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
telecommunications
The Latest Corporate Media and Telecom Trend? Caving to Trump
We expect our media to act as a check on abuses of power. Instead, these companies are enabling the Trump regime even as it’s actively and openly attacking journalism and undermining free speech.
Jul 13, 2025
In the Trump 2.0 era, media conglomerates aren’t just reporting news but making it as well—and for all of the wrong reasons.
Companies including Paramount (which owns CBS) and Disney (which owns ABC) have earned headlines for capitulating to the political thuggery of the White House and its improperly subservient federal agencies.
In December 2024, ABC News caved in advance of U.S. President Donald Trump’s inauguration, paying $15 million (plus $1 million in legal fees) to resolve Trump’s defamation lawsuit against the network and its anchor George Stephanopoulos, who had imprecisely said that the president had been found “liable for rape” in a civil trial in New York. (In fact, Trump had been found liable under New York State’s definition of “sexual abuse.”)
And in July, Paramount Chairwoman Shari Redstone paid Trump $16 million to settle a frivolous lawsuit the president brought against CBS News. Trump wrongly claimed that “60 Minutes” deceptively edited an interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris, allegedly causing him “mental anguish.” Redstone’s decision to settle the case (driven by her desire to gain official approval of a multibillion-dollar merger with Skydance) has sparked righteous discontent among CBS reporters and producers who see the ostensible bribe as a betrayal of the news organization’s journalistic principles and free-speech rights.
The Capitulation Trend
These disturbing examples of media capitulation are not isolated events but part of a worrisome trend across all sectors of the U.S. media and telecommunications industry. The nation’s largest telecommunications companies are busy pandering to the Trump regime as well. In recent months, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon have abandoned prior commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion in hopes of winning approval of various mergers, acquisitions, and other regulatory requests before federal agencies.
A series of Trump executive orders seeking to erase DEI programs in the public and private sectors prompted the capitulations in the telecommunications sector. In a stunning reversal of their previous commitments, companies have fallen into line.
In a July 8 letter to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr, T-Mobile announced that it has scrapped all DEI initiatives, as it looks to the agency to green-light its proposed acquisitions of UScellular’s wireless operations and of internet service provider Metronet. Previously, the wireless giant had “dissolved” its partnership with several civil-rights organizations that had helped the company develop inclusive corporate-governance practices.
While many U.S. media institutions curried favor with political figures during previous administrations, these companies’ surrender to the tyranny of Trumpism poses an existential crisis of an entirely different scale—one that cuts to the core of our democracy.
Earlier, in May, the FCC blessed Verizon’s proposed merger with Frontier Communications. Buried in the FCC’s approval order—but proudly touted in the agency’s press release—is the claim that Verizon got the deal done only after promising to end its own DEI programs in a letter filed with the FCC just a day before it received agency approval.
In March, AT&T ended its DEI-focused employee training and cut off funding for the Trevor Project, a suicide-prevention group for LGBTQIA+ youth, and Turn Up the Love, a series of Pride events that partners with musical artists.
“In this political climate, there’s no such thing right now as corporate reckoning with systems of oppression,” said Free Press vice president of policy and general counsel Matt Wood. “There’s no T-Mobile as a magenta maverick. The only colors today are green and white: chasing dollars, and appeasing baseless white grievances over so-called reverse racism.”
Cozying Up to Political Power
And it’s not just phone giants that are following the craven path Disney and Paramount have forged. Caving to Trump has become a pattern across the entire establishment media sector, from broadcasting and entertainment companies to online platforms and newspaper owners.
While many U.S. media institutions curried favor with political figures during previous administrations, these companies’ surrender to the tyranny of Trumpism poses an existential crisis of an entirely different scale—one that cuts to the core of our democracy.
The wealthiest media companies have become so deeply embedded within the power structures of society—and so entangled with and dependent on government contracts and other official favors—that it’s not surprising to see them bend to the whims of an authoritarian leader. But that doesn’t make it any less dangerous.
We expect our media to act as a check on abuses of power. Instead, these companies are enabling the Trump regime even as it’s actively and openly attacking journalism and undermining free speech. That large telecommunications companies have joined the cowardly capitulations exposes the deep structural rot at the root of our entire media, journalism, and communications system.
These failures raise important questions about a captured media-policy infrastructure—fueled by hundreds of millions of dollars in fees to corporate lobbyists, lawyers, and trade groups—that has allowed a relatively small group of media and telecommunications companies to become this enormous.
As the Trump administration—with the help of a compliant FCC—attempts to roll back limits to media consolidation, it’s worth recognizing that bigger media isn’t better for the American people and our democracy.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Pakistan Election-Day Internet Blackout Condemned as 'Reckless Attack on People's Rights'
"The decision to suspend telecommunications and mobile internet services on an election day is a blunt attack on the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly," said an expert with Amnesty International.
Feb 08, 2024
A leading international human rights group condemned Pakistani authorities on Thursday for shutting down the country's internet services as voters headed to the polls to cast their ballots in a long-delayed election marred by military interference, terrorist violence, and the imprisonment of the nation's most popular politician, former Prime Minister Imran Khan.
"The decision to suspend telecommunications and mobile internet services on an election day is a blunt attack on the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly," Livia Saccardi, Amnesty International's interim deputy director for South Asia, said in a statement issued as polls closed in the world's fifth-most populous nation.
"It is reckless to impede access to information as people head out to polling stations on the heels of devastating bomb blasts and what has been an intense crackdown on the opposition in the lead-up to the elections in the country," said Saccardi. "Unwarranted restrictions on dissemination of information, despite reassurances to the contrary from the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority and Election Commission of Pakistan, are in breach of people's human rights at this critical time in Pakistan."
The internet blackouts across the country were one of many factors that called into question the legitimacy of Thursday's vote, in which dozens of parties competed for nearly 270 seats in the lower house of the Pakistani Parliament as well as positions in regional governments. The Parliament will be tasked with choosing a prime minister after the results are tallied.
Video footage posted to social media showed long lines at polling stations, but early government reports suggested that overall turnout was low relative to other elections in recent years.
Sayed Bukhari, who served as an adviser to Khan, disputed claims of low turnout, calling them a ploy by Pakistan's caretaker government to "rig the votes."
"So this what this incompetent and compromised caretaker government and its officials will do this next, mark my words!" Bukhari wrote. "Despite a historic turnout in most of the country... they will now spread the fake narrative that the voter turnout was very low."
"No extra time to vote has been granted as it usually always does," he added, noting that polls closed as many were still standing in line to vote. "How many channels are going to play this narrative?"
The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), and the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) are the three dominant parties in the nation's politics. The Associated Press noted ahead of Thursday's vote that "the top contender is PML-N and on its ballot are two former prime ministers, Nawaz Sharif and his younger brother Shehbaz Sharif."
"However," the outlet added, "it is the absence from the ballot of PTI's founder, cricket legend turned Islamist politician Imran Khan, that's at the forefront of public discourse in Pakistan."
Just a week before the contest, Khan was hit with two lengthy prison sentences—10 and 14 years—on consecutive days, one for his alleged release of state secrets and the other for corruption charges that the former prime minister and his allies say were politically motivated.
Khan, who was removed from power in a no-confidence vote in 2022, was already in prison facing corruption allegations before the closed-door trials concluded last week. The no-confidence vote was backed by the U.S. State Department.
Ahead of Thursday's election, as The Intercept's Ryan Grim wrote Wednesday, Pakistan's government worked hard to suppress Khan's popular PTI party, including by banning its famous electoral symbol—a cricket bat—and arresting members of the party.
"With the loss of its bat, PTI was converted from a formidable political party to a loose group of individuals with no legal affiliation overnight, effectively disenfranchising millions of citizens who placed their trust in PTI as a political entity," Grim wrote. "The move has been severely criticized as a 'huge blow to fundamental rights' by the Pakistani legal fraternity and civil society."
In an Economist op-ed written from prison last month, Khan warned that elections held under such conditions "would be a disaster and a farce, since PTI is being denied its basic right to campaign."
"Such a joke of an election would only lead to further political instability," Khan wrote. "The only viable way forward for Pakistan is fair and free elections, which would bring back political stability and rule of law, as well as ushering in desperately needed reforms by a democratic government with a popular mandate. There is no other way for Pakistan to disentangle itself from the crises confronting it. Unfortunately, with democracy under siege, we are heading in the opposite direction on all these fronts."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Gaza Internet Blackout Conceals Israel's Human Rights Violations—And Is Itself One
"It is unconscionable to toy with connectivity amidst unprecedented violence and unfathomable human suffering," said one campaigner, demanding global action "to end the war and internet shutdowns."
Jan 18, 2024
Human rights advocates sounded the alarm as Thursday marked the seventh straight day of a near-total telecommunications blackout in the Gaza Strip—the ninth and longest outage since Israel declared war in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack on October 7.
"For over 100 days, Gaza has endured on-and-off disruptions and internet shutdowns, with its people now facing the longest blackout since October," said Kassem Mnejja, a campaigner with the digital rights group Access Now.
"With the people of Gaza continually in the dark, documenting and sharing information about what is happening on the ground is increasingly challenging, if not outright impossible," added Mnejja, whose group is calling for a physical and digital cease-fire.
Paltel, a Palestinian internet service provider (ISP), said on social media last week: "We regret to announce that all telecom services in Gaza Strip have been lost due to the ongoing aggression. Gaza is blacked out again."
"Long hours of service interruption," the ISP
added Thursday. "How many loved ones have we lost? How much do we worry about our loved ones?"
Despite Israel's claims that its troops are targeting militants in the Hamas-governed enclave, Israeli forces have killed at least 24,620 Palestinians—mostly women and children—and wounded another 61,830, according to officials in Gaza. Thousands more remain missing in the rubble that used to be homes, hospitals, mosques, schools, and other civilian infrastructure.
Sharing a new graph from the watchdog NetBlocks that shows network connectivity in Gaza throughout the war, Mohammed Khader, policy manager at the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, noted that the start of the current blackout coincided with International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearings for the South African-led case accusing Israel of genocide.
The section of South Africa's 84-page application to the ICJ summarizing genocidal acts states that "Israel is deliberately imposing telecommunications blackouts on Gaza and restricting access by fact-finding bodies and the international media. At the same time, Palestinian journalists are being killed at a rate significantly higher than has occurred in any conflict in the past 100 years."
A Palestinian Journalists' Syndicate volunteer
said last week that the group has evidence that at least 96 of the 109 Gaza reporters whose deaths it documented "were deliberately and specifically targeted by surgical Israeli strikes against them."
After an Israeli airstrike killed Wael Abu Fannouna on Thursday, Gaza officials announced that at least 119 members of the media have been killed since October 7. The U.S.-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has identified 76 of them.
"A communications blackout is a news blackout," CPJ stressed in a late October statement about Gaza—as Anealla Safdar, Al Jazeera's Europe editor, recalled in response to the NetBlocks update on Thursday.
"This can lead to serious consequences with an independent, factual information vacuum that can be filled with deadly propaganda, dis- and misinformation," CPJ warned at the time, also highlighting that targeting journalists or media infrastructure constitutes possible war crimes.
"At this dark hour, we stand with journalists," the group added, "with those truth-seekers whose daily work keeps us informed with facts that shed light on the human condition and help to hold power to account."
In addition to limiting on-the-ground reporting on the war, the current blackout "left civilians unable to call for help and aid workers struggling to reach them as Israeli airstrikes rained down on the south," The New York Times reported Wednesday.
According to the newspaper:
Airstrikes and fighting between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants in Khan Younis have been so intense that repair crews have had trouble reaching the damaged sites, Paltel said. Last week, two of its workers, in the process of making repairs, were killed when a company car was fired upon, Paltel said, adding that it had coordinated the repairs with the Israeli authorities in advance. The Israeli military said the episode had been referred for investigation.
"Internet shutdowns are a matter of life and death in Gaza," declared Marwa Fatafta, Access Now's MENA policy and advocacy director.
"It is unconscionable to toy with connectivity amidst unprecedented violence and unfathomable human suffering," Fatafta said. "The international community must act now to end the war and internet shutdowns. The silence so far has been glaring."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Gaza Telecom Networks Face 'Complete Halt' as Another Blackout Nears
Blackouts have "severely affected the delivery of vital services to what remains of the crumbling medical facilities treating thousands of ailing victims of the unrelenting assault on Gaza," said one advocate.
Nov 15, 2023
In a matter of hours, Amnesty International said Wednesday, Gaza is expected to "plunge into another total communications blackout" unless Israel lifts the total blockade that has kept fuel from reaching the besieged enclave for more than a month.
Two major telecommunications firms announced that their data servers have begun shutting down due to the rapidly dwindling energy supply—affecting operations at hospitals where medical workers are already struggling to care for thousands of injured people and preventing civilians from seeking help.
"Israel's ongoing refusal to deliver sufficient fuel and restore power will bring Gaza's communications network to a complete halt," said Rasha Abdul-Rahim, program director at Amnesty Tech. "It has also severely affected the delivery of vital services to what remains of the crumbling medical facilities treating thousands of ailing victims of the unrelenting assault on Gaza and has hampered the rescue of injured people trapped under the rubble of destroyed buildings. This will be further exacerbated by the collapse of communications services, which in itself could amount to a violation of international law."
On Wednesday, Israel allowed the first fuel truck to enter Gaza since its bombardment began on October 7, but Philippe Lazzarini, head of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), said the 23,000 liters trucked into the enclave are just a fraction of what is needed at hospitals, communications centers, water treatment plants, and humanitarian facilities.
"It is appalling that fuel continues to be used as a weapon of war," Lazzarini told Al Jazeera, noting that 160,000 liters of fuel are needed daily just to run the U.N.'s refugee shelters, where 800,000 people have sought safety. "This seriously paralyzes our work and the delivery of assistance to the Palestinian communities in Gaza."
Since October 11, said Amnesty, Gaza has had communications connectivity of about 30% below pre-conflict levels. The enclave has faced three total blackouts that lasted 24-48 hours, leaving residents without access to rescue services or the ability to make sure their loved ones were alive and well.
The blackouts, said the group, have also prevented international and local reporters and groups from documenting human rights violations.
During one 48-hour blackout from October 27-29, Israel bombed the areas surrounding al-Shifa, al-Quds, and Indonesian hospitals, killing at least 302 people, according to Gaza health officials.
"Against the backdrop of devastating airstrikes on critical civilian infrastructure and dwindling fuel reserves, civilians in Gaza cannot afford another blackout, which risks becoming a protracted period of no communication, darkness, and invisibility," said Abdul-Rahim. "Israel must immediately lift its blockade on Gaza and allow the entry and distribution of fuel and lifesaving aid for civilians. Israel is subjecting the civilian population to collective punishment, which is unlawful and cannot be justified, while cutting them off from each other and rest of the world as it does so."
Amnesty International reiterated its demand for an immediate cease-fire and the restoration of all telecommunications infrastructure to ensure injured people can seek help and humanitarian organizations can keep their operations running.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden Signs Bill to End Profiteering From Prisoners' Calls to Loved Ones
"The predatory correctional telecom industry has avoided regulation for too long, and families have paid the exorbitant price," said one supporter of the legislation.
Jan 05, 2023
Justice campaigners celebrated Thursday after U.S. President Joe Biden signed a bill empowering federal regulators to ensure that charges for video and audio calls from correctional and detention facilities are "just and reasonable."
Named for a late nurse who fought for lower rates after struggling to afford phone calls with her incarcerated grandson, the Martha Wright-Reed Just and Reasonable Communications Act of 2022 was sent to Biden's desk last month.
The measure, led by U.S. Sens. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) and Rob Portman (R-Ohio), amends the Communications Act of 1934 to require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) "to ensure just and reasonable charges."
"Words could never express or begin to explain the incredible magnitude of power and support in this bill," said Wright-Reed's grandson Ulandis Forte, who is no longer incarcerated, after Congress passed the legislation. "A multitude of family and friends will be positively impacted by the passing of this bill and the journey to get there."
"Many will never understand the sleepless nights and ongoing struggle it has taken to bring this wonderful day to fruition," Forte added. "To God be the glory, and I'm so grateful for a moment in history that will never be forgotten."
As The Associated Press detailed Thursday:
The FCC must still go through the rule-making process before the changes can be officially made. In 2013, FCC capped rates at 25 cents per minute, which meant a 15-minute call cost $3.75; before that, it was roughly $17 on average, about 10 times more than the average per-minute rate. Prison telecommunication companies challenged the decision in court, claiming the FCC didn't have the right to regulate the calls.
In 2015, then-FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn told lawmakers she supported measures to cap the costs. "Incarceration is a family matter, an economic matter, a societal matter. The greatest impact of an inmate's sentence is often on the loved ones who are left behind," she said.
Today, "Kentucky has the highest cost for a 15-minute call, at $5.70, and $9.99 for a cellphone call," according to the AP.
"It's unacceptable for anyone to have to choose between necessities like rent or healthcare and connecting with their loved ones," Jesselyn McCurdy at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights said in December, declaring that the legislation's passage "will correct this injustice and be life-changing for incarcerated individuals and their families."
Along with celebrating what the measure will mean to those struggling to pay for reaching their loved ones, campaigners have continued to condemn what Cheryl A. Leanza, policy adviser of the United Church of Christ Media Justice Ministry, called "the predatory behavior of companies serving incarcerated people and their families."
Sakira Cook, vice president of policy and government at Color of Change, pointed out that "prison telecommunications services profit from vulnerable families trying to stay in touch with their loved ones, generating $1.4 billion annually."
"Incarcerated people and their loved ones have paid the price, literally, for the predatory behavior by the correctional telecom industry for far too long," said Heather Franklin, internet campaign director at Free Press Action. "The ability for incarcerated people to maintain regular communication with their loved ones, counsel, and clergy is a human rights issue."
Worth Rises executive director Bianca Tylek agreed that "the predatory correctional telecom industry has avoided regulation for too long, and families have paid the exorbitant price."
"This legislation will bring extraordinary relief to families with incarcerated loved ones—parents and children especially—who need to stay connected," Tylek added. "Those connections are important to the strength of families, well-being of people inside, and their mutual success upon reentry. Their success benefits us all."
Charles Sullivan, president of International CURE, noted that the legislation is also "essential to preparing for jobs and housing when a person is released."
Duckworth
made similar points after the bill was sent to Biden, saying that "we must do all that we can to ensure that phone rates in correctional facilities are just and reasonable so family members can afford to stay in touch with incarcerated loved ones, improving the chances that rehabilitated offenders will be able to become productive members of society upon their release."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rising Alarm Over FCC Rule Change: Would Consumers Have to Pay $225 to File Telecom Complaints?
"At a time when consumers are highly dissatisfied with their communications companies, this abrupt change in policy troubles us."
Jul 11, 2018
Under a proposal that the Republican-controlled Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is slated to finalize Thursday, two House Democrats are "deeply concerned" that consumers would have to pay a $225 fee to get agency staff's help resolving complaints about communications companies' shady business practices.
In a letter (pdf) sent to Trump-appointed FCC Chairman Ajit Pai on Tuesday, Democratic Reps. Frank Pallone (N.J.) and Mike Doyle (Penn.), high-ranking members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, expressed concern that the proposal "would eliminate the agency's traditional rule of helping consumers in the informal complaint process" by directing staff "to simply pass consumers' informal complaints on to the company."
"Historically, FCC staff has reviewed responses to informal complaints and, where merited, urged companies to address any service problems," wrote the congressmen. "We have all heard countless stories of consumers complaining to the FCC about waiting months to have an erroneous charge removed from their bill or for a refund for a service they never ordered or about accessibility services that are not working. Oftentimes these issues are corrected for consumers as a result of the FCC's advocacy on their behalf."
Pallone and Doyle worry that if the proposal passes, as Gizmodo put it, "customers will either be at the mercy of their service providers--which are hated by consumers specifically because of their terrible customer service--or pony up $225" to file a formal complaint. Although, as The Verge noted, "the fee for a formal complaint isn't new," the lawmakers believe the optional and "complicated formal legal process" soon could be the only way to get help from agency staff.
"Too often, consumers wronged by communications companies face unending corporate bureaucracy insetad of quick, meaningful resolutions," the letter concluded. "At a time when consumers are highly dissatisfied with their communications companies, this abrupt change in policy troubles us."
An FCC fact sheet claims (pdf) the proposal "streamlines and consolidates procedural rules governing formal complaints," and that "wording revisions" to the two sections that address informal complaints "do not alter the substance of the rule."
"The item would not change the commission's handling of informal complaints," an agency spokesperson told CNET and The Verge. "The Democrats' letter is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the draft order."
While FCC Chief of Staff Matthew Berry turned to Twitter to dismiss The Verge--which updated its story with the FCC comment--and Gizmodo's reports as "fake news," and shared the current consumer guide (pdf) for filing an informal complaint, Mathew Ingram of the Columbia Journalism review responded:
Doyle, for his part, reiterated his worries about the proposal on Wednesday morning:
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Government Is Already Forcing Companies to Give It Access to Our Data
Feb 27, 2016
The government wants our data, whether it's sitting on our iPhones or in transit across the Internet.
Last week, we learned that the FBI is trying to force Apple to break its security features to access data stored on an iPhone that belonged to one of the San Bernardino shooters. Many predict this would set a dangerous precedent for future cases -- and they're right. But it's important to remember that the government's appetite for data isn't limited to iPhones. In fact, this is only the latest front in the government's long-running efforts to access our data wherever it can be found.
While the country debates what kind of access the FBI should have to the devices we use daily to communicate, the NSA is already intercepting, copying, and searching through vast quantities of our communications as they travel across the Internet backbone from point A to point B. This warrantless spying, known as "Upstream" surveillance, ensnares essentially everyone's international Internet communications -- including emails, chats, text messages, and even web-browsing information. It constitutes a mass intrusion into our privacy online.
With the compelled assistance of the country's biggest telecommunications providers, such as AT&T and Verizon, the NSA conducts Upstream surveillance by tapping directly into the Internet backbone -- the high-capacity cables, switches, and routers that carry Americans' online communications. The NSA's surveillance devices are installed at backbone "chokepoints," major junctions on the Internet through which most international communications travel. After copying virtually all of the international text-based traffic, the NSA searches this traffic for key terms, called "selectors," that are associated with its thousands of targets. Critically, however, the NSA isn't just plucking out the communications of suspected terrorists or spies. Instead, it's drinking from a firehose: It's copying and searching nearly everyone's international communications, looking for information about its targets. And it does all of this without a warrant.
In other words, it's as if the NSA dispatched agents to the U.S. Postal Service's major processing centers and had them open, copy, and read the contents of everyone's international mail. If a letter contained something of interest -- for example, a reference to a phone number believed to be associated with a target -- the NSA would add the letter to its files and retain that copy for later use. Of course, the Fourth Amendment protects us from precisely this kind of general, warrantless search. The government can't simply open all of our letters to look for those that are potentially of interest to it. There's no question that this would violate the Constitution, and there's no reason to treat Americans' private Internet communications differently.
Last year, the ACLU filed a suit challenging Upstream surveillance on behalf of a coalition of educational, legal, media, and advocacy organizations, including the Wikimedia Foundation. The plaintiffs engage in sensitive international communications during their work, including with journalists, foreign government officials, victims of human rights abuses, clients, witnesses, and the hundreds of millions of people who read and edit Wikipedia. The government's dragnet surveillance of these communications undermines the privacy and confidentiality on which the plaintiffs' work depends.
The case, Wikimedia v. NSA, is now on appeal in the Fourth Circuit after the district court improperly concluded that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue because they had not plausibly alleged that the NSA was monitoring their communications. The opening brief in the appeal was filed last week, and yesterday, several other groups, including technologists, media organizations, and law professors, filed amicus briefs in support of the plaintiffs.
The surveillance state runs deep. But there's still plenty of room to fight back.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More Stories
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