Wendy Metcalfe’s Post

Statement on Google's threat to start banning journalism in California in response to the California Journalism Preservation Act: “California lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom must stand united against Google’s undemocratic threats to censor the work of California’s journalists by shutting off news access in the middle of an election year. Every voter’s access to information counts; California’s journalists are covering an ongoing congressional election in the 16th District, where two candidates received an equal number of votes. This is an extraordinarily inappropriate time for Google to experiment with which voters might or might not see news about elected officials and candidates for office. "Google is not engaging with California lawmakers in good faith regarding Asm. Buffy Wicks’ California Journalism Preservation Act. During a December informational hearing related to that bill, amid discussion about the prospect of Google banning journalism from its services in California, Google news executive Richard Gingras testified to Committee Chair Sen. Tom Umberg that Google had ‘no desire to stop including news in Search.’ Given today’s events, obviously Google’s testimony to our elected leaders was not true. "Google must stop playing games with California’s democracy.”

"Goddammit, when is somebody going to go on the record in this story?" said Jason Robards, playing Ben Bradlee in "All the President's Men." The other day, Christina Reynolds mentioned the generous use of anonymous sources in new media coverage of Biden and Trump. It is easy to find examples. For instance: The New York Times: “according to one person briefed on the Trump campaign’s internal discussions, who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly.” The Washington Post: “They spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters related to the president’s inner circle.” The Associated Press: “according to the people who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition on anonymity to discuss details of the ongoing probe.” Axios doesn't bother to explain its reasoning: “Several people close to Biden said.” OK, so I've used anonymous sources when reporting and approved them when I was editing. (At UNC, I did not allow students to use them; they needed to learn discipline.) Generally speaking, most journalists understand that transparency with readers is critical and that the use of anonymous sources should be rare, only when a story is vital. A 2020 Pew Journalism Center survey found: "A majority of U.S. adults (82%) say that there are times when it is acceptable for journalists to use anonymous sources, with 67% saying it is acceptable only in special cases – a view which echoes the standards of professional journalism organizations that say journalists should take every step to attribute information to a named source when possible before relying on an anonymous source." Major news organizations have rules addressing anonymous sources, and what makes a "special case" is nebulous and rarely defined. Here's an example: "Under AP’s rules, material from anonymous sources may be used only if: *The material is information and not opinion or speculation, and is vital to the report. *The information is not available except under the conditions of anonymity imposed by the source. *The source is reliable, and in a position to have direct knowledge of the information." I'm not suggesting that any news organization uses anonymous sources too often. I have to trust the news organizations' judgment. But I'm a former journalist so I kind of get it. I'm pretty sure the general public doesn't. I have to say though that "according to one person briefed on the Trump campaign’s internal discussions, who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly" is pretty weak.

Journalism's Power Check: Uncovering Truth In today's dynamic and ever-changing global landscape, the critical importance of journalism as a key mechanism for scrutinizing power cannot be overstated. Journalism serves as a potent instrument for fostering accountability, illuminating the conduct of individuals holding positions of authority, and elucidating truths that contribute to the collective welfare of society. JJournalism is essential for accountability and uncovering the truth. It's the fourth estate, maintaining democracy and transparency. Through investigative reporting, journalists delve deep into issues that may otherwise remain hidden from public view, exposing corruption, injustice, and abuse of power. By holding the powerful to account, journalism serves as a watchdog, safeguarding the interests of the public and promoting accountability in all sectors of society. One of journalism's essential functions is to give a voice to the voiceless and illuminate marginalized communities whose stories may otherwise go unheard. Investigative journalists often work tirelessly to uncover stories of injustice and inequality, amplifying the voices of those who are most vulnerable and holding power to account for their actions. Through their reporting, journalists have the power to drive social change and advocate for a more just and equitable society. In recent years, the importance of journalism as a power check has become increasingly evident, particularly in the face of growing threats to press freedom and the rise of disinformation. Journalists around the world face significant risks in their pursuit of truth, with many facing harassment, censorship, and even violence for their work. Journalists are committed to uncovering truth and holding power accountable, demonstrating remarkable courage and resilience. In uncertain times, journalism plays a crucial role in checking power. In an age of misinformation and fake news, reliable and trustworthy journalism serves as a beacon of truth, providing the public with the information they need to make informed decisions and hold their leaders accountable. Now more than ever, we must support and defend the vital work of journalists as they continue to uncover truth and shine a light on power. Journalism's power check is essential for upholding democracy, promoting accountability, and uncovering societal truth. By shining a light on the actions of those in positions of authority, journalists play a crucial role in safeguarding the public's interests and ensuring transparency in governance. As we confront the challenges of our time, let us recognize journalism's invaluable contribution to our democracy and commit to supporting the work of journalists as they continue to uncover the truth and hold power accountable. #Journalism #Accountability #Truth #PressFreedom #PowerCheck

In today's media landscape, it can be challenging to navigate a world where the pursuit of truth often takes a back seat to narratives shaped by corporate interests. These narratives cater to an audience that may not take the extra steps to uncover the truth. Let's explore how we can seek out and embrace the truth amidst a sea of bias and misinformation, shining a light that others may follow. Take Catherine Herridge, for example. She first gained widespread attention by breaking the Access Hollywood tape story involving Billy Bush. Later, she was fired for her investigative work on Hunter Biden's laptop. Despite the controversies and corporate pushback, Herridge remained committed to her journalistic integrity, striving to present critical information without bias. Her story exemplifies the importance of seeking and sharing the truth, even when it isn't convenient or popular. Today, Herridge continues her work through independent journalism. Unbound by corporate mandates, she focuses on uncovering hidden truths, such as the complexities of immigration—a topic often glossed over or distorted in mainstream media. Her dedication inspires us to demand transparency and authenticity in the news we consume. When we watch or read the news, we often notice a coordinated effort across different channels to present a uniform narrative. This becomes evident when talking points are echoed verbatim across multiple platforms. Such uniformity can cast doubt on the authenticity of the information presented. It's crucial to seek out credible, reliable sources that challenge this echo chamber. Journalism's credibility has taken a hit in recent years, leading many to turn to independent journalists who prioritize honesty and courage. These journalists, like Herridge, stand out by piercing through the fog of misinformation and presenting facts that engage critical minds. Dr. Phil McGraw is another example of a public figure who, despite not being politically motivated, advocates for truthful discourse. I seldom rely on mainstream media for news, as I often find their narratives lacking in truth and integrity. It is disheartening to see editors suppress information that conflicts with their beliefs, reinforcing the importance of seeking out unbiased sources. Following journalists like Catherine Herridge, who fight to preserve the principles of free speech and investigative reporting, is a step towards a more informed and enlightened society. As we navigate our media-saturated world, let's commit to seeking the truth. Share stories of journalists who prioritize integrity and encourage others to do the same. By shining a light on critical issues and demanding transparency, we can foster a more informed, engaged, and truthful society. Catherine Herridge

In 1928, Edward Bernays, the founder of “Public Relations,” wrote: “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of... It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.” Over more than three years working to Protect Thacker Pass, it is a striking fact that the number of journalists who have interviewed me is far greater than the number of dedicated grassroots activists who have taken action to defend the land. Why is that? I explore the reasons why in my latest essay. Here are a few thoughts: 1. Journalism is big business. There are some journalists who work independently, in the public interest, but most reporting is driven by corporate profit motives. In other words, the primary (unspoken) goal is to attract a sufficiently large audience of wealthy individuals so that their attention can be sold to advertisers. 2. Journalism largely fits into a “base and superstructure” model. In other words, journalism largely helps reinforce societal norms that protect existing elites and systems of power. 3. There is a heroic tradition within journalism of holding the powerful accountable, exposing scandals and coverups, and unflinchingly holding a mirror up to society. But generally speaking, these are exceptions to the rule. 4. Most journalists hold to what Chris Hedges calls “the creed of objectivity.” He writes, “   “The creed of objectivity and balance, formulated at the beginning of the 19th century by newspaper owners to generate greater profits from advertisers, disarms and cripples the press. And the creed of objectivity becomes a convenient and profitable vehicle to avoid confronting unpleasant truths or angering a power structure on which news organizations depend for access and profits. This creed transforms reporters into neutral observers or voyeurs. It banishes empathy, passion and a quest for justice. Reporters are permitted to watch but not to feel or to speak in their own voices. They function as ‘professionals’ and see themselves as dispassionate and disinterested social scientists. This vaunted lack of bias, enforced by bloodless hierarchies of bureaucrats, is the disease of American journalism.” Read more about how journalists and media corporations “reinforce for those on the winning team the comforting dualism of Civilization versus Barbarism” on my Substack. https://lnkd.in/gXQQg7_Z

I would like to share my certificate of participation in the event celebrating World Press Freedom Day, organized by the Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalism (ABRAJI), in collaboration with ESPM and the U.S. Embassy and Consulates. At the event, I had the opportunity to hear from Minister Carmen Lúcia of the Supreme Federal Court, who spoke about the crucial role of press freedom and the right to information in democratic societies. I also listened to insights from Leticia Kleim, ABRAJI's legal coordinator, and Cristina Zahar, coordinator of the Committee to Protect Journalists for Latin America, who discussed the current challenges facing press protection. They highlighted the violence against journalists in the region, such as physical attacks, media stigmatization by public authorities, laws that criminalize journalism, and the prevalence of SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation). In this context, Kleim introduced the Monitor of Judicial Harassment Against Journalists, a study by ABRAJI with UNESCO's support, which tracks abusive lawsuits designed to silence the press on matters of public interest. For those interested, here's the link to the Monitor's website: https://lnkd.in/dXSm9gA5 Lastly, I heard from Patrícia Campos Mello, a reporter for Folha de São Paulo, Paulo Talarico, the training and data director at Agência Mural de Jornalismo das Periferias, and Sérgio Lüdtke, editor of Projeto Comprova. They discussed the current challenges in covering elections amidst disinformation and the use of artificial intelligence. Issues like news deserts, the spread of deep fakes, politicians using AI, and the lack of fact-checking and media literacy initiatives were highlighted. For those interested in these topics, here's the recording of the event: https://lnkd.in/d2uD7bbj

This is why Local News To Use was created... to help local, citizen journalists tell their stories, celebrate their communities and keep their governments in check. The Rebirth of Local Journalism By David Leonhardt and Lyna Bentahar Dec. 22, 2023, 6:41 a.m. ET Many of this country’s biggest problems are devilishly hard to solve. The decline of local news may be different. That decline is certainly a problem. Hundreds of newspapers have closed in recent years, leaving many communities without any source of local news. Academic research has found that voter turnout tends to fall, and corruption and political polarization tend to rise, when people have no way to follow local events. But replacing yesterday’s newspapers with 21st century digital news publications may be more feasible than it once seemed. That’s the argument that Steven Waldman — a longtime journalist who now runs Rebuild Local News, an advocacy group — made in a recent essay in The Atlantic. “Unlike other seemingly intractable problems, the demise of local news wouldn’t cost very much money to reverse,” Waldman wrote. Most journalists don’t make a lot of money, he noted. Most communities don’t need hundreds of journalists to cover them. And local journalism often more than pays for itself in tax dollars saved. Waldman pointed to examples of costly corruption in California and Utah that exposés helped halt. That said, there is still the question of where the money for local journalism will come from — which brings me to the subject of today’s newsletter. The Morning has an annual tradition of highlighting great Times journalism from the past year. Today, we’re expanding that tradition to cover local journalism too. We asked editors at dozens of publications — both for-profit and nonprofit — to tell us about some of their best 2023 work. Below, you’ll find a selection of 25 stories, and we have posted a longer list online. We hope you find this work as delightful as we did. We also hope you’ll consider supporting a local news organization in your community through a subscription or donation. Find one whose work you admire, and then help them do their work strengthening your community. A growing number of these publications are thriving. “It took a generation for the American news industry to unravel, and it will take a generation to fully rebuild it,” Sarabeth Berman, C.E.O. of the American Journalism Project, which funds nonprofit newsrooms, said in a recent speech. “But real progress is underway.”

Promoting Press Freedom: Our Initiatives Journalist Training We provide comprehensive training programs for journalists that cover digital and physical safety, stress management, professionalism, access to information, and freedom of expression. These trainings familiarize journalists with the legal framework governing their work, including international, regional, and national laws, codes of conduct, and best practices. By enhancing their skills and knowledge, we empower journalists to carry out their daily duties with professionalism, minimizing errors that could lead to press suppression in the country. Training for Security Forces We organize training sessions for security forces such as the police, army, and national security agencies on freedom of expression, access to information, and journalist safety. Through these trainings, security forces gain an understanding of the rights of journalists, civil society, and citizens when it comes to media freedom and freedom of expression. Training for Parliamentarians We conduct specialized training programs for national and state parliamentarians on freedom of expression, access to information, and journalist safety. Equipped with this valuable knowledge, lawmakers can effectively advocate for press freedom in the legislative process and play a crucial role in ensuring press freedom at all levels. Mentorship and Knowledge Sharing We empower students and aspiring journalists through events that facilitate experience sharing. Accomplished and seasoned journalists share their real-life work experiences, challenges, and opportunities in the field of journalism. These events prepare young professionals to assume active roles in the industry. Collaborative Events with Journalists, Stakeholders, and Partners We organize gatherings that bring together journalists, media stakeholders, and partners for productive discussions and the consolidation of efforts aimed at realizing press freedom in the country. These initiatives, among others, have proven to be impactful in the pursuit of press freedom over the past years, resulting in significant improvements as reported by the World Press Freedom Index in 2021, 2022, and 2023. As South Sudan prepares to commemorate World Press Freedom Day on May 3rd, and with elections on the horizon, NPC-SS reaffirms its commitment to collaborating with other media organizations to continue exerting efforts towards establishing a viable, robust, and independent media presence in South Sudan. We extend our heartfelt gratitude to all our partners, including UNESCO, IREX, Free Press, stakeholders, and other development organizations. Your invaluable support will contribute to the realization of press freedom in South Sudan. UNESCO IREX All followers

The Office of the Prime Minister today strongly refuted a media report alleging that it has gagged media freedom in the country. The report cited an internal circular distributed to all ministerial first secretaries for coordinated effort in State information dissemination. Today’s Post-Courier front-page article titled "PM Stops Media Freedom," which the PM's Chief-of-Staff Andy Hetra described as misrepresenting the contents of the internal circular. "Media, as the fourth estate, plays a vital role in scrutinizing public officials and political institutions for the public interest. While freedom of expression is a cherished right, it comes with responsibility. The fourth estate should engage in responsible reporting, free from bias and distortion," countered Mr Hetra in a media statement. "Encouraging journalists and editors to uphold investigative reporting skills, we emphasize the importance of avoiding questionable media narratives with distorted facts. Journalism's primary purpose is to provide information in the public interest, ensuring a balanced and truthful representation of events. "Today’s front-page coverage by Post-Courier, turning an internal circular into an allegation against the Prime Minister, raises concerns about the impartiality and independence of the news agency. This instance of poor journalism calls for a commitment to ethical reporting and fact-checking," he said.

As I observed some weeks ago, you can't be a Trump supporter without being a media critic. Why? Because every story about Trump is a minefield of out of context quotes, subliminal plots, journalistic bias, and opinion masquerading as facts. So, while I like to know what Trump is up to, I have to approach every new report with a level of skepticism. Peggy Noonan, who I may have to buy a Trump hat for some day, has apparently discovered what Trump has been saying for years. That is, old fashioned journalism is dead. As Peggy writes, the original purpose of journalism was to "get the story." That is, inform the public about what is happening that affects them. What journalism has become though is what interests journalists. As Peggy writes, "Newsrooms have become increasingly distracted from the main mission, confused about their purpose. As a result, major stories go unreported because they don't related to the personal obsessions of the editors and reporters, or to their political priors. You hear on Fox News that illegal aliens are killing, raping, and pillaging. But, mainstream journalists aren't interested in these stories. And they criticize Fox News for reporting on them. Trump gets a big reception at an event he visits, but that event is not covered by the media. Or if it is, then it is only to criticize who attended it, or flag something that Trump said. Basically, you get the news the editors and reporters "want" you to get. Not necessarily the news that is happening. It is the proverbial "tree in the forest." If it isn't reported on, then it didn't happen. But, did it? Trump maintains his base and his popularity. If anything he is raising more money now since the Bragg trial. He is expanding his rallies to places like Detroit, New Jersey, and New York where no Republican for president is expected to go. But, if you were looking for answers from journalists as to why Trump retains his popularity with millions of common people, you would never find the answer you are looking for by reading the New York Times or Washington Post. For their readership, Trump's viability as a presidential candidate is a mystery. That is why when I encounter Never Trumpers on Linkedin they always express confusion as to why I support him. They are ignorant because the journalists they depend on to inform them, are treating them like mushrooms. A year or so ago, I had posted a nostalgic piece on the late great Walter Cronkite and the way news used to be. Cronkite was the most trusted man in America. Not because he told us what "he" wanted us to know. But, because he cared about what we wanted to know, and he told it to us in a way that showed he respected us to figure out how to think about it. In the one time he stepped out of that role and gave his "personal opinion" on the Vietnam War, that was news. These days journalists have turned Cronkite's journalistic ethics on its head. It is a rare day you get straight news.