Department
Of Homeland Security Compiling Database Of Journalists And 'Media
Influencers'
6
April, 2018
In
today’s installment of "I’m Not Terrified, You
Are," Bloomberg
Law reports
on a FedBizOpps.gov posting
by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with the relatively
benign-sounding subject, “Media Monitoring Services.”
The
details of the attached Request
for Information,
however, outline a plan to gather and monitor the public activities
of media professionals and influencers and are enough to cause
nightmares of constitutional proportions, particularly as the freedom
of the press is under attack worldwide.
And
"attack" is not hyperbolic.
Every
day, journalists face serious consequences including physical
violence, imprisonment and death.
A few days ago, the Committee
to Protect Journalists launched
its annual Free
The Press campaign to
raise awareness about imprisoned journalists throughout the world. On
May 3, UNESCO will once again mark World
Press Freedom Day "to
inform citizens of violations of press freedom — a reminder that in
dozens of countries around the world, publications are censored,
fined, suspended and closed down, while journalists, editors and
publishers are harassed, attacked, detained and even murdered."
Meanwhile,
the United States government, traditionally one of the bastions of
press freedom, is about to compile a list of professional journalists
and "top media influencers," which would seem
to include bloggers and podcasters, and monitor what they're
putting out to the public.
What
could possibly go wrong? A lot.
DHS's
"Media Monitoring" Plan
As
part of its "media monitoring," the DHS seeks to track more
than 290,000 global news sources as well as social media in over 100
languages, including Arabic, Chinese and Russian, for instant
translation into English. The successful contracting company will
have "24/7 access to a password protected, media influencer
database, including journalists, editors, correspondents, social
media influencers, bloggers etc." in order to "identify any
and all media coverage related to the Department of Homeland Security
or a particular event."
"Any
and all media coverage," as you might imagine, is quite broad
and includes "online, print, broadcast, cable, radio, trade and
industry publications, local sources, national/international outlets,
traditional news sources, and social media."
The
database will be browseable by "location, beat and type of
influencer," and for each influencer, the chosen contractor
should "present contact details and any other information that
could be relevant, including publications this influencer writes for,
and an overview of the previous coverage published by the media
influencer."
One
aspect of the media coverage to be gathered is its "sentiment."
Anyone
else just pull their blanket up over them a little more tightly?
Just me?
Why
"Media Monitoring" and Why Now?
DHS
says the "NPPD/OUS [National Protection and Programs
Directorate/Office of the Under Secretary] has a critical need to
incorporate these functions into their programs in order to better
reach Federal, state, local, tribal and private partners." Who
knows what that means, but the document also states the NPPD's
mission is “to protect and enhance the resilience of the nation’s
physical and cyberinfrastructure."
That
line makes it sound as if the creation of this database could be
a direct response to the rampant allegations of Russian
interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election — though
President Donald Trump, who has normalized the term "fake
news," can't
seem to decide whether
that's even an issue or not.
Facebook
CEO Mark Zuckerberg thinks it is. Earlier this week, he announced the
social networking site would remove "more than 270
pages and accounts operated by a Russian organization called the
Internet Research Agency" in an effort "to protect the
integrity of elections around the world."
Within
the context of increasing concerns over "fake news" and
foreign interference in elections, an action such as the DHS's
database might seem, at first glance, to be a sensible approach.
Not
exactly.
Unfortunately, increasing
government encroachment on the freedom of the press is the
sinister backdrop to all of this. Freedom House, which has
monitored the status of the press for nearly 40 years,
recently concluded that global
media freedom has
reached its lowest level in the past 13 years. The independent
watchdog organization blames "new threats to journalists
and media outlets in major democracies" as well as "further
crackdowns on independent media in authoritarian countries like
Russia and China." And then it goes one step further.
"But
it is the far-reaching attacks on the news media and their place in a
democratic society by Donald Trump, first as a candidate and now as
president of the United States, that fuel predictions of further
setbacks in the years to come," the report said.
Could
the DHS media database be such a setback?
Possibly,
and it's not even the first time potential regulation of journalists
has drifted across the American political scene.
Last
October, an Indiana lawmaker proposed that journalists
be licensed.
Representative Jim Lucas's bill was mostly a publicity stunt, but
could this DHS action be a way for the government to keep track
of American and foreign journalists as well as “citizen
journalists," threatening not only the freedom of the press but
also individual freedom of speech?
The
real question, of course, is what the government plans to do with the
information it compiles, and there's been no comment on that beyond
what is in the posting, which, by the way, has interest from at least
seven companies. Will
those on the DHS media database be questioned more harshly
coming in and out of the country? Will they have trouble getting
visas to go to certain countries for their own reporting or personal
vacations? Worse?
Speaking
of visas — and showing that social media activity is
squarely on the radar of this Administration — earlier
this week, the State Department placed two notices in the Federal
Register seeking comments on its proposal to require that all visa
applicants to the U.S. turn
over their social media information for
the previous five years.
Regarding
the DHS media database, we are entering potentially dangerous
territory with the government keeping track of the
"sentiment" of citizens and foreign nationals. If not legal
challenges from organizations that defend press freedom and
freedom of speech interests, the government should expect, at the
very least, backlash from the public.
And
that means you. If you think the idea of the U.S. government's
compiling and monitoring a list of media professionals and "top
media influencers" is a potential threat to democracy, now would
be the perfect time to call your local and congressional
representatives to let them know how much you value a free
press and the freedom of speech, just in case they've forgotten.
Sleep
tight, kids!
See also -
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.