34 - United States of America
Cable television providers in some markets carry a variety of foreign news sources, including Al-Jazeera America, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Spanish-language services, and state-controlled television channels from Russia and China.
Traditional media, including print and broadcast outlets, have suffered financially from the increasing popularity of the internet as a news source. The newspaper industry in particular is undergoing a period of decline and readjustment. There were an estimated 1,400 daily newspapers, geared primarily toward local readerships, but even the largest and most prestigious papers have faced falling print circulations and advertising revenues and been forced to cut staff.
Even though the United States retains a diverse media landscape and strong legal protections for freedom of expression, there were setbacks in 2013, mainly due to the national security policies. Freedom of the press has suffered a number of rectrictions regarding the reporters' access to the employees of the Obama administration and to government information, especially when it comes to national security; to government's tapping of journalists and news outlets; and to the ongoing effort to force journalists to reveal their sources.
Official regulation of media content in the United States is minimal, and there are no industrywide self-regulatory bodies for either print or broadcast media, although some individual outlets have an ombudsperson. By law, radio and television airwaves are considered public property and are leased to private stations, which determine content.
Although the government does not restrict political or social engagement over the internet, there are laws banning or regulating promulgation of child-abuse images, exposure of minors to indecent content, dissemination of confidential information, online gambling, and the use of copyrighted material.
An increasing number of news outlets are aggressively partisan in their coverage of political affairs. The press itself is frequently a source of contention, with conservatives and liberals alike accusing the media of bias. The appearance of enhanced polarization is driven, to some degree, by the influence of all-news cable television channels and blogs, many of which display an obvious editorial slant.
The popularity of talk-radio shows, whose hosts are primarily conservative, has also played an important role in media polarization. Nonetheless, most U.S. newspapers make a serious effort to keep a wall of separation between news reporting, commentary, and editorials. The long-term trend toward fewer family-owned newspapers and more newspapers under corporate control has contributed to a less partisan, if blander, editorial tone.
Print2015 SCORES
PRESS STATUS
Free
PRESS FREEDOM SCORE
(0 = BEST, 100 = WORST)
22
LEGAL ENVIRONMENT
(0 = BEST, 30 = WORST)
6
POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT
(0 = BEST, 40 = WORST)
11
ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
(0 = BEST, 30 = WORST)
5
The United States retains a diverse media landscape and strong legal protections for freedom of expression. Nonetheless, a combination of developments has placed journalists under new pressures in recent years, and these persisted during 2014. The most serious problems stem from tensions between press freedom and U.S. national security and counterterrorism efforts. They include government surveillance of journalists, government attempts to compel reporters to reveal the sources of leaked information, and Obama administration policies that severely limit interactions between journalists and officials.
Legal Environment
The United States has one of the world’s strongest systems of legal protection for media independence. The First Amendment of the U.S. constitution provides the core guarantee of press freedom and freedom of speech. While those rights have come under pressure at various times in the country’s history, the independent court system has repeatedly issued rulings that uphold and expand the right of journalists to be free of state control. The courts have also given the press broad protection from libel and defamation suits that involve commentary on public figures, though libel formally remains a criminal offense in a number of states.
In a case that could have important implications for online journalism, Barrett Brown, a journalist and activist, pleaded guilty in April 2014 to charges related to his posting of a link in a chat room; the link led to a file that was publicly available on the internet, but that contained stolen data (obtained via hacking) from Stratfor Global, an intelligence contractor. Brown was not involved in obtaining the data. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and other media watchdogs expressed concern over the case, as it could result in the criminalization of linking to documents that were already made public by others in online articles, a common journalistic practice. Brown was awaiting sentencing at year’s end.
Some 40 states have shield laws that give journalists either absolute or limited protection from orders to reveal confidential sources or other information gathered in the course of their work. The federal government, however, offers no such protection, and efforts to adopt a federal shield law have been unsuccessful to date. The latest congressional attempt to enact shield legislation expired in 2014 after the Senate failed to bring the bill to a vote.
Over the past decade, federal prosecutors have provoked a series of controversies by attempting to compel testimony from journalists in high-profile cases, including some centered on government workers charged with leaking information to the media or lobbyists. While some of the cases were initiated by the Justice Department under President George W. Bush, the administration of President Barack Obama has proven even more zealous in pursuing government secrecy cases and issuing demands for information from reporters. Indeed, the Obama administration has brought more criminal cases against alleged leakers than were brought by all previous administrations combined.
In 2013, the Justice Department revealed that it had secretly subpoenaed and seized records for more than 20 telephone lines used by reporters at the Associated Press (AP). The Justice Department also acknowledged that it had secretly subpoenaed and seized the e-mail and telephone records of James Rosen, a Fox News correspondent. Both actions were taken as part of national security leak investigations. After a firestorm of criticism, the department issued new guidelines that significantly narrowed conditions under which the government could gain access to records of journalists’ communications with sources.
In a positive development related to the new guidelines, the Justice Department in late 2014 largely abandoned a lengthy campaign to force James Risen, a New York Times reporter and author of several books on national security themes, to testify about information he may have received from Jeffrey Sterling, a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee, in the course of researching a book about American efforts to disrupt Iran’s nuclear program. Risen was set to appear in court in early 2015, but it was agreed that he would not be compelled to identify sources or any information they supplied.
The right to access official information, with some exceptions, is protected under the 1966 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). In one of its first acts after taking office, the Obama administration announced a more expansive interpretation of the law than had prevailed under President Bush. In 2009, the attorney general declared that records should be released to the public unless doing so would violate another law or cause foreseeable harm to protected interests, including personal privacy and national security. Despite this and other pro-disclosure rhetoric, the administration has drawn criticism for its record on transparency. Complaints have focused on the government’s refusal to release many documents concerning national security and counterterrorism issues, and its heavy redaction of documents that are made available. According to an AP analysis, the administration censored or denied a record 39 percent of all FOIA requests in fiscal year 2014. Legislation to reform FOIA practices advanced in Congress during 2014, but failed to win final passage by year’s end, meaning it would have to be reintroduced by the new Congress in 2015.
Official regulation of media content in the United States is minimal, and there are no industrywide self-regulatory bodies for either print or broadcast media, although some individual outlets have an ombudsperson. By law, radio and television airwaves are considered public property and are leased to private stations, which determine content. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is charged with administering licenses and reviewing content to ensure that it complies with federal limits on indecent or offensive material in terrestrial broadcasts. While the judiciary has declined to issue a broad ruling on the FCC’s authority to regulate indecency on the airwaves, recent decisions have chipped away at the agency’s power.
Although the government does not restrict political or social engagement over the internet, there are laws banning or regulating promulgation of child-abuse images, exposure of minors to indecent content, dissemination of confidential information, online gambling, and the use of copyrighted material.
In 2013, former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden’s revelations of extensive surveillance by the signals-intelligence agency generated widespread criticism of American policy, from both domestic and foreign sources. Civil libertarians and press freedom advocates pointed to the potential effect of the data collection on the rights of Americans, and free speech organizations asserted that the surveillance revelations were causing writers to practice self-censorship. In late 2014, Republicans in the Senate blocked legislation that among other things would have restricted the NSA’s ability to engage in bulk collection of metadata from Americans’ phone calls and other communication records. However, the law authorizing the activity was set to expire in mid-2015, meaning the issue would likely be revisited by the new Congress.
Political Environment
While self-censorship among journalists remains rare in the United States and official censorship is virtually nonexistent, an increasing number of news outlets are aggressively partisan in their coverage of political affairs. The press itself is frequently a source of contention, with conservatives and liberals alike accusing the media of bias. The appearance of enhanced polarization is driven, to some degree, by the influence of all-news cable television channels and blogs, many of which display an obvious editorial slant. The popularity of talk-radio shows, whose hosts are primarily conservative, has also played an important role in media polarization. Nonetheless, most U.S. newspapers make a serious effort to keep a wall of separation between news reporting, commentary, and editorials. The long-term trend toward fewer family-owned newspapers and more newspapers under corporate control has contributed to a less partisan, if blander, editorial tone. Most terrestrial broadcasters and major news agencies similarly avoid partisan reporting.
The Obama administration has come under fire for effectively limiting journalistic access to federal officials, as well as official events. The president held fewer press conferences in his first term than did his predecessors, and favored interviews with friendly Media to present his perspective to the public.
Journalists have complained of an environment in which officials are less likely to discuss policy issues with reporters than during previous administrations.