June 2016

A group of technology and civil rights groups are pushing Republicans and Democrats to adopt party platforms that defend Internet privacy, affordability and openness. Nearly 20 organizations sent a letter to the heads of the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) as they start drafting their platforms for the 2016 elections. They say the parties should treat Internet access as "essential, not a luxury.”

The RNC is reportedly meeting with a number of technology trade groups June 6 about the issue, and the DNC is hearing testimony from stakeholders on Wednesday and Thursday in Washington, D.C., about its party platform, which will be taken up during the presidential nominating convention next month. “Understanding where both political parties stand on issues such as protecting privacy online, or ensuring greater broadband access, deployment, and adoption in urban, rural, and tribal areas alike, will be crucial to helping voters make an informed choice on Election Day,” according to the letter. The letter was signed by groups like the Center for Democracy and Technology, Color of Change, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Free Press, the Open Technology Institute, and Public Knowledge. Democrats and Republicans have come down on opposite sides of many regulatory policies involving the internet in the past few years.

The National Security Agency, it seems, has not told the public the whole story about Edward Snowden's contacts with oversight authorities before he became the most celebrated and vilified whistleblower in US history. Hundreds of internal NSA documents, declassified and released to VICE News in response to our long-running Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, reveal now for the first time that not only was the truth about the "single email" more complex and nuanced than the NSA disclosed to the public, but that Snowden had a face-to-face interaction with one of the people involved in responding to that e-mail.

The documents, made up of e-mails, talking points, and various records — many of them heavily redacted — contain insight into the NSA's interaction with the media, new details about Snowden's work, and an extraordinary behind-the-scenes look at the efforts by the NSA, the White House, and Sen Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to discredit Snowden. The trove of more than 800 pages, along with several interviews, offer unprecedented insight into the NSA during this time of crisis within the agency. And they call into question aspects of the US government's long-running narrative about Snowden's time at the NSA.

[Commentary] The control of personal information is a powerful reality in 2016. It can be used as a weapon against oppression, as currency on the black market, and as an unregulated asset in political campaigns. Personally identifiable information (PII) can be used to shame people off the Internet and drive them toward depression or worse, and with “sextortion,” it can literally blackmail people based on abject fear. Heck, knowing the address of an adversary – say in the gaming community – can get them arrested and nearly killed by an armed-to-the-teeth SWAT team.

Controlling and manipulating PII can carry life-changing consequences for individuals. Just as disturbingly, controlling PII could even affect freedom of the press and the health of a democracy. Recently, The New York Times reported on Finnish journalist Jessikka Aro. As an award-winning investigative reporter for Finland’s state broadcaster, Yle Kioski, Aro decided to cover a powerful contingent of an alleged Russian-based “troll army.” What started as a quest to find truth, turned into a personal nightmare for Aro.

Journalism groups and media reporters warn that a Donald Trump presidency could do serious damage to press freedom. Throughout his campaign, Trump has launched a series of attacks on the press, ranging from personally attacking reporters to barring critical outlets from covering his events to promising to “open up our libel laws” if he’s elected. Trump also has a long history of suing or threatening to sue critical journalists, and he and a top ally have both invoked the prospect of enacting retribution against media using the government.

Recently, The New York Times cited legal experts explaining how Trump's "blustery attacks on the press, complaints about the judicial system and bold claims of presidential power collectively sketch out a constitutional worldview that shows contempt for the First Amendment, the separation of powers and the rule of law." In interviews with Media Matters, journalists and press freedom experts raised several concerns about how a President Trump would deal with the media.