blowers and the important role they play. Stay tuned.

    Welcome to The Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio, I’m your host Mickey Huff. On today’s program, we’re going to address all things whistleblower. We are joined for the hour by Tom Devine of the Government Accountability Project. He is their legal director and has worked with the organization since 1979, and he has formally or informally assisted in over 7,000 whistleblower cases, people defending themselves against retaliation and in making real differences on behalf of the public. So Tom Devine will be with us for the hour today, and then we are also honored to be joined by several whistle blowers themselves. [00:02:00] We are joined by Frank Serpico first, Frank became a national hero and of course folks may know of a well known film of the same name about him. We’ll talk about law enforcement whistleblower cases and why we still need whistleblower protections. We’ll also be joined by Rick Parks, who is affiliated with a film, Meltdown, about Three Mile Island. So a whistleblower from 1979, going all the way back to the Three Mile Island disaster, and we also have Robert MacLean with us on The Project Censored Show today, and he’ll be talking about an ongoing case with Transportation Security Administration and we’ll get into the details of each of these people as examplars and examples of whistleblowers, how they’re important, why they’re important, and why we need to support them. You can learn more about the Government Accountability Project at whistleblower.org and Tom Devine, let’s start with you. Welcome back to The Project Censored Show. 

    Tom Devine: Thanks for having me Mickey. 

    Mickey Huff: It is always a pleasure Tom. We were out of the loop for [00:03:00] a few years, but we’re glad to be back together for the National Whistleblower Summit coming up at the end of July. Project Censored is back co-sponsoring that with you and we’re looking forward to being back in the loop, supporting whistleblowers. By the way for listeners, stay tuned, in next week’s show, we’ll have Kevin Gosztola, Abby Martin, with significant updates on the Julian Assange case, speaking of other important whistleblower cases. So Tom, let’s start with you and let’s talk about why are we still talking about the need for protecting whistleblowers?

    Tom Devine: Whistleblowers are the people who have kept organizations and those who have power honest or tried to keep them honest and have been our most essential check since the beginning of organized society. Whistleblowers are just individuals who use free speech, rights to challenge abuses of power that betray the public trust, and as long as we’ve had organized society, and as long as people have had power, they haven’t been able to resist abusing it for their own ends instead of for the public good. And when [00:04:00] people fight back with weapons, we call them revolutionaries. When they fight back with words, we call them dissidents and whistleblowing’s just the modern slang for something that’s as old as the history of organized society. They’re the people who change the course of history. We’ve got three people today with you on this program who actually have changed the course of history. 

    Mickey Huff: Indeed, it’s remarkable, and I’m looking forward to speaking with each of our special guests here today. Tom Devine, whistleblower protection though, it’s interesting. The history of it in the United States goes back to 1777, is that right? 

    Tom Devine: That was the first kind of anecdotal whistleblower protection for some whistleblowers on a Navy ship with a corrupt captain, but we really didn’t get into having any credible free speech fights until 1978 for government workers.

    Mickey Huff: So, this is a pretty significant history and it sounds like in the last 40 years there’s been a lot more attention being paid to the importance of whistleblowers. Again, granted, going all the way [00:05:00] back to Daniel Ellsberg, one of the more famous in the latter 20th century in the Pentagon Papers, but so many whistleblowers since, and many that ought to be household names, but many that folks just never seem to hear about because there’s a connection between whistleblowers and press freedom. The corporate media don’t always like to cover these kinds of stories, because whistleblowers often are saying things that are very damning or incriminating about the corruption of our public and private institutions. Is that right Tom Devine? 

    Tom Devine: Absolutely. Whistleblowers threaten those who are abusing their power, and animal instinct is if something threatens you, you want to destroy the threat. You don’t think about whether or not you deserved it as a lesson to be learned, or you had it coming or this or that. You want to eliminate whatever is getting in your way and that’s the way organizations react with whistleblowers and because of that, I’m proud, in one sense, of the United States. We pioneered a global legal revolution in whistleblower rights, we passed it in 1978. The second one [00:06:00] wasn’t until 1998 in Great Britain. Now there’s 62 countries that have national whistleblower laws. We got this started, but it’s kind of frustrating. Unlike the rest of the world, we don’t get a fair day in court for our whistleblowers, at least if they’re federal workers. The protection is limited to just employees, not to anyone who peddles the truth where it’s needed. And the protection is generally limited here to workplace harassment, which means that you can be hit with a SLAPP suit that’ll bankrupt you, or you can be criminally prosecuted for the things that you couldn’t be fired from your job for. So our laws have become kind of a caricature. 

    Mickey Huff: And it’s very unfortunate because it is great work, but rights don’t enforce themselves and laws don’t enforce themselves and corruption and conflict of interest, they are age old challenges and they continue to be, I’d like to bring in one of our whistleblower guests here today. Frank Serpico, of course, folks may know Frank [00:07:00] Serpico in the late 1960s and seventies Serpico blew the whistle on police corruption. This eventually prompted something called the Knapp Commission. Tom Devine, you and Frank wrote an article back in 2020 about changing the culture of silence to protect police whistleblowers specifically. But Frank Serpico welcome to The Project Censored Show. I’d like it if you could talk a little about your historic story with our audience today, Frank Serpico. 

    Frank Serpico: Yeah, thanks Mickey. Thanks for having me. Well, first, you know, all your guests and all this all has to do with the safety and wellbeing of the society, whether it’s pollution, air safety, or protecting and serving. And as people know from the movie, those that saw it, I mean, it was actually going back to 1971, there was systemic police corruption throughout New York City police department. And I thought, boy, [00:08:00] wait till they hear about this, speaking about internal affairs, that they were going to do something. I didn’t know that internal affairs knew more about it than I did, and they were part and parcel of it. And if it wasn’t for one brave police inspector, Paul Delise, who was my boss at one time, who put his career on the line and went with me to The New York Times, and one good newspaper reporter Dave Burnham, which are hard to find today. The editor didn’t even want to publish the story because, he said, we’re paying off the cops too. And so corruption, it has a purpose and it greases the wheels of corruption when people want favors but it hurts the community as a whole. In my case, they call it the blue wall of silence or the code of silence, which is an unwritten code that is as [00:09:00] strong as the mafia’s omertà. So me having blown the whistle, the term that I hate, because it sounds demeaning, on the corruption, I was on duty with three other offices and I ended up getting shot and exchanging fire with a drug dealer and they left me for dead. And one police car that showed up because a tenant called the police and they didn’t even know that a cop had been shot because they never put out a 10-13, which is officer down. So this one police car took me to the hospital and I was thinking, well, at least it was two cops. Later, I found out the guy that picked me up, he said: “if I knew it was Serpico, I would’ve left him there to fester.” So this is the attitude. The whistleblower is the opposite of the criminal because the whistleblower [00:10:00] exposes the criminal, and the criminal, no matter what guise they come under, doesn’t want to be exposed and they want to keep that code of silence that protects them. And that’s why we need a bill to protect the few that had the courage to come forward and expose corruption, and maybe if we had a whistleblower protection, more of them would be encouraged to come forward. But as in my case, the police want to make sure that they don’t forget, and so they continue to treat me with disdain. Here’s a classic example, right up to date. The Daily News was going to write a story about the 50 year anniversary of the Knapp Commission, which came to be due to my charges of police corruption, which did a very good job of exposing the corruption. But the police did a very poor job of correcting it, although they pretended [00:11:00] that they did. So I was awarded the Medal of Honor for my bravery in exchanging fire with a drug dealer. But what happens? They never gave me my proper medal or my certificate. And I constantly asked every police commissioner for my certificate, they all ignored me. The last one, I thought, you know, this is enough. I got in touch with Civil Liberties and they said, we’ll look into it. And so they said, oh, Frank, I got your certificate. They send it to me in a tube. And I look at it and it’s signed by commissioner Murphy, who was the commissioner at the time who was supposed to be the reform commissioner, which he wasn’t, and it doesn’t have a department seal on it. So I go, what? And so I called the newspaper and he says, well, I got a story coming out about the 50 year anniversary [00:12:00] of the Knapp Commission. I said, great, maybe you can tell them I still haven’t gotten my certificate. And the article comes out on Twitter of all places. And I said, nice article, but you have forgot to mention, I didn’t get my certificate. So the new mayor, Adams, says “Frank, you are my hero. I want to make sure you get that certificate.” Great, but how about addressing me as detective Serpico? I mean, do I know you? Are you in the official police department? It’s like everybody wants to get in on the act. So I don’t say anything and then I get a call from Civil Liberties saying, Frank, I just got a call from the mayor’s office. Now, I’m 86 years old. They want to know, can you get down here at eight o’clock tomorrow morning? I started laughing. I said, wait a minute, I don’t hear too good, would you repeat that? No, I heard him right. I said, what the hell’s he think, I’m waiting for him? [00:13:00] Maybe I want to bring some friends or relatives. “They’ll pick you up and drop you off.” No, that’s not the question. Why don’t they treat me with the respect that any recipient of the Medal of Honor gets in the department. He calls me back: “Okay, here’s your choices: you can come pick it up, they’ll deliver it to you,” I forget what the other choice was. I said, look, just tell him to put it in the mail. “Well, what do you want on there?” I want what every other member that got that award, nothing less, nothing more. Framed, proper seal, proper date, et cetera. Calls me back again. “Oh, Frank, can they deliver it to the Sheriff’s office?” Why are they jerking me around? So finally I do get it, and it’s framed with my picture and I look at it and it’s signed by the current commissioner, [00:14:00] Sewell, and the date is January 1st, 2022. Wait a minute, that’s not when I was issued this medal, it was back in [1972]. So it appeared and the media picked it up, that I was being rewarded for blowing the whistle on corruption. So you see how I’m at a loss for the word of how disgusting and divisive and deceitful. And this is 2022. So I hope you followed what I’m telling you because that’s the way it happened and there are other officers that blow the whistle on corruption and they become the victims. Not only victims, they make them criminals. As in the case of one officer he’s facing, I [00:15:00] don’t know how many years in jail, because he exposed that these cops were responsible for the death of their suspect. So that’s where we are. 

    Mickey Huff: So detective Frank Serpico, thank you for sharing your story again with us today, and I’m afraid that the story you just told seems to be all too common with people that have the civil courage to blow the whistle on corruption. And I just wanted to thank you for all that you’ve done to call attention to this. This is still a significant problem in 2022, the code of silence, the blue code of silence. It’s still something that we need to address and Tom Devine, after the break, maybe we can talk a little bit about one of those bills that’s in Congress. And then of course, we also are going to get to our other guests today. We have Rick Parks to talk about Three Mile Island, we have Robert MacLean to talk about the TSA. I’m your host, Mickey Huff for The Project Censored Show. We’ll continue our conversations all about whistle blowing after this [00:16:00] brief musical break.

    Welcome back to The Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio, I’m your host Mickey Huff. before the break we were speaking with Tom Devine, the legal director at Government Accountability Project, who will be with us for the hour. We were also joined by Frank Serpico and we were talking about his famous case and of course, lingering concerns that go all the way up to this year. Tom Devine, some of the things that Frank was mentioning, that these are still problems., These are still real issues and challenges. Can you [00:17:00] talk about one of the bills that you’re fighting to get past in Congress about police accountability? 

    Tom Devine: You have to have a baseline to compare what these bills would be changing and right now they’d be pretty much changing a vacuum of credible rights against retaliation for police officers who defend the public. Right now, if somebody wants to blow the whistle, a police officer, they go to an internal affairs operation that may be collusive and actually engaged in the same corruption. And if they’re retaliated against, they get to go to the same police department that’s engaging in the harassment and ask them to change their minds. In other words, they don’t have any viable channel to get the truth out and they don’t have a viable channel to defend themselves. There’s legislation in the house of representatives by representative Gerald Connolly, H.R.6762, and it would protect everyone who provides evidence of police illegality or misconduct, [00:18:00] whether or not it’s a law enforcement officer from the local beat to the federal government, the military police, or criminal investigators. It would protect citizens who were witnesses on the street with their smartphone, it would protect victims who are currently afraid to file charges that they were beat up because it’ll get even worse. It’ll protect the media, it would protect civil rights groups. It would give all these people access to jury trials, global best practice confidentiality protections that they don’t want to be exposed, and probably most significant it would give them a right to defend themselves in court against civil or criminal liability. All too often what we’re seeing is that police officers who blow the whistle on crime get charged with the same crime that they were challenging, like Javier Esqueda, that Frank was talking about. He discovered a George Floyd style murder in Joliet, Illinois, did the research to prove it, and they’re charging him with [00:19:00] four felonies and seeking 20 years in prison because he investigated and found the evidence of the murders. They said it was unauthorized for him to see it, even though it was one of his trainees and he was the training supervisor who had to. Or there’s a whistleblower down in Miami, Florida who blew the whistle on the police there in Broward County planting drugs on teenage minority youths and busting them as a distraction from their own drug dealing. So it looked like they were enforcing the law instead of cashing in on the drug trade. Well, this police officer, after he made internal disclosures, they prosecuted him three times. He was found innocent all three times because he was squeaky clean, but he spent a year and a half in prison, a lot of it in solitary confinement, they put him in with the general prisoners who want to kill cops. This is for what we call committing the truth and we need these rights. 

    Mickey Huff: My goodness, Tom Devine, legal [00:20:00] director, Government Accountability Project. And something tells me with your cadence and stride there, that you could go on for quite a time longer with lists of names of people that need protection and that we need to hear their stories. So Tom Devine, let’s also bring in to our conversation, Rick Parks and Rick, welcome to The Project Censored Show. It’s an honor to have you with us today.

    Rick Parks: I’m glad to be here. 

    Mickey Huff: I understand that you are involved, were involved, with the Three Mile Island disaster that happened back in 1979 and you also have a film that is now a Netflix documentary, it’s called Meltdown. Could you talk to our listeners about Three Mile Island? I heard about Three Mile Island as a kid and my father worked at a local power plant and actually was very familiar with Three Mile Island. So in our house, when we heard about Three Mile Island, we heard a different story than the one that the media was telling. Let’s hear it from you. 

    Rick Parks: First of all, Mickey, I know the power plant your dad [00:21:00] used to pay a visit to, Shippingport, and I worked at Beaver Valley Power Station also. So I was not at Three Mile Island during the accident. Actually I started to work there in 1980. Specifically, I will not name the company, but anyway, it was another beltway bandit. We were there to do the startup testing on the Submerged Demineralizer System (SDS), the system that was going to be built and implemented to process the million gallons of highly radioactive water that was in the basement of the reactor building. That’s how I got there. Actually, it was a golden opportunity for me because I’m, to that day, to this day, still very pro nuclear. I am an advocate for nuclear power when it’s done right. There’s a couple of ways it can be done right, but that’s not germane to this conversation. What is germane to this [00:22:00] conversation is that along as it does talk about in the movie, and the process, the original concept was we were going to restore unit two to operations. What we found in July of 1982, when we did the quick look process, procedure where we stuck cameras and radiation monitoring equipment, et cetera, down into the reactor vessel. We determined that the upper half of it was all but gone. Big problem with that, as we knew a large part of it had to be in the bottom reactor vessel head. The laws of gravity and physics tend to make that happen after a meltdown, Chernobyl also proved it. So that changed the whole ball game. We knew it was going to take the cleanup a lot longer. By that point in time, I was no longer involved with the SDS project. [00:23:00] Larry King had come on site as director of plant operations. Bechtel had taken over under the auspices of GPU and the DOE, and they were putting people in every department. And since, in the operations department of a nuclear power plant, their operators have to be nuclear operators, they put me in with him. So Bechtel, who I did not work for, approached me about coming to work for them so they could put me in Larry King’s department. And I said fine. Larry King gave me the polar crane as a project, as an operations engineer, myself and the other operations engineer interfaced with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, we reviewed everything that was to be performed on that power plant that could affect the fuel inside the reactor vessel. I mean, we weren’t the only ones we approved it for operations, Ed [00:24:00] Gischel’s guys approved it for engineering aspects, that sort of thing, and radiological aspects. When we said you could do it, you could do it, because our people had the license that was required by law to be in charge of that fuel and make the final decision about what was done. Unfortunately, money stands in the way of everything, the pursuit of man’s livelihoods, and when we wouldn’t approve the procedure, because we considered that there was a chance that we could drop the reactor vessel head and shear the transverse in-core probes on the bottom of the reactor vessel, because we figured that the reactor core, when it melted, damn sure came close if it did not exceed the ability to melt some of the thinnest parts of the reactor vessel, which [00:25:00] was where the transverse in-core probes go to. Ultimately, it was proved those tubes were braided during the accident, so it was a good damn thing they never dropped the head. The problem being if they had dropped the head because they had violated every aspect of the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, which means if it’s not been thoroughly reviewed and approved from a nuclear safety protection standpoint, it’s an unreviewed nuclear safety question and you’ve got to take another look at it. So Bechtel put the procedure on our desk, which became my desk and I started reviewing it. I went and started looking for the records, because during my stint under the SDS program, I was the assistant startup and test manager at unit two and I knew what the test program was and I knew what type of records [00:26:00] we had to have, and there weren’t any that I could find. So in my mind, that made every part put on there a suspect or counterfeit part until you could prove otherwise because that’s what the regulations require. So I was accused of being a super by-the-book-er and I was threatened as soon as I put that in writing back to not only Bechtel, but to the NRC. A guy who had been instrumental in getting me to come back to Bechtel and work for them, a friend of mine, walked up to me the day after I made those comments and issued that memo and said, management is really pissed at me and they were looking every way they could to get me off the island. That blew me away. And it was because they didn’t like the positions I was taking. I wasn’t a team player is basically what he was saying. They wanted me there to push stuff through and [00:27:00] I would’ve if it had been safe. You tell me what I asked for, give me the load drop analysis to prove that if we drop the load sufficiently, we would not create a special shape missile, and I want to make sure that missile cannot break the pressurizer surge line. And by the way, can you prove that if we drop this, or any portion of that weight, will the fracture potential for the bottom of the reactor vessel head be adequate. And everybody: “oh, yeah, we have all the calculations.” I went all the way up to Mr. Sanford, the senior vice president of Bechtel at Gaithersburg, Maryland issuing my complaints and my concerns and I went to the NRC, and the NRC told me, take your silly ass problem to the Department of Labor. This is an employer employee relationship [00:28:00] problem. I said, wait a minute, threatening me because I won’t go along with it, you’re saying that I should just take it to the DOL? Okay. Well, when I went to Mr. Sanford there were three of us: Larry King, my boss, Ed Gischel, the director of plant engineering who reported to Larry King and myself. And when Ed refused to approve that procedure from an engineering standpoint, a man who sat on the committee that wrote American National Standards Institute procedures for how you test polar cranes in a reactor building, so therefore they thought he didn’t know what he was talking about, they required him to have a neuropsychological evaluation. Larry King, they [00:29:00] fired, accused him of conflict of interest. They flew in a special investigator from San Francisco, Bechtel did. Put me in a room with this guy and my boss, whom I’d never met because they hired me over the phone, I never went to the home office, I just went to work under a different hat. So these two guys are asking me, I’m accused of conflict of interest. What’s the conflict? So my instincts told me I was being set up. I mean, I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I damn sure ain’t stupid. I told them I didn’t want to talk anymore unless I could have an independent witness inside that room and they assured me that that wasn’t necessary, and I assured them if they wanted to hear anything from me it was. As history has demonstrated, there’s not a lot of backup in me, but they finally gave in [00:30:00] and the guy I asked to come into the room was another Bechtel engineer, a friend of mine. And as we walked out of that room, he said he had never seen that before in any of his experience with Bechtel, never even heard of it. So I demanded to see the vice president who was the lead dude down in Gaithersburg. And his name was Sanford, as I said. I go in telling the story, he tells me, well, you know, all those calculations exist. And I said, well, I sure would love to see them. I have never seen them. Not in all my lifetime. They don’t exist. Unless they doctored them up yesterday. Then he told me I’d probably be fired for putting Bechtel in a bad light with a customer, and I’m thinking, holy Jesus here, if we drop that head and we shift that fuel just enough, put it [00:31:00] into a critical mass, it’s not going to be critical, it’s going to be super critical because it’s going to have the water there to feed it until it cracks, and it’s going to eject all of that stuff out. And the reactor building was open. They like to claim that the reactor building was sealed. I walked on board that side in 1980 and that reactor building had more penetrations that were open than a porcupine’s got quills. So they lie about that too. Ed Gischel even made awful lot of stink about that and they chose to ignore it because we were compromising reactor safety to the general public, and they ignored it. So I had no choice. I knew that after I found pot in my vehicle and I was pulled over and searched, I mean, high and low. I should’ve smoked that pot instead of flushing it, I’d have probably been better off. My [00:32:00] apartment was broken into. I mean, I had every position of authority stripped from me so I could no longer be an impediment because until I signed off that I accepted the response on my comments, declaring the whole thing an unreviewed nuclear safety question, they were up the proverbial creek without a paddle. And they were wanting me to agree to sign off. I decided that since I couldn’t trust the NRC, because I’ve never seen such incompetency in my life as I witnessed on the part of some members of the NRC, definitely demonstrated to me that they would not hesitate a moment to do anything that it required to further their career and the revolving door concept between the NRC and the beltway bandits like Bechtel, Stone & Webster, Burns & Roe, Babcock & Wilcox. It existed [00:33:00] then the same way it exists now, best way to advance yourself from going to lowly paid beyond working for the U.S. government is to suck up to the big boys. And so to make long story short I knew they didn’t care, and I knew that I not only had two men I respected above all else, Ed Gischel and Larry King, who agreed the same thing I did, I know the other guys in the upper management within site operations department agreed fully too, but by then, those guys had been so compromised, the ones that had been involved there during the accident that they toed the line. That’s a story that would take more than this radio show to tell, because I don’t think it’s ever been told, but I worked with those guys for years. I drank beer and played pool with those boys. We all had common backgrounds, we were all ex-Navy nukes, [00:34:00] most of us anyway. Story that was fed, I thought was, to the people during the accident, I think the movie, Meltdown: Three Mile Island is the actual title, did an excellent job of showing it. I know to a lot of people, it was yesterday’s history, but that very same thing goes on in this country to this very day within the nuclear industry. There may not be a blue wall of silence, as Frank Serpico referred to, within the industry, but there is certainly a wall of silence because they know the guys that are licensed to operate these plants know, when in doubt, put it out is the rule they like to shout about, you do that once. Because, a million dollars a day in purchase power it costs, at a minimum, to take a nuke off line. Okay. [00:35:00] So all of management puts the thumb on the guys that have the license and the guys that have the license have to decide: do I do it knowing that I’m falsifying records? Do I do it knowing I’m keeping a reactor at power, full load, base load, with a leaking pilot-operated relief valve? How do I know it’s leaking? Because the tail pipe temperature’s been out of spec for God knows how long and the technical specifications says: thou shalt shut down the reactor. They didn’t do it. So it’s pressure, management integrity. 

    Mickey Huff: And also regulatory capture. You mentioned the revolving door, Rick Parks. I’d like to remind our listeners, you’re tuned to The Project Censored Show. I’m your host, Mickey Huff. We were just hearing from whistleblower Rick Parks talking about Three Mile Island, there’s a new series at [00:36:00] Netflix called Meltdown: Three Mile Island. You can see that story here. We’re going to continue our conversation about whistleblowers. We’re going to bring back Tom Devine and also Robert MacLean and I believe Rick Parks, you’re going to stay with us and certainly can chime in here again in the next segment. Stay tuned for more talk on whistleblowers on The Project Censored Show after this brief musical break.

    Welcome to The Project Censored Show. Once again, we are continuing our conversation on whistleblowers. Today. We are [00:37:00] joined by the legal director for the Government Accountability Project, Tom Devine. Earlier in the program we heard from Frank Serpico from the historic whistle blowing case about law enforcement corruption. In this last segment, before the break, we were speaking with Rick Parks talking about Three Mile Island. He is a whistleblower on the Three Mile Island case. There is also a new Netflix series called Meltdown: Three Mile Island that tells that story. And in this segment we want to bring in Robert MacLean. Robert MacLean was on The Project Censored Show several years ago. As I mentioned at the outset, Project Censored is one of the co-sponsors for the National Whistleblower Summit, and we have reconvened and reupped our relationship with the wonderful folks doing that important summit at the end of July. You’ll hear more about that coming up on a future Project Censored Show. You can learn more at whistleblowersummit.com and also to learn more about the Government Accountability Project, you can go to whistleblower.org. Tom Devine, that was an incredibly riveting [00:38:00] story that Rick Parks just shared with us. Could you talk to us a little bit about some of the things going on in Congress that might be able to address some of these issues? 

    Tom Devine: It’s the things that haven’t been going on. Congress has been pretty much letting the NRC have the field to itself in terms of how carefully to enforce the nuclear safety laws, and this is playing with a lot more than fire it’s playing with nuclear disaster. If Rick hadn’t stopped the Three Mile Island cleanup and the polar crane had dropped the 170 ton reactor vessel head, it could have triggered a meltdown that would’ve taken out Philadelphia, New York City, and Washington, DC, with massive evacuations for years. And we’re seeing a similar, the NRC is turning its head and just looking the other way about similar risks today. About a quarter of the nation’s nuclear power plants are located downstream from dams, upstream dams. And if there’s a dam break, they’re not able to withstand the [00:39:00] floods and those floods could cause meltdowns that would cause multi-state multi-year evacuations. And the NRC has known about this since the 1990s and even after a whistleblower named Larry Criscione was backed by the government whistleblower agency, the Office of Special Counsel said that there’s a substantial likelihood it’s a threat to public health and safety. The NRC responded with what they call a post-Fukushima reform by lowering the requirements for flood walls from 18 feet to four and a half feet, which is where they are currently, which means that we are at the mercy of any hurricane that comes near a nuclear power plant for taking out large regions of our country and the NRC is just sitting there watching and letting it happen. We need to have effective congressional oversight to keep this industry honest, because it’s a lot worse than playing with fire. 

    Mickey Huff: Tom Devine. That’s extraordinary to hear and we’ve certainly done many shows on Fukushima on some of the known [00:40:00] dangers with nuclear power and here in California, like New York, we have the threats still looming and people fighting about what to do about them as the danger still looms and lurks. Robert MacLean, we want to bring you in. I mentioned you before that you were on The Project Censored Show. So your case is ongoing, involving the Transportation Security Administration and of course your case clearly illustrates the need for whistleblower rights that allow you to seek justice from a jury. But this also involves the Department of Homeland Security, the war on terrorism, terror threats. So remind our listeners, Robert MacLean about your case and what’s happening right now.

    Robert MacLean: Thanks for having me on. Because of the 9/11 attacks, almost $2 trillion have been lost, wasted or spent and hundreds of thousands of lives were killed or maimed after the 9/11 wars, both military and civilian. And Mickey, I [00:41:00] always ask the question. Do you know how the cockpits were breached? Most people don’t know. They believe the TSA narrative that the cockpits were opened under duress by the pilots because they wanted to save the flight attendants from their necks being cut. That’s absolutely preposterous because six of the eight pilots were seasoned military veterans who attended survival school and the terrorists knew that it would’ve been a ridiculous risk to have a hostage standoff when one of those pilots could have simply said, I’m not opening that cockpit, I’m going to emergency land this thing, we’re over land, but I’m not letting anybody into my cockpit. And that would’ve foiled a multi terrorist plot that was in the making. The other myth [00:42:00] is that the cockpits were broken open. That’s also absurd because 13 months before 9/11, a man tried to break down a cockpit door on a Southwest 737 and he failed, and the reason was because the passengers crushed him to death when they thought, hey, we could all be killed if this guy gets in. So I’m pretty certain that the masterminds of 9/11 read that in the New York Times and everywhere and go, well, trying to break open the doors, that’s probably going to be stupid and the next absurd myth is that they forced the flight attendants to give them keys to unlock the cockpit doors. That’s also absurd because a lot of airlines don’t have keys. Some do, some don’t, and the terrorists would have to risk that the keys were misplaced, lost, or didn’t [00:43:00] work. So that would be dumb. So the easiest way, and it’s right in the it’s on page 5, 158 and 245 of the 9/11 Commission Report. They simply waited for the pilots to need to use the lavatory or get their breakfast. This is why they chose those flights. These were six hour nonstop flights. They knew at least one of those pilots was going to unlock that door, either to chat with the flight attendant about issues, get a food tray, get coffee, get water, but primarily to use a lavatory and that’s how they got in. And 20 years later, we are still in the same situation and I use the analogy is, if today we had no radar systems around Hawaii and we parked the entire Pacific Naval fleet in Pearl Harbor. That’s essentially what we’re doing today. And one of the biggest things that we couldn’t put [00:44:00] into my Supreme Court arguments was that three months before my disclosure in July of 2003, the pilots went public that the airlines and the government failed to put in a secondary barrier system and instead they spent millions and millions of dollars on armoring the doors, making them bulletproof, and making them impossible to break down, even though they were already impossible to break down, they just made it harder. But the pilots went public to Associated Press and CBS News in April of 2003, once again, three months before my disclosures, that those multimillion dollar armored doors, they still open up throughout the flight. So for the past 20 years I’ve been screaming and yelling: using flight attendants’ bodies and drink carts to protect unlocked [00:45:00] cockpits is provably absurd and I found a secret report that was issued in 2011, that the TSA and the FAA refused to go public about. They were making a report about doors that we see all day long opened on a flight, that is secret and we can’t read that. And in that report, it said even federal air marshals couldn’t stop an attack on unlocked doors, just like what happened on 9/11. And I mentioned to you drink carts. We have two airlines, major airlines, that don’t even have drink carts on their flights. And I’ve seen it repeatedly after I was reinstated from the Supreme Court decision, flight attendants, they have their backs turned. I even saw on one flight they allowed the passengers to line up behind the forward area while the cockpit was open. And last month, [00:46:00] the chairman of the house transportation committee, it’s on video because I captured it, he said that while he was flying, it was Peter DeFazio, while he was flying from Oregon to DC he said the flight attendant left the door open for almost 15 minutes, chit chatting with the pilot. At the same time, looking behind her back to make sure that nobody’s attacking. So, okay. Let’s just say a terrorist is not crazy enough to jump in a cockpit and kill everybody. Well, on December 16th, 2020 in a U.S. Department of Justice indictment, it said Cholo Abdi Abdullah was obtaining flight training in Philippines. He also conducted research into the means and methods to hijack a commercial airline to conduct the planned attack, including security on commercial airlines and how to breach a cockpit door from the outside and information about the tallest building in the United States. It gets [00:47:00] better, Khalil El Dahr observed, on a Jet Blue, door open and he grabbed a flight attendant by her collar and tied with one hand while using his other hand to grab the overhead compartment to gain leverage to kick, the FBI affidavit says. As the Jet Blue flight attendant was kicked in the chest, El Dahr yelled for the flight crew officer to shoot him. The pilot actually had unlocked the door and he’s asking for the pilot. Well, it gets better. Last month, The Wall Street Journal came out with an exposé. They concluded that in March, there was a China Eastern Boeing jet, brand new, that took a straight nosedive. The investigators are leaking to The Wall Street Journal that that was intentional. So bottom line is, I’m blowing the whistle and just to finish off, this is pretty much just like the Ford Pinto scandal. Ford spent all [00:48:00] this money engineering and manufacturing the Ford Pinto, which was marketed for poor people, but they figured out that this thing was a bomb and they knew it. But the lawyers said, hey, it’s cheaper that we just pay out injury and wrongful death claims than to fix the problem. So Congress recently tried to fix the problem about unlocked cockpit doors. They issued a law. So now the terrorists could just read the law on the books. In 2018, they said we’re only going to put secondary barriers on newly built aircraft. So now you just told all the terrorists don’t bother with the new jets that were just built, attack the old ones. 

    Mickey Huff: Part of your story too, is that you’ve been terminated from two positions for speaking out? 

    Robert MacLean: Right after the Supreme Court decision, and I was reinstated, they were coming after me with everything. So I had a perfect law [00:49:00] enforcement officer career, numerous awards, all kinds of commendations. And for the Supreme Court case, they only could get me on one charge. This time, they got me on 13 charges ranging from being this serial sexual harasser, obstructing their investigation into me, and while they’re withholding all this information, they can influence witnesses, they can destroy evidence. They altered an exhibit that they used to fire me. They literally went in there and took whiteout, they spliced something together, they put it on a photocopier, and they used that exhibit to fire me. That’s a felony. That’s how far they went. They tried to have me criminally prosecuted. They wanted me in federal prison. 

    Mickey Huff: So Robert MacLean, this case is still going on. Is that correct? 

    Robert MacLean: It’s been over three years since they fired me again. So that goes to show you, and I’m back in the United [00:50:00] States Merit Systems Protection Board that was empty for three years, which couldn’t stop my termination. And when we got through the discovery, the guy who fired me, he made the decision to fire me, he had the draft in his possession for five months. So why did he sit on it for five months? Because he knew the Trump administration wasn’t going to put any people on the Merit Systems Protection Board, and all of the Merit Systems Protection Board members, they got forced out, and days after they fired me, because they would’ve stopped my termination. 

    Mickey Huff: That’s an incredible story, Robert, thank you for sharing it with our listeners here on The Project Censored Show. Great thanks to the whistleblowers we’ve had on the program today for their courage and their willingness to speak up and speak the truth and speak truth to power, even though it obviously has negative repercussions for their own positions, their own lives. Tom Devine, let’s bring you in here. What’s going on in [00:51:00] Congress around Robert MacLean’s issue in the TSA. Any bills, anything we could talk about? 

    Tom Devine: The pioneer whistleblower law that was first passed in 1978 is now up for its fifth generation. These are timeless struggles and the law, which was a pioneer law, is a dinosaur right now. The whistleblowers don’t have access to a jury of citizens to who they’re purporting to defend when they risk their careers to seek justice. Robert right now is before an administrative judge who used to be part of the DHS team that tried to fire him the first time. And now is the judge for when they’re firing him the second time. There’s no chance for justice there. We’ve gotta get access to jury trials. If we’re going to be having credible rights. There is no protection in current law against retaliatory investigations. And so Robert was put under six criminal investigations immediately after the Supreme Court reinstated him. It went on for several years until they’d [00:52:00] accumulated enough garbage that they could assemble a series of pretexts and he couldn’t defend himself against those investigations until they fired him. And then there’s to get a real chance for injunctive relief, for temporary relief. These cases drag on routinely for three to five years and even if a whistleblower survives the gauntlet of political bias and actually wins, it may be too late. They’ve already lost their home, their family, they’re bankrupt, their professional reputation is irrevocably destroyed. We need credible rights for federal employees. If we expect them to defend the public, they’ve gotta be able to defend themselves. 

    Mickey Huff: Indeed, Tom Devine. And where can we go to get more information about these cases? Of course, Tom, you are legal director at the Government Accountability Project. You’ve been there since 1979. You’ve been involved with some 7,000 whistleblowers defending themselves against retaliation. [00:53:00] And of course I think our listeners can tell, the folks that have been on this show today have made significant differences and they’ve put those differences in the public interest, above their own personal interests. And that’s something that we always talk about when we talk about whistleblowers on The Project Censored Show, whether it’s Rick Parks or Robert MacLean or Frank Serpico or Julian Assange or Reality Winner or Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, Thomas Drake, we could go on and on, John Kiriakou. The list is long Tom and there’s a lot to do, but can you tell us where to get more information? whistleblower.org is the Government Accountability Project. Rick or Robert do you have any sites or any places you want to direct people to? Of course, Rick, you have directed us to the new Netflix series Meltdown: Three Mile Island. Is that among the better places to go? 

    Rick Parks: That is. 

    Mickey Huff: And Robert MacLean, anything you’d like to share as far as contacts, connections, where [00:54:00] to follow the case? 

    Robert MacLean: Call your members of Congress, your house representative, both of your U.S. senators, call them on the phone. Don’t email them, the emails go nowhere. Call them on the phone, blow up their lines. H.R.911, 9/11, needs to be passed. H.R.911 would mandate secondary barriers on all cockpit areas, just like Israel has had since the seventies. That’s why nobody’s hijacked in Israeli jet when they were hijacked left and right in the fifties and sixties. So H.R.911, and I’m looking at it right now, we have 52 co-sponsors. That is huge. If anybody knows, Tom knows, 52 co-sponsors on that bill shows that we’ve got a serious problem because it’s going to cost a lot of money to put in those secondary barriers, but it needs to be done. And you could find me real easy, to get a briefing on this, is my Twitter [00:55:00] account: Robert MacLean, M A C L E A N, and my Twitter handle is R as in Robert, J as in James, and then my last name, MacLean, M A C L E A N [@rjmaclean] and you will see my tweets that’ll make your toes curl, but we could all fix this by passing H.R.911.

    Mickey Huff: Robert MacLean, thanks so much for joining us and for your work. Rick Parks, thank you for joining us on The Project Censored Show today. Thanks too to Frank Serpico, who joined us earlier and Tom Devine, last words from you today. Obviously much more to do and more to say but wanted to leave you with the last words on the hopes for protecting whistle blowers and why we need them.

    Tom Devine: Thanks Mickey. If your listeners want to help, they should go to the Take Action page at GAP’s website, the Government Accountability Project’s website, whistleblower.org. And it’ll give you instructions for the bill numbers, which members of [00:56:00] Congress to contact, and the message to make and we need your help to get real rights for these people. The politicians need to catch up with the public. Right before the last election, there was a Marist poll and 86% of likely voters said that Congress should pass stronger whistleblower laws. But unfortunately since the impeachment trials and president Trump saying that whistleblowers were traitors who should be hanged, we’ve gone from always having unanimous support for these rights, to it being a partisan issue. So your listeners should, if they’ve got a Republican Congressman or Senator, they should be demanding that they make their first loyalty to the voters, not to Trump, and being loyal to the voters means having a safe channel for the truth about what’s happening with their lives. And for the Democrats, if you’ve got a Democratic Congressman or Senator, demand that they fight for those who expose the truth, [00:57:00] because otherwise we’re not going to get it.

    Mickey Huff: Tom Devine, thank you so much for the work you’re doing, protecting whistleblowers since 1979, Government Accountability Project. And again, Robert MacLean, Rick Parks, Frank Serpico, thanks to all of you for your work and thank you for joining us to share these stories on The Project Censored Show today. 

    And that does it for another episode today, you’ve been listening to The Project Censored Show on Pacifica Radio, established in 2010. I am Mickey Huff, executive producer and co-host of the program, along with co-host and associate producer, Eleanor Goldfield. Special thanks to Anthony Fest, our longtime senior producer, and the man behind the curtain.

    The Project Censored Show airs on roughly 50 stations around the United States from Maui to New York. You can find any of our previous archive programs by going to [00:58:00] projectcensored.org, please follow and like us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram before we get deplatformed and be sure to subscribe to The Official Project Censored Show on your digital tethering device’s podcast application. Please feel free to share your feedback or learn more about our work at projectcensored.org and see our new publishing imprint, The Censored Press at censoredpress.org. Last but not least, thanks to you our listeners for tuning in. We’ll see you next time.

     

     

     

     

    Image by Daniel Bone from Pixabay

    The post Whistleblowers appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  •  

    This week on the Project Censored Radio Show, Eleanor Goldfield dives into Pride: talking about some of the misconceptions of pride, the corporatization of pride, the radical roots of pride – from this past century and indeed beyond – and the myriad intersections of pride that are glossed over and whitewashed. Later in the show, we will be joined by Jen Deerinwater who is a bisexual, two-spirit multiply-disabled member of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, an award-winning journalist and organizer. She joins us to discuss the corporatization of pride and the power of pride outside those confines.

    Produced by Eleanor Goldfield, Co-Host and Associate Producer.

    The post The Misconceptions, Corporatization, and Radical Roots of Pride appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.

  • Mickey’s guests for the hour are the creators of a forthcoming graphic book that explores the far-reaching consequences of replacing classroom teaching with remote instruction and increased technology during the coronavirus pandemic. Author Adam Bessie and illustrator Peter Glanting collaborated on Going Remote: A Teacher’s Journey. The book is also a personal memoir in which Bessie recounts issues such as his cancer diagnosis. In addition, Mickey and the guests examine disturbing trends in the administration of higher education that resulted from decades of neoliberal policies.

    Adam Bessie teaches literature, English composition, and critical thinking at a community college in Northern California.  Peter Glanting is an illustrator and product designer based in Portland, Oregon. Their book is scheduled for release in early 2023, from The Censored Press and Seven Stories Press.

    The post Going Remote appeared first on Project Censored.

    This post was originally published on Project Censored.