There's a fundamental misunderstanding among Assange supporters.

[cab67]

Many, if not most, argue that the prosecution of Julian Assange was somehow an assault on freedom of the press, and that other journalists will be hampered in their work.

But there's a fundamental flaw in that line of reasoning. Julian Assange is not, in fact, a journalist.

Legal definitions of "journalist" or "reporter" are neither uniform nor uniformly clear, and court decisions are not always (to my not-a-lawyer untrained eyes) consistent, but there are nevertheless limits on who can apply a shield law for protection against lawsuits or prosecution. This is why reporters at most news conferences wear badges identifying them as such.

Assange doesn't qualify under any of them. He doesn't work for a news agency (print, broadcast, online), and his purpose was not merely to disseminate information, but to push a specific political agenda.

Like what he did? Fine, I suppose. But stop calling him a journalist. He's a hacker. There's a difference.

[ret5hd]

1. the constitution doesn't specify who and...

under what circumstances someone will be considered a journalist.

start a neighborhood news flyer? you’re a journalist.

film cops stopping/arresting a total stranger? you’re a journalist.

no credentials, no badges, no training, no certification.

the supreme court (as of today) says so.

this does not indicate support or non- support of Assange. but the facts are what they are.

[cab67]

3. The constitution doesn't specify what a firearm is, either.

Nor does it specify what qualifies as an act of war, whether for purposes of declaring war or prosecuting people for treason.

There are Federal court decisions within the past 2 or 3 years that have deemed some people as "not journalists."

I never said certification was needed. It's used by journalists for admission to certain events (e.g. White House press conferences), and that's because not everyone who calls themself a "journalist" really is one. The point wasn't that one needs such credentials to be called a "journalist;" it was that lay and legal understandings of the word are not always the same, and the use of credentials in some cases reflects that.

I agree that court decisions have been back and forth in some points, but no court has ever found that the mere act of disseminating information, in and of itself, qualifies as "journalism."

[brush]

2. Those wikileak leaks helped give us trump.

IMO he's in Comey territory by disclosing internal Dem party correspondence that helped the Russians help trump win.

Now we've suffered thru one trump presidency and he's now a threat to our democracy if he wins again.

Assange did our nation and the world no favors by loosing trump's ass onto everyone.

[GreenWave]

8. And what did he leak about Trump or Epstein?

I guess he has fear of falling from 10th floor windows.

[brush]

9. Should've leaked about trump and Epstein before the '16 too.

Maybe that would've helped trump lose. Is that what you mean?

Hope so, cause Assange is, as I said, in Comey territory to me. Helped deprive us of a Hillary presidency and helped give us a trump one.

[red dog 1]

18. Not only did he disclose Democratic Party emails that helped the Russians make sure Trump won,

but he also SECRETLY helped the Trump campaign defeat Hillary in the 2016 election in other ways as well.

For example,
"In November, 2017, it was revealed that the Wikileaks Twitter account secretly corresponded with Donald Trump Jr. during the 2016 presidential election." (Wikipedia)
https://democraticunderground.com/1016380060

[LetMyPeopleVote]

4. I was at the 2016 National Convention when Assange released some of the Russian edited emails

I remember having to deal with the resignation of the then DNC chair and the anger of Sanders delegates. The Texas delegation had a mini riot due to in part these emails and the demand that Clinton delegates change their votes to Sanders and condemn Sec. Clinton.

In addition, a group of Sanders delegates yelled at my daughter and called her the c-Word because she would not try to get me to change my vote. My daughter was my guest and she got to attend the first night and see Michelle Obama.

Russia and Assange managed to disrupt the 2016 National Convention. I will not forgive Assange

[Flatrat]

5. Thanks for that

When one engages in partisan politics and is attempting as a mission to influence one side over another, that person is a propagandist, not a journalist.

There are far greater assaults on the freedom of the press than the legal pursuit of accused rapist Assange.

[live love laugh]

16. So Fox, NYT ... are propagandists?

[Bev54]

6. The problem is DOJ allowed him to plead to the espionage act for obtaining and disclose

secret documents. They should have had him plead to hacking but they did not.

[betsuni]

7. K&R

[socratesagain]

10. "I don't have to show you no stinkin' badges..."

Respectfully disagree, mate. Gutenberg needed no badge, nor did Ben Franklin, nor Tom Paine, for the matter. The university of democracy & life experience taught them critical thinking skills and the right to question any and all authority. Their consciences compelled them to report their findings.
Journalism school merely confers a diploma. A job at a news institution issues a paycheck for asking questions and reporting the answers. And a "badge" to make it look official, as in "a member of the club." Please don't get conned by the institutional party line and signifier-invocation used as convenient covers to imprison this courageous reporter.
Here's the reason the MSM fell into disrepute decades ago: because first, last and always these media remain spokesmen, frontmen and apologists for corporate America. Their job is to rake in profits. If the facts offend their advertisers and shareholders, the facts don't. get. aired. Period. Call these clowns anything but journalists and/reporters. It's a bit late in the day for that.
Be well.

[William769]

11. Welcome to DU.

[cab67]

12. I think you misread some of what I wrote.

I never said a badge or a degree were needed to be considered a journalist. I merely pointed out that, from a legal point of view, not everyone who releases written content is entitled to the protections given to journalists. Having a badge or whatnot is certainly good evidence that one is a proper journalist, but it isn't necessary.

As for your examples - standards change. Surgeons didn't always need an MD, and in some time periods, they were as likely as not to have been trained as barbers. Professors didn't always need terminal degrees. Peer review wasn't a thing until well into the 20th century. Some of the greatest jurists in history would not currently be allowed to practice law in the US, because the standards needed to do so didn't exist back then. Benjamin Franklin would probably be considered a journalist now because he published a newspaper, but Gutenberg would not; he published material that was already widely available in manuscript format.

(And welcome to DU!)

[markodochartaigh]

13. Here is a great breakdown on the case.

https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/06/26/the-damaging-precedent-of-the-julian-assange-espionage-guilty-plea/

[markodochartaigh]

14. For people whose reflex response is

"I support people exposing US war crimes so I support Assange", and this includes myself, there is a lot more to the story. Thom Hartmann has a great exposé. I support people who are nice to their Mothers, but I would want to know more about Stalin than just that he was nice to his Mother.

?feature=shared

[live love laugh]

15. Careful ... some here claim Hartmann is also a Russian asset,

though I find him to be trustworthy.

Thanks for the in depth info about this issue.

[markodochartaigh]

19. Thank you.

Yes, I'm aware that some people here are not on board with Thom, or probably anyone to the left of Joe Lieberman or Joe Manchin. I was banned from Daily Kos, it is probably only a matter of time before I'm banned here.

[iemanja]

17. and the fact he is a rapist?

naturally that doesn't matter. It's only a woman's body he violated, and God knows women mean nothing.

[moondust]

21. Some probably saw the Apache

helicopter shooting at civilians and were justifiably outraged and grateful to Assange for making it public. He's a whistleblower who must be free!!!

But they may not even be aware that Assange then released tons of classified information that likely endangered sources and methods and thus compromised U.S. national security and possibly NATO and Five Eyes.