SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Amy Goodman reporting on the Dakota Access Pipeline. (Image: Democracy Now!)
When Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman (9/4/16) asked security guards at the Dakota Access Pipeline construction project why they were using pepper spray and dogs to attack Native American protesters, the guards soon backed off, taking their mace and attack dogs with them. It was a dramatic lesson in how journalism can defend the rights of citizens.
The state of North Dakota had a response to this kind of journalism: It issued a warrant for Goodman's arrest, charging her with criminal trespassing. This is an extraordinary action; Jack McDonald, a lawyer for the North Dakota Newspaper Association and for the Bismarck Tribune, told the Tribune that in 40 years of doing media law in the state he's never heard of a reporter being charged with trespassing (9/15/16).
So how did reporters respond to one of their own being threatened with arrest for doing her job? Mostly, they ignored it. The story was covered locally, in the Bismarck Tribune (9/15/16), and internationally, in the British Guardian (9/12/16) and a mention in the Toronto Star (9/13/16). The Committee to Protect Journalists (9/12/16) and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe's Representative on Freedom of the Media (9/14/16) put out statements calling on the state to drop the charges.
But most national corporate media outlets--the ones who complain about not getting a seat on a candidate's plane--breathed not a word on North Dakota's assault on the press's ability to cover a major story of the moment. (The internet-based Salon--9/12/16--and Mashable--9/11/16--deserve credit as exceptions.) Elite media coverage of a million issues makes clear that they don't mind taking sides. It's a real shame they won't take the side of the right to do journalism when and where it matters.
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
When Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman (9/4/16) asked security guards at the Dakota Access Pipeline construction project why they were using pepper spray and dogs to attack Native American protesters, the guards soon backed off, taking their mace and attack dogs with them. It was a dramatic lesson in how journalism can defend the rights of citizens.
The state of North Dakota had a response to this kind of journalism: It issued a warrant for Goodman's arrest, charging her with criminal trespassing. This is an extraordinary action; Jack McDonald, a lawyer for the North Dakota Newspaper Association and for the Bismarck Tribune, told the Tribune that in 40 years of doing media law in the state he's never heard of a reporter being charged with trespassing (9/15/16).
So how did reporters respond to one of their own being threatened with arrest for doing her job? Mostly, they ignored it. The story was covered locally, in the Bismarck Tribune (9/15/16), and internationally, in the British Guardian (9/12/16) and a mention in the Toronto Star (9/13/16). The Committee to Protect Journalists (9/12/16) and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe's Representative on Freedom of the Media (9/14/16) put out statements calling on the state to drop the charges.
But most national corporate media outlets--the ones who complain about not getting a seat on a candidate's plane--breathed not a word on North Dakota's assault on the press's ability to cover a major story of the moment. (The internet-based Salon--9/12/16--and Mashable--9/11/16--deserve credit as exceptions.) Elite media coverage of a million issues makes clear that they don't mind taking sides. It's a real shame they won't take the side of the right to do journalism when and where it matters.
When Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman (9/4/16) asked security guards at the Dakota Access Pipeline construction project why they were using pepper spray and dogs to attack Native American protesters, the guards soon backed off, taking their mace and attack dogs with them. It was a dramatic lesson in how journalism can defend the rights of citizens.
The state of North Dakota had a response to this kind of journalism: It issued a warrant for Goodman's arrest, charging her with criminal trespassing. This is an extraordinary action; Jack McDonald, a lawyer for the North Dakota Newspaper Association and for the Bismarck Tribune, told the Tribune that in 40 years of doing media law in the state he's never heard of a reporter being charged with trespassing (9/15/16).
So how did reporters respond to one of their own being threatened with arrest for doing her job? Mostly, they ignored it. The story was covered locally, in the Bismarck Tribune (9/15/16), and internationally, in the British Guardian (9/12/16) and a mention in the Toronto Star (9/13/16). The Committee to Protect Journalists (9/12/16) and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe's Representative on Freedom of the Media (9/14/16) put out statements calling on the state to drop the charges.
But most national corporate media outlets--the ones who complain about not getting a seat on a candidate's plane--breathed not a word on North Dakota's assault on the press's ability to cover a major story of the moment. (The internet-based Salon--9/12/16--and Mashable--9/11/16--deserve credit as exceptions.) Elite media coverage of a million issues makes clear that they don't mind taking sides. It's a real shame they won't take the side of the right to do journalism when and where it matters.