SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
journalism
Trump Threatens NBC's Welker With 'Punishment' for Doing Her Job
"Trump, like all authoritarians, wants to silence those who disagree with him," Sen. Bernie Sanders said in response.
Aug 30, 2026
President Donald Trump took to Truth Social on Sunday to threaten NBC journalist Kristen Welker with "rebuke or punishment" from the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC, after she accurately reported that his endorsement had netted "mixed" results for Republican candidates this election cycle.
In a second post on Sunday, Trump also lashed out against reported polling results, writing, "THE FAKE POLLS USED BY OUR CROOKED MEDIA ARE OUT OF CONTROL, AND SOMETHING MUST BE DONE ABOUT IT. FCC TO THE RESCUE!"
"Trump, like all authoritarians, wants to silence those who disagree with him," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote on social media in response. "Now he's trying to punish an NBC journalist for reporting on his mixed endorsement record. Sorry, Mr. President. In America, we believe in democracy and the First Amendment. FIGHT BACK."
Welker made the remarks that enraged Trump during a pre-"Meet the Press" promotion on NBC's Washington, DC affiliate station. They were backed up by NBC reporting that six candidates Trump endorsed for House and governor had lost their Republican primary races in August.
"Trump makes clear that he thinks it's the government's role to go after journalists who anger him."
"Kristen Welker, the Unpopular 'Hostess' of the once great Meet the Press, now considered Meet the Fake Press, just stated that Donald Trump has 'mixed results' on his Endorsements of Candidates, when the recent WINS of Darline Graham and Mike Mazzei, stand at 100% for the US Senate, and 98% for the US House, recently and over the longterm. How can anyone be allowed to say this, working for freely given Public Airwaves? Results are attached. Because of this purposeful inaccuracy, she will be reported to the FCC for rebuke or punishment," Trump wrote.
He also appealed to the head of the FCC directly, saying, "I hope that Chairman Brendan Carr, and the fine people of his Commission, will take this Threat to our Country very seriously."
"Trump is getting more explicit about weaponizing the FCC," CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter noted in a thread on social media. While he pointed out that the FCC cannot legally punish Welker and has limited power by design, its chair Carr "has been responsive to Trump's posts in the past..."
Indeed, Carr has a history of targeting Trump critics.
In September of 2025, he pressured ABC into briefly removing Jimmy Kimmel from the air following remarks he made surrounding the Trump administration's response to conservative activist Charlie Kirk's death.
In March, Carr wrote a post on social media that appeared to threaten to revoke the broadcasting licenses of news outlets that criticized Trump's war on Iran, responding directly to Trump's own social media rant against war coverage.
In April, he ordered Disney's eight ABC stations to file their broadcast renewal requests years early, prompting ABC and Disney to file a First Amendment lawsuit against the FCC earlier this month. The renewal requests, which Carr denies were retaliatory, came a day after Trump again criticized Kimmel for making jokes about First Lady Melania Trump.
Stelter concluded: "Trump invoked Carr's name, complimented the 'fine people' of the FCC, and said he hopes the commission will 'take this Threat to our Country very seriously.' ABC is already in court fighting the FCC's unprecedented actions; it's reasonable to think NBC will be targeted next."
Chief White House correspondent for The New York Times Pete Baker wrote on social media that, with his threats against Welker, "Trump makes clear that he thinks it's the government's role to go after journalists who anger him."
"Are there really any Americans left who think this man is paying any attention to any problem any person in the United States is having right now," Trump biographer Seth Abramson wrote on social media in response to Trump's tirade. "As far as I can tell there's not a single second of his day taken up by anything but what personally interests and enriches him."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Washington Post Ordered to Rehire Columnist Who Was Fired for Charlie Kirk Comments
"This is a landmark win for every journalist who refuses to be silenced."
Aug 24, 2026
A group dedicated to defending the rule of law from authoritarianism and corruption said it had succeeded in its "monumental defense of the First Amendment" on Monday after an independent arbitrator ruled that The Washington Post had wrongfully fired columnist Karen Attiah last September over social media posts she wrote about assassinated right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, and ordered the newspaper to rehire Attiah.
"The ruling marks a landmark moment for press freedom, confirming that corporate media institutions cannot use retaliatory discipline to silence journalists who address uncomfortable truths," said Democracy Defenders Fund, which signed on to represent Attiah, along with the W ashington-Baltimore News Guild, when she filed a grievance against the Post arguing she had been wrongfully terminated.
The arbitrator, Sarah Miller Espinosa, said in the binding decision that the Post "did not have good and sufficient cause to terminate" Attiah's employment, which it did after then-opinion editor Adam O'Neal complained about her social media posts to a human resources officer and then-CEO Will Lewis.
Espinosa ordered the Post to provide Attiah with full back pay and benefits. Attiah has said she would be “willing to go back” to the newspaper.
In her posts, Attiah suggested that while influential figures on the far right demanded what she called "performative mourning" for Kirk, who was known for "debating" liberal college students and was fatally shot at an event at Utah Valley University, America had "shrugged and moved on" after other acts of political violence.
"Part of what keeps America so violent is the insistence that people perform care, empty goodness, and absolution for white men who espouse hatred and violence," said Attiah, who worked at the Post for 11 years, on Bluesky. "Refusing to tear my clothes and smear ashes on my face in performative mourning for a white man that espoused violence is... not the same as violence."
The Post executives met without Attiah and decided to fire her, with chief human resources officer Wayne Connell accusing her in writing of "gross misconduct" and violations of the Post's social media policies that could "harm the integrity of our organization."
Espinosa noted in her decision that, as the Washington-Baltimore News Guild argued during the arbitration proceedings, “there
were clearly external pressures to fire Ms. Attiah after the Kirk murder," as "there were widespread calls to fire people who expressed opinions at all critical of Charlie Kirk, including by prominent elected officials such as Vice President JD Vance.”
A Reuters investigation in November 2025 estimated that about 600 people were fired, investigated, disciplined, or suspended from their jobs in the weeks after Kirk was assassinated.
Attiah testified at an arbitration hearing in June that her posts had been part of her work as an opinion columnist, where it was within her duties to comment "on our discourse on political violence."
The arbitrator's decision, said Attiah, "confirms what we've said from the start: I was doing my job as an opinion journalist, and doing that job is not misconduct.
"After spending over a decade of my career at the Post as an editor and an opinion columnist focusing on race, gender, and global human rights, I’m relieved to finally have that record set straight," she continued. "I am grateful to everyone at the Guild and Democracy Defenders who stood behind me through this nearly yearlong battle. I hope that this win sends a message to journalists and media institutions everywhere that freedom of expression is always worth fighting for.”
Espinosa said in her ruling that the Post failed to make a convincing case that Attiah had "disparaged white men" as a group in her social media posts or that she was "responsible for potentially endangering her colleagues" and for "threats of violence made by bad actors" against the Post.
The Post's implication that Attiah had endangered the newspaper and its staff was "wholly rejected as justification for the termination," wrote Espinosa.
Norm Eisen, co-founder and executive chair of Democracy Defenders Fund, said the decision was "a thunderous victory for Karen Attiah, an award-winning journalist fired for doing her job, over Bezos’ Washington Post," referring to Jeff Bezos, the billionaire Amazon founder who purchased the newspaper in 2013 and last year called for the opinion section to focus on "personal liberties and free markets.”
"The Post tried to pass off retaliation as discipline, but the rule of law has exposed it for what it truly is: wrongful termination," said Eisen. "This is a landmark win for every journalist who refuses to be silenced."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Ugly, Un-American Attack on Our Free Press': Stars & Stripes Journalists Fired for Saying They Had Independence
"It’s a shame for the institution and service members, who swore to defend the Constitution and deserve the right to a free and independent press," said ouster journalist Lara Korte.
Aug 22, 2026
Correspondent Lara Korte, editor-in-chief Erik Slavin, and publisher Max Lederer were fired from their posts at Stars and Stripes on Friday, in the latest attack on press freedom by President Donald Trump and members of his administration—this time targeting the paper that provides daily news to U.S. service members worldwide.
"I consider it a great privilege to live alongside members of the military and share their stories," said Korte in a social media post following her ouster. "It’s a shame for the institution and service members, who swore to defend the Constitution and deserve the right to a free and independent press."
Korte said she was "informed that the Department of Defense is firing me for insubordination after I told a CBS reporter that I work for Stars and Stripes—not the Pentagon, not any administration, and not any policymaker."
Slavin explained that he and Korte were fired specifically over an interview they gave earlier this year with CBS News, in which they said they were independent of the Pentagon and the White House and that they would resist any effort to censor the news military members receive. Even though the military publication operates within the US Department of Defense, it has always enjoyed editorial independence.
Editor in Chief of Stars and Stripes Erik Slavin speaks out after he was fired by the Pentagon today: "They said that I was insubordinate for responding to a hypothetical about censorship and saying it was a red line... I reaffirmed what the law says, what the DOD regs say, which… pic.twitter.com/KrBwY4gTug
— Erin Burnett OutFront (@OutFrontCNN) August 22, 2026
“I stand by the principle that Stars and Stripes must remain editorially independent, as required by law and by the department’s own policies,” he said in a statement Friday.
Press freedom advocates slammed the move by the DoD.
"Today's firings are an ugly, un-American attack on our free press," said the free speech group Fire in a statement. "America's brave service members swore an oath to defend the Constitution. They deserve the free and independent press our Founders fought for 250 years ago, not Pravda-style propaganda. The United States is uniquely committed to freedom of the press, and has been since our founding. Accepting censorship means losing our national identity."
Speaking with the Associated Press, Slavin said his firing for insubordination was for saying in the CBS interview "that hypothetical censorship of news for service members would constitute a red line” for him.
“We need to be able to provide independent news to service members,” he had told CBS in July. “If we can’t do that, if we were turned into something other than that, if we were public relations? Yeah, that’s the foxhole.”
- YouTube
According to reporting by Stars and Stripes, Lederer was also fired Friday, though he had announced his retirement earlier this week, on Tuesday.
In a letter to the outlet's staff, later posted online, Lederer explained, “It has become clear that my philosophy of leadership, and my understanding of value and mission of the Stars & Stripes, differ in fundamental ways from the direction of the leadership of the Department of Defense."
Replacing Lederer as the new publisher of Stars and Stripes is Capt. William Urban, a longtime public relations officer and communications specialist inside the US military with no professional experience in the field of journalism.
Urban previously served, as he explained in a memo to newspaper staff on Friday, as a "spokesman for some of the hardest Public Affairs assignments in the Navy and Department of War for more than 20 years."
"Does repeatedly being at the center of a media firestorm qualify me to help lead Stars and Stripes?" Urban asked in his letter. "No, but it is not a bad place to start."
Apparently, a public relations expert is exactly what The Pentagon, under the leadership of Secretary of State Pete Hegseth and President Trump, has been looking for.
Earlier this week, Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote to Secretary Hegseth about their concerns over the "shakeup" at Stars and Stripes, represented by Lederer's retirement announcement and the news that Urban would replace him.
“The placement of an active-duty Public Affairs officer in the senior leadership of an organization whose credibility depends on its independence from the military chain of command raises serious questions,” the Senators wrote in a letter.
“For generations, American servicemembers, particularly those stationed overseas and in combat zones, have relied on Stars and Stripes for credible and independent news," the Senators added. "That trust depends on preserving a clear separation between independent journalism and the Department’s public affairs apparatus. At this critical moment of leadership transition, that independence must not be compromised.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
800+ USA Today Journalists Demand Paper End Deal With Palantir to Collect Reader Data
Not only does the partnership "create an inherent conflict of interest," it "fails the journalists who have been assaulted and falsely arrested while covering immigration enforcement actions and protests."
Aug 14, 2026
More than 800 unionized journalists and other media workers at USA Today Co. demanded this week that the nation’s largest newspaper chain abandon a newly announced partnership with surveillance tech giant Palantir to collect and analyze reader data, warning that the deal threatens privacy, public trust, and newsroom independence.
USA Today Co. chair Mike Reed told investors during an August 6 meeting that the company, formerly known as Gannett, is working with Palantir to “drive more effective and faster monetization across our platform" by using its software to collect and analyze reader data. Reed did not say how long USA Today had been using the software.
In a statement released earlier this week, workers represented by The NewsGuild-CWA said they were “shocked” by the company’s decision to partner with the controversial data analytics firm. Thirty-one unions representing employees across USA Today Co. publications have called on management to immediately terminate the agreement.
"We have significant ethical issues with Palantir, whose artificial intelligence (AI) software has been used to advance widespread surveillance and power immigration crackdowns," the union said. "Not only does partnering with Palantir, a major player in the news we cover, create an inherent conflict of interest, but it fails the journalists who have been assaulted and falsely arrested while covering immigration enforcement actions and protests."
Journalists are committed to upholding First Amendment principles to serve the democratic process. That’s in direct contrast with a company like Palantir, whose cofounder, Peter Thiel, once said freedom and democracy were not compatible. newsguild.org/usa-today-jo...
[image or embed]
— The NewsGuild-CWA (@newsguild.org) August 10, 2026 at 9:02 AM
"USA Today Co. has provided minimal details about this partnership and the parameters of its agreement with Palantir," the statement continues. "We have serious concerns and questions about how readers’ personal information and data will be used under this partnership and how their data would be protected. Without answers, how can journalists encourage readers to subscribe to our news outlets?"
The journalists noted that billionaire Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel—who "once said freedom and democracy were not compatible"—is responsible for products tied to human rights abuses and privacy violations.
"Technologists and even former employees have warned that it’s not far-fetched to imagine a future where Palantir’s AI technology is used to surveil American citizens and target dissidents," their statement notes. "And throughout history, journalists are often the first to be targeted."
"These concerns should be reason enough for USA Today Co. to steer clear," the journalists asserted. "This partnership with Palantir arrives as USA Today Co. executives dive headfirst into AI without sufficient regard for workers or the public after decimating newsrooms across the country."
"We will continue pushing back on ill-planned attempts to force AI into our newsrooms and onto our readers, who deserve quality, human-led journalism," they added. "We will advocate for the responsible use of new technologies when it emboldens our journalists and their work instead of shamelessly promoting AI to support profit-driven corporate edicts."
News organizations increasingly operate not just as publishers, but as data collection businesses. The USA Today journalists' concerns come against a backdrop of increasingly sophisticated tracking across digital news. USA Today Co.'s own public Data Collection Explorer shows that the company already operates an extensive system for collecting, routing, and analyzing user data across its publications and platforms, including through third-party analytics vendors.
Mike Davis, a reporter for the Asbury Park Press—a USA Today Co. newspaper in southern New Jersey—told NiemanLab that “part of the problem" with the Palantir partnership "is that we know very, very little" about how the company's software is being used.
“It’s pretty surprising that our company would unilaterally decide to bring in such a controversial partner like Palantir without providing a complete explanation to its employees, most of whom are naturally skeptical journalists," Davis said.
“An investigative reporter who keeps a ton of sensitive notes, source information, and confidential documents on their devices is going to be naturally concerned about protecting that information, and who could blame them?” he added. “It’s pretty hard to trust management’s intentions when the goalposts shift so often that there’s always a fear that what’s true today won’t be true in six months. We’ve all seen the years of disinvestment in local news, especially in the name of going all-in on AI.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
With Oral History Project, Journalists Remember 'Fearless' Colleagues Killed by Israeli Forces in Gaza
"He never wavered for a single moment from carrying out his mission, reporting the news, delivering the truth, and exposing the atrocities of the Israeli genocide in the Gaza Strip," said one journalist of Al Jazeera correspondent Anas al-Sharif.
Aug 13, 2026
Just over a year after six journalists—Anas al-Sharif, Mohammed Qraiqea, Ibrahim Zaher, Mohammed Noufal, Mohammed al-Khalidi, and Moamen Aliwa—were assassinated in an Israeli strike on their tent outside Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, a collective of media workers on Wednesday set out to ensure that all 270 Palestinian reporters who have been killed while covering Israel's nearly three-year assault on the exclave are remembered by the world.
The New York War Crimes collective, a project of Writers Against the War on Gaza (WAWOG), said it initially aimed to gather remembrances of al-Sharif, a 28-year-old Al Jazeera correspondent who was born in Jabalia refugee camp and started his career as a volunteer for Al-Shamal Media Network before becoming internationally known for his "ceaseless coverage" of Israel's US-backed assault on Gaza.
The responses the collective got, said the organizers, "transformed the project. Anas, his colleagues told us, would not have wanted to be remembered as a singular hero, but as a servant of the Palestinian cause."
"So, over the course of the following year, we gathered spoken testimonies from fellow journalists, photographers, cameramen, journalism professors, students, and workers across the media sector in Gaza," reads the website for the project, titled A Living Record. "Each contributor was asked to record a personal remembrance of one or more martyrs, to tell a small part of the history that, as [journalist] Samira Nassar says, should be written in gold."
A number of journalists spoke to WAWOG about al-Sharif, who reported from northern Gaza while the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) were heavily restricting humanitarian aid there as they waged intense attacks there on refugee camps and other civilian infrastructure.
"All the journalists were in awe—really in awe—of him," said Isra al-Madallal. "Just the fact that he was in the north while all the other journalists were in the south was enough to make everyone keep asking, 'How are you? Where are you? What are you doing? What is happening? May God keep you steadfast.' And the starvation—that was something that they lived through together, something intense."
Another colleague, Doaa Shaheen, said Al-Sharif served as "the voice of Jabalia, the voice of the north as a whole; he never left
"He never wavered for a single moment from carrying out his mission, reporting the news, delivering the truth, and exposing the atrocities of the Israeli genocide in the Gaza Strip," said Shaheen, adding that when her fellow Jabalia camp native was killed she thought: "So that’s it? He’s been martyred? So where is Anas’ voice?"
Freelance journalist Baraa Lafi remembered Mariam Abu Dagga, a visual journalist who extensively documented how children were being affected by Israel's attacks, which have been called a genocide by leading human rights groups and Holocaust scholars. She photographed overwhelmed hospitals as medical workers struggled to care for sick and injured Palestinians, as well as documenting the impact of Israel's blockade on humanitarian aid.
Lafi was wounded in the Israeli double-tap strike on Nasser Hospital that killed Abu Dagga, as well as Moaz Abu Taha, Hussam al-Masri, Ahmad Abu Aziz, and Mohammad Salama, just weeks after Al-Sharif and his colleagues were killed.
"As a journalist, Mariam was brave. Braver than many men," said Lafi. "Everyone could see that. Mariam in the field was not unassuming and timid—no. She was fearless. She ran toward the fire, she was first on the scene. If she saw an injured child in distress, she would stop and comfort them. If she saw someone upset, she would stop and stay by their side. If Mariam saw a mother searching for her children—whether during famine or bombardment—she would stop filming and stay by her side, going with her from hospital to hospital to help her find them."
WAWOG collected remembrances from several reporters of "journalists as a collective," with Bisan Owda, who won the Peabody Award in 2024 for her coverage of the war on social media, saying that despite Israel's slaughter of more than 73,000 Palestinians and decimation of the exclave's civilian infrastructure, "there’s still goodness here, in this small place, in the ground underneath us, in those who fight the evil spreading through the rest of the world. To me, those are the people and journalists of Gaza."
"To me, these individuals were daring enough to dream, to believe that we can make a difference," said Owda. "We are brave. We are the ones who have the courage to document with our cameras, to change the narrative, change our current conditions, and to draw attention to our people’s oppression. To change what is happening. You are dealing with the bravest people on the face of the Earth. They are the ones spreading the truth to combat every false narrative in the world."
As The Living Record was published Wednesday, protesters rallied outside The New York Times headquarters in New York City to demand accountability for the killing of journalists in Gaza, while Drop Site News correspondent Mohamed Awad was detained by Israeli forces in Ramallah, the West Bank.
WAWOG said that in the fall, as the third anniversary of Israel's assault on Gaza approaches, it plans to publish more eulogies of Gaza journalists who have been killed in the exclave.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Why Print: On Newspapers, Democracy, and the Things a Screen Cannot Replace
We strive for a world in which we are informed with the paper in our hands—a world in which we run with that paper to our elected representatives and demand, “What the hell are you doing?"
Aug 10, 2026
Politics has become strangely empty. We sign petitions with a click, make five-dollar donations with a tap, and mistake engagement for participation.
Capitol Hill Citizen believes that democracy requires something more substantial than that. It requires attention, presence, and involvement. It requires something tangible.
That is why we print a newspaper.
In the absence of tangibility, we are each reduced to data, data that corporations use to manipulate us, predict us, and sell us back to ourselves. In a world where corporations are treated as people under the law, Capitol Hill Citizen calls upon its readers to do something that a corporation cannot do: hold a newspaper. Better yet, do democracy.
Democracy requires action. That means showing up, which is exactly what our journalists do as they report from the frontlines of the institutions that shape our lives. And it is what our readers do when they carry that reporting back into their communities. Action means feeling the paper, engaging with your fellow human beings, and speaking to people face to face.
Human engagement is the first thing the machine strips away from us.
Doing things with your hands, with that which distinguishes you from the machine, is a revolutionary act. We are living, breathing human beings with emotions and feelings, sights and smells. To hold a newspaper is a small reminder that we still inhabit bodies, communities, and a democracy that exists somewhere beyond the screen.
We strive for a world in which we are informed with the paper in our hands—a world in which we run with that paper to our elected representatives and demand, “What the hell are you doing? Why aren’t you addressing this? It’s on page 14. Look at it.”
To read Capitol Hill Citizen is to refuse to disappear into the churn of algorithm-driven news cycles and superficial political opportunism. We put Capitol Hill Citizen on every congressmember’s chair. And every congressmember does the same thing: they move it. But at least they move it.
This is not merely Golden Age thinking. We do not want things to go back to how they used to be. We want to take back something that has been stolen from us: the tangible, the embodied, the uniquely human. We want to read print.
This article first was first published in the Capitol Hill Citizen, an independent antiwar print newspaper for citizens done with the corporate duopoly and the internet addictions that keep the citizenry depressed, dejected, distracted and defeated. It appears at Common Dreams with permission.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Groups: Israel’s Killing of Journalist Amal Khalil ‘Must Be Investigated as a War Crime’
“Amal’s killing can’t be allowed to become yet another unresolved case of a journalist killed by Israeli forces with complete impunity,” said one campaigner demanding a probe into the Lebanese reporter's death.
Aug 06, 2026
An Amnesty International investigation published Thursday led human rights defenders in Lebanon and around the world to renew their calls for a war crimes probe into an Israeli attack that killed Lebanese journalist Amal Khalil and wounded a colleague earlier this year.
Khalil, a 42-year-old veteran correspondent for the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, and 21-year-old freelance photographer Zeinab Faraj were reporting in the southern Lebanese village of al-Tiri on April 22 when an IDF drone bombed what Amnesty said was a civilian vehicle traveling in front of them. A second strike then hit the journalists' car, wounding them.
As Khalil and Faraj sheltered in a nearby building, IDF drones hovered overhead for two hours before the structure was bombed, collapsing it. Lebanese Red Cross personnel coordinated access to the site with Israeli authorities, and once granted permission, rushed to the scene and pulled Faraj—who suffered a fractured skull, severe leg and eye injuries, and a crushed hand—from the rubble. But due to what they called threats of further attack while trying to save the mortally wounded Khalil, the Red Cross workers said they had to withdraw. Recovery operations were delayed for hours.
A medical examiner's report said that Khalil died of cardiac arrest due to head trauma and severe bleeding hours after rescuers were forced to leave her.
Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam at the time condemned that attack as "a clear-cut war crime."
The IDF contends that it declared the area where Khalil was killed off-limits and that it was targeting Hezbollah militants.
"The IDF does not target journalists in any way and works as much as possible to minimize harm that may befall them while maintaining the security of our forces," a spokesperson said.
However, dozens of journalists have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces in Lebanon, while the figure is in the hundreds in Gaza, where Israel is waging what Amnesty and many others say is a genocide in retaliation for the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. The IDF also attacked and invaded Lebanon—which it has repeatedly done before—to stop Hezbollah from firing rockets at Israel in solidarity with Gaza.
According to Reporters Without Borders, Israel was the world's leading killer of journalists last year, while the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said in February that Israel was responsible for two-thirds of all journalist deaths worldwide in 2025.
“The Israeli military says it does not target journalists, but the facts and evidence show that it has repeatedly done so. Amal Khalil and Zainab Faraj are the latest victims in a long series of such attacks,” Ramzi Kaiss, a researcher at Human Rights Watch in Lebanon, said Thursday. “The evidence is clear that the Israeli military knew or should have known that Faraj and Khalil were civilians, but attacked them anyway, and then prevented paramedics from rescuing them for hours."
“Israeli forces’ continued killing of journalists shows a brazen willingness to commit atrocities without any fear of consequences," Kaiss added.
Amnesty argues that the IDF strike on the building where the journalists were sheltering, and the subsequent delay in allowing first responders to rescue them, should be investigated as a war crime.
“Amnesty International’s investigation paints a harrowing picture of a direct attack on two civilians while they had sought refuge from Israeli attacks," Amnesty Middle East and North Africa regional director Heba Morayef said Thursday in a statement.
"After the first strike had eliminated the military-stated target, and with two drones flying low overhead, the Israeli military knew or should have known that two civilian women were sheltering in that building," she continued. "Despite this, they proceeded with what we have reasonable grounds to believe amounted to a direct attack on civilians, demonstrating a shocking disregard for international humanitarian law (IHL)."
“The fact that the two journalists were in what Israel has designated a no-return zone does not make them lawful targets," Morayef added. "All parties to a conflict have a clear obligation to distinguish between civilians and military targets at all times and to direct their attacks only at military objectives. There can be no justification for targeting civilians who sought shelter in search of safety. This attack must be promptly, independently, and impartially investigated as a war crime.”
CPJ regional director Sara Qudah said Thursday that “Amnesty International’s findings paint, yet again, a deeply disturbing picture of a systemic failure of legal mechanisms designed precisely to protect civilians—including journalists.”
“Amal’s killing can’t be allowed to become yet another unresolved case of a journalist killed by Israeli forces with complete impunity,” Qudah stressed. "This repeated failure to conduct transparent investigations into attacks on journalists has reinforced a climate of impunity and hollowed out the protections granted to the press under IHL."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'An Unmistakably Chilling Message': Trump DOJ Subpoenaed Phone Records of Journalists' Relatives
"Every American who values a free and independent press should see this for what it is: an abuse of power designed to silence scrutiny."
Jul 20, 2026
Attorneys representing The New York Times have revealed that the Trump administration's subpoenas of the newspaper's journalists are far more aggressive than what had been previously reported.
In a letter sent to US District Judge Arun Subramanian on Saturday and unsealed by the court on Monday, attorneys David O'Neil, Douglas Zolkind, and Julie Edelstein said that the US Department of Justice was engaged in an "alarming pattern of conduct" beyond its recently revealed efforts to compel Times reporters to testify before a grand jury for a probe related to unspecified national security leaks.
The attorneys said the administration had gone so far as to subpoena phone companies for subscriber information and toll records for phone numbers used by one reporter's mother and by two reporters' spouses, among others.
They also revealed that two administration subpoenas seek records going back as far as January 1 this year, "long before the events that are purportedly the basis for the department's investigation," suggesting that "the department is using this investigation... to forage for information about the journalists' source relationships more broadly."
The subpoenas of the Times journalists, issued earlier this month, came days after the paper published a story that detailed security concerns about the luxury jet the Qatari government gave to President Donald Trump.
The issued subpoenas did not specifically name the Times’ reporting on the Qatari jet as the reason for the grand jury probe, although they were given to all four journalists—Tyler Pager, Julian Barnes, Eric Schmitt, and Eric Lipton—who reported the story.
It is highly uncommon for government investigators to subpoena journalists when they are probing national security leaks, as such actions are generally seen as having a chilling effect on reporters’ ability to gather information.
Katie Fallow, deputy litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, described news of the department seeking phone records of reporters' spouses and a parent as "an extraordinary escalation in the Trump administration’s campaign to intimidate the press."
"The Justice Department didn't stop at journalists—it went after their family members, too," Fallow noted. "That sends an unmistakably chilling message to anyone thinking about reporting on this administration. Every American who values a free and independent press should see this for what it is: an abuse of power designed to silence scrutiny."
Seth Stern, chief of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation, was even more scathing in his denunciation of the administration's actions.
"Even the Mafia says families are off limits," said Stern. "It’s gross that the administration—in its never-ending effort to harass and intimidate reporters who reveal its incompetence—is going after the communications of journalists’ relatives."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Trump Visa Rules Set to Make Life Harder for International Students, Journalists
One legal advocacy group said the rule change "will be costly, cause chaos, and cut legal immigration."
Jul 16, 2026
The Trump administration on Thursday finalized sweeping new visa restrictions that immigration advocates and higher education professionals say will make it significantly more difficult for international students and journalists to study and work in the United States.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said it is replacing the long-standing "duration of status" system—which allowed students to remain in the country as long as they complied with the terms of their visas—with fixed admission periods that generally cap student and exchange visitor stays at four years.
Foreign journalists, meanwhile, will see their visas limited to 240 days, while Chinese journalists will face an even shorter 90-day limit. Visa holders will have to apply for extensions if they need more time.
NEW: The Trump admin finalized a regulation which makes the largest changes to the student visa process in 50 years, along with changes to rules for exchange visitors and international journalists. 🧵on some of the most consequential changes set to go into effect in September.
[image or embed]
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social) July 16, 2026 at 12:09 PM
Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin claimed that “for nearly half a century, the outdated 'duration of status' system has compromised national security and created an environment ripe for immigration fraud."
"For decades, foreign students have been admitted into the US indefinitely, allowing thousands to abuse our immigration system by perpetually enrolling in courses to avoid having to leave the US," Mullin added. "By implementing clear, finite limits on these visas, the United States is reclaiming its ability to properly screen, vet, and monitor individuals within our borders."
However, Todd Schulte, president of the bipartisan political advocacy and lobbying group Fwd.US, warned that “these new restrictions will only make it harder for international students and researchers to complete their studies in the US and contribute their education to the US workforce after graduating."
"These changes will hurt America’s global competitiveness, hinder businesses’ ability to hire US-educated talent, impose significant and unnecessary costs on universities and students, and increase the workload for federal agencies already struggling with backlogs and delays," Schulte added. "This rule will create more bureaucratic backlogs and delays and help grind the legal immigration system to a halt.”
"Have these people no understanding of how life works?"
The American Immigration Lawyers Association said the rule change "will be costly, cause chaos, and cut legal immigration."
David Bier, the immigration studies director at the libertarian Cato Institute, told Reuters that "international students, many of whom will have spent years in the USA, will now have just 30 days to find an employer to sponsor them or immediately be turned into illegal immigrants. Have these people no understanding of how life works?"
Fanta Aw, executive director of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, said in an interview with The Washington Post that “DHS’ decision to end duration of status is a misguided and unnecessary policy shift that injects uncertainty, bureaucracy, and fear into a system that has long worked effectively."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FCC Chair Ripped Over 'Unlawful' Plan to Hand 'Public Airwaves to Billionaire Buddies' of Trump
The lone Democrat on the FCC said Brendan Carr's plan would "destroy local newsrooms, silence community reporting, and drive-up costs for the American families."
Jul 15, 2026
Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr announced Wednesday that his agency will soon vote to repeal a decades-old rule aimed at limiting consolidation among television broadcasters, a move that press freedom organizations say would be disastrous for journalism and American democracy.
Carr, a loyalist of President Donald Trump, outlined his proposal in an op-ed for the far-right online publication Breitbart, claiming his plan would "restore balance to the broadcast airwaves." But Anna Gomez, the lone Democratic FCC commissioner, warned in a fiery statement that "this unlawful effort to hand control of the public airwaves to billionaire buddies of this administration will destroy local newsrooms, silence community reporting, and drive-up costs for the American families who depend on local stations for news and emergency alerts."
Carr said the FCC will vote on August 6 on his proposal to eliminate a rule barring any single TV broadcaster from reaching more than 39% of US households—a limit designed to constrain television conglomerates. The FCC, which has a two-to-one Republican majority, is likely to approve the plan.
But Gomez argued in her statement on Wednesday that Carr's proposal is illegal, noting that "Congress wrote that specific [39%] number into federal law in 2004, and it did so on purpose."
"This is not the first time the FCC has tried to move on this issue," said Gomez. "In 2003, the commission raised the cap to 45% under its own authority. Congress stepped in within months, rewrote the law to set the cap at 39%, and made clear the FCC did not have the authority to change it. An FCC vote to raise the cap now would be unlawful, as it would mean doing the exact thing Congress has already said the commission cannot do."
Politico noted that Carr's proposal "marks a likely victory for the National Association of Broadcasters and its members such as Nexstar and Sinclair, which would be freer to pursue mergers that would breach the cap."
Earlier this year, the FCC approved Nexstar's $6.2 billion acquisition of rival TV company Tegna. A federal judge blocked the merger deal in April pending resolution of a legal challenge. If the merger is finalized, the new media conglomerate would reach roughly 80% of US households, blowing past the statutory 39% limit that Carr is now working to remove.
"Just as the FCC had no power to waive a congressional statute to grease the skids for Nexstar’s merger with Tegna, it has no power now to completely obliterate the limit Congress set," Matt Wood, vice president of policy and general counsel at Free Press, said in a statement on Wednesday. "The national cap remains good policy. It promotes competition, localism, and diversity in broadcasting, incentivizing stations to preserve local newsrooms and local-journalism jobs instead of duplicating stories nationwide and passing that off as local news."
"But whatever the law’s merits may be," Wood added, "the key point is that Brendan Carr cannot undo the limit that Congress set just because he feels like it.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy