Sujet 1 : Internet regulation/censorship
Discuss the three documents related to Internet regulation and/or censorship
Doc A : “First They Came for WikiLeaks, Then the 'New York Times'”, Bloombergbusinessweek (online), July 25, 2012
Doc B : The Young Turks (online news show) “Aaron Swartz/Wikileaks” January 2013
Doc C
C1 : A poster of “Anonymous”
C2 : A 17th century portrait of Guy Fawkes
First They Came for WikiLeaks, Then the 'New York Times'
By Mathew Ingram, July 25, 2012 When WikiLeaks made its first big media appearance by publishing tens of thousands of topsecret diplomatic cables in 2010, we argued that the group headed by controversial front man
Julian Assange was a media entity, albeit an unusual one. The broader implications of this
status extend far beyond the question whether we support the organization or its motives: As a
blog post at the Electronic Frontier Foundation points out, threats aimed at WikiLeaks are by
implication also threats to any other media outlet that dares to publish government
information. And some members of Congress say they want to make this connection explicit
by changing laws so that journalists can also be sanctioned.
In his post, Trevor Timm notes that signs have been accumulating for some time now that
members of the government are looking for ways to go after journalists who publish official
secrets. During a recent hearing of a House Judiciary subcommittee, several members of
Congress questioned legal experts about whether existing laws, such as the Espionage Act,
could be used to target journalists who published classified information. As Representative
Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) put it to the committee:
“Put them in front of the grand jury. You either answer the question or you’re going to be
held in contempt and go to jail, which is what I thought all reporters aspire to do anyway.”
According to the legal scholars who attended the hearing, going after a journalist or a media
entity such as the New York Times would be difficult because of the First Amendment and
protection for freedom of the press—but at least one commenter said he believed that under
certain circumstances, journalists could be prosecuted for publishing government secrets,
provided it could be shown they knew the consequences of their actions would affect national
security. (…)
When WikiLeaks was initially targeted by the Justice Department for investigation under the
Espionage Act, there was very little criticism of the move, either from traditional media
outlets such as the New York Times (which has had a somewhat fractious relationship with
WikiLeaks in the past) or from free-press advocates. It was as though no one wanted to admit
that the same forces that were going after WikiLeaks for revealing government data could just
as easily be directed at mainstream journalists. Now those particular chickens appear to be
coming home to roost. (…)
As Timm notes, the kind of legislative attack that Congress and the Justice Department seem
to be intent on pursuing is a threat to media entities of all kinds—both traditional forms like
the New York Times as well as newer iterations like WikiLeaks. That doesn’t mean
mainstream media outlets have to allow Assange to become a member of the National Press
Club, but it does mean they should be a lot more concerned about what the investigation of
WikiLeaks portends for freedom of speech and a free press.
C1
C2