Valutazione di stato, al quadrato L'#Anvur è già un'agenzia nominata dal governo e ai suoi ordini. La riforma in cantiere la renderà ancora più dipendente dal governo, come spiegato da Roars qui. Questa dipendenza sarà semplicemente più evidente.
La dipendenza dell'Anvur attuale è mostrata dal commento dell'attuale presidente dell'Anvur, #Uricchio, riportato in fondo da Beniamino Cappelletti Montano. Uricchio è stato eletto dal consiglio direttivo (di nomina comunque ministeriale) e non nominato dal ministro. Ma le sue parola mostrano che si comporta come se fosse stato nominato direttamente dal ministro.
La proposta di riforma dell'ANVUR rende finalmente evidente ciò che da anni era solo implicito: l’Agenzia è lo strumento con cui il governo attua il controllo centralizzato e indirizza le attività di università e ricerca.
La generazione Z del Perù guida il movimento contro la criminalità e la paralisi politica
La generazione Z del Perù guida le proteste contro la criminalità dilagante e gli anni di stallo politico, chiedendo un cambiamento sistemico dopo aver visto sette presidenti succedersi in un decennio.
Peru's Generation Z is leading protests against rampant crime and years of political deadlock -- demanding systemic change after watching seven presidents come and go in a decade.
Linux è pronto per il mainstream, ma con limiti: ecco cosa manca
#Linux ha compiuto un’evoluzione significativa passando da sistema operativo per esperti a soluzione accessibile per utenti comuni. Con il 6% di quota mercato in alcune aree, distribuzioni moderne e gaming potenziato, resta solo un ostacolo: la percezione degli utenti
We will meet at the 5 Callender Street entrance to the Cambridge Community Center. As part of the meetup, we will divide up the area around the Community Center and go searching for Ring and other cameras to add to our Surveillance Camera Map. We mapped some of the cameras in the area and expect there will be more.
The Cambridge Community Center is an eleven minute walk from the Central Square, Cambridge. Central Square is accessible by the Red Line MBTA stop and multiple bus routes.
Our next PPI board meeting will take place on 28.10.2025 at 20:00 UTC. The prior board meeting did not make quorum, and so we expect a fruitful meeting with high attendance.
All official PPI proceedings, Board meetings included, are open to the public. Feel free to stop by. We’ll be happy to have you.
What does psychosocial support look like in the face of spyware attacks and digital security threats? It can mean adapting care to the context, listening without rushing, and building protocols that protect both dignity and data. But we want to hear what it means to you and to those already integrating psychosocial support into their accompaniments — such as Fundación Acceso in Latin America and Digital Society of Africa during our next community call.
Learn more about the state of digital attacks on Human Rights Defenders, when researchers and experts come together to discuss a recently concluded report.
During this lab, you will establish a strong foundation in designing participatory and interactive sessions for both online and face-to-face formats. This will enable you to facilitate sessions that foster co-empowering, learning, and knowledge sharing, thereby advancing your work and that of your participants.
As national and regional efforts around digital sovereignty gain momentum, SplinterCon Paris will bring together technologists, researchers, and policymakers to consider what resilient, interconnected digital societies require today and in the future.
Joe, Steve and James discuss why we oppose Cambridge’s effort to install Flock ALPR cameras, what we are doing at the Boston Anarchist Bookfair, the Boston NoKings protest and CycloMedia.
Nous soutenons l'initiative de l'APRIL #AdieuWindows qui organise et rassemble les personnes souhaitant quitter Windows à l'occasion de la fin du support de Windows 10.
C'est le moment de passer à Linux en étant soutenu et bien entouré!🐧
Vous avez peut-être entendu parler de la fin du support de Windows 10 sans forcément y prêter attention, ou vous vous demandez si ça vous concerne. Faisons le point. De quoi est-il question ?...
J'ai commencé à vraiment utiliser Linux l'année dernière, quand j'ai sauté le pas sur un PC vieillissant. J'ai remplacé Windows 10 par Linux Mint. D'abord en double-boot, au cas où... Puis en simple boot, quand j'avais pris mes marques et migré mes données perso... Et maintenant j'installe Linux Mint sur toutes les machines que je récupère. C'est simple, efficace, rien à redire ! Seul mon PC de travail est encore sous Windows 10 (pas le choix) mais ça changera sûrement un jour. ^^
J’ai longtemps eu un double boot WinDOS/Ubuntu LTS, jusqu’en 2020, par là. Je passais tout mon temps sur Ubuntu. Et puis ma carte graphique n’a plus été prise en compte par les dernières versions de Ubuntu LTS ; je restais sur Ubuntu de 2016. J’ai donc laissé carrément tomber le PC − hors de question que je retourne sous WinDOS − pour un Raspberry Pi sous Raspberry Pi OS (Debian). J’avoue que j’ai été soulagé quand le Rapsberry Pi 5 à 16 Go est sorti.
mon seul frein pour utiliser linux sur ma machine principale (j'utilise déjà mint sur une autre machine) c'est d'avoir l'assurance de pouvoir bien faire tourner pro tools et ableton live, ainsi que d'avoir des drivers stables sur ma carte son.
Si l’on a un pc pas trop pourri, il y a moyen de mettre Windows 11 dessus. Linux, c’est bien, le soucis peut être les applications que l’on utilise, il faut qu’il y ait des alternatives.
💬Die teilnehmende Missbrauchsbeauftragte hat letzte Woche übrigens ein Grußwort an eine pro Chatkontrolle-Lobbyveranstaltung gerichtet. Die Verordnung müsse kommen. linkedin.com/posts/kerstin-cla…
Today, 16 October, marks an important moment: across Europe, policymakers, child rights advocates, tech representatives, children and young people are gathering in #Brussels for the ECLAG event “Back to Basics: Fighting sexual abuse with children at …
Faktencheck Aussagen der Missbrauchsbeauftragten zur freiwilligen Chatkontrolle 1.0 ("Interimsverordnung") eben: 1️⃣Will man diese Verordnung verlängern, braucht man nicht die für alle verpflichtende Chatkontrolle 2.0 samt Brechen von Verschlüsselung, die jetzt vorgeschlagen wird. 2️⃣Auf sexuelle Gewalt wird man kaum einmal durch Chatkontrolle aufmerksam. Eher schadet die qualitativ minderwertige Hinweisflut gezielten Ermittlungen und kostet Ressourcen. 3️⃣Verharmlosung durch Vergleich mit Metalldetektor: Unzählige gemeldete Chats sind trotz identischem Hashwert nicht strafrechtlich relevant: patrick-breyer.de/beitraege/ch…
🇫🇷 Französisch: Traduction du dossier Chat Control 2.0 🇸🇪 Schwedisch: Chat Control 2.0🇳🇱 Niederländisch: Chatcontrole
Inhalt der Seite:
Die Abschaffung des Digitalen Briefgeheimnisses
Hilf jetzt mit die Chatkontrolle zu stoppen…
Inizia:Martedì Ottobre 21, 2025 @ 7:00 PM GMT+02:00 (Europe/Rome)
Finisce:Martedì Ottobre 21, 2025 @ 9:00 PM GMT+02:00 (Europe/Rome)
Martedì 21 Ottobre torna il Log Out!
Log Out è il ritrovo dei Tech Worker che dopo il lavoro vogliono incontrarsi. Un aperitivo per conoscersi e confrontarsi, per parlare di lavoro (ma anche altro) con persone che potrebbero benissimo essere nostri colleghi, se solo non lavorassero altrove 😊
Sezione bolognese di @twcita. Uno spazio per discussioni di rilevanza locale tra tech worker. Dove ci si organizza, tra una balotta e l'altra. Info & regolamento: https://t.me/twcitagruppo/80268/80519
Cambridge PD says the data won’t be shared outside of Cambridge and people’s rights will be protected, but Flock hasn’t agreed to this limitation. We know that Flock shares the data widely. Once the ALPR records and video are in Flock’s system, they are as good in ICE’s hands or the hands of any other police department who wants to track people.
At this Monday’s Cambridge City Council on Oct. 20th at 5:30pm, Cambridge PD will defend the rollout of these cameras. City Councilors Patty Nolan, Sumbul Siddiqui and Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler have called for reconsidering introducing more cameras to Cambridge. Sign up to speak against the rollout of Flock cameras. All you need to do is choose the meeting and fill out the form. You can present your comment in person or remotely and you will have between one and three minutes to speak, depending on the number of people asking to comment. Be sure to mention if you are a Cambridge resident. Also, election day is November 4th.
We encourage Cambridge residents, especially those near the proposed camera sites to attend the Pole and Conduit Commission meeting. The registration link is up.
We are not alone in opposing this effort. Digital 4th, the ACLU, Cambridge DSA and others are turning people out. We need to lend our voice and get this surveillance expansion stopped!
ICE, Secret Service, Navy All Had Access to Flock's Nationwide Network of Cameras
A division of ICE, the Secret Service, and the Navy’s criminal investigation division all had access to Flock’s nationwide network of tens of thousands of AI-enabled cameras that constantly track the movements of vehicles, and by extension people, according to a letter sent by Senator Ron Wyden and shared with 404 Media. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the section of ICE that had access and which has reassigned more than ten thousand employees to work on the agency’s mass deportation campaign, performed nearly two hundred searches in the system, the letter says.
In the letter Senator Wyden says he believes Flock is uninterested in fixing the room for abuse baked into its platform, and says local officials can best protect their constituents from such abuses by removing the cameras entirely.
The letter shows that many more federal agencies had access to the network than previously known. We previously found, following local media reports, that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) had access to 80,000 cameras around the country. It is now clear that Flock’s work with federal agencies, which the company described as a pilot, was much larger in scope.
This post is for subscribers only
Become a member to get access to all content Subscribe now
The Netherlands once again finds itself at a political crossroads. Less than two years after a coalition government collapsed under the weight of internal tensions, Dutch voters are preparing to decide what kind of leadership they want for their future.
On the 29th of October, Dutch people will be going to the polls to elect a new Tweede Kamer (Dutch lower house). Initially, the next elections were scheduled for 2028, but due to the fall of the 2024 cabinet, snap elections were called for.
On the 3rd of June, Geert Wilders, leader of the far-right conservative party PVV (Party for Freedom), walked away from the coalition due to different views on asylum policies. The cabinet led by Dick Schoof as prime minister ended with his resignation. The upcoming elections thus pose an opportunity for voters to shape the composition of their parliament anew.
The elections held in November 2023 led to talks that concluded in 2024, with the coalition appointing the independent Schoof as prime minister. The coalition was formed by the Party for Freedom (PVV), the largest party in the House of Representatives, with the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), New Social Contract (NSC), and the Farmer–Citizen Movement (BBB). The coalition was marked by its delicate nature and Wilders’ inability to converse with his fellow coalition members, often alienating them due to his narrow, inflexible views on migration, asylum, and social policies.
As the elections approach, a first debate was held on the 12th of October. It was expected that the populist nature of Wilders would take centre stage; however, he withdrew from the campaign and did not participate in the debate. [Earlier in the week, he had been mentioned in the list of targets of a terrorist group, and so, for security reasons, he decided not to participate in the debate, even after the group had been arrested, security had confirmed it to be safe, and possibilities for venue changes and online allocations were suggested.] In his absence, the leader of D66 (Democracy 66), Rob Jetten, joined in his place.
The debate featured Dilan Yeşilgöz, the leader of VVD (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, a conservative-liberal party), Henri Bontenb from CDA (Christian Democratic Appeal), Frans Timmermans from the recently combined GroenLinks-PvdA party (social democracy, green politics), and Rob Jetten. Key debate topics included asylum policies, how to address the current housing crisis, health care practices, and issues in Gaza. Despite party leaders fixating on the language of the debate rather than the policy proposals and personal attacks, the key topics of the election agenda were raised.
Given Wilders’ absence from this weekend’s debate, other party leaders had the opportunity to present their positions more prominently. This offers a hopeful outlook, as his strongly right-aligned views were not the focal point, allowing voters to engage with other perspectives. Considering Wilders’ rigid stance on migration during the previous government, he may have alienated not only other parties but also segments of his own voter base.
According to polling conducted at the beginning of October (ipsos-publiek.nl/actueel/ipsos…), support for the PVV has declined compared to 2023, yet it remains the most popular party. The most notable change is the decline in support for the VVD and NSC, two former coalition parties. It is also key to highlight the rise in support for CDA, a party that has previously stated its preference to work with the VVD rather than the PVV. The shifting popularity of some parties from the previous coalition may signal a potential change in the composition of the next one. This could be encouraging news: the Netherlands might see a government more centrally aligned in its social and immigration policies and more open to dialogue. While the left and more progressive parties have yet to gain significant momentum (including the Dutch Pirate Party), there remains a possibility for a more moderate, centre-right coalition to emerge (rather than the previous extreme-right one).
So how are our Dutch Pirate Party colleagues faring?
The campaign has centered around the party leader Matthijs Pontier and focused on his appearances in public debates. The Piratenpartij Podcast has featured him and other candidates in discussions on the main Pirate points, and talking about Pirate Party history, and topics in the news.
With Dutch voters heading to the polls at the end of the month, there is still room for public opinion to evolve and for parties to rethink their alliances. For the moment, there is a cautious hope that the next Dutch government may take a more moderate path.
As protesters paint signs for another round of “No Kings” demonstrations this Saturday, journalists are getting ready in their own way: Charging camera batteries, notifying emergency contacts, and rinsing old tear gas off their shatter-resistant goggles.
At similar events since June, well over a hundred journalists have been injured, detained, or arrested by police. Now two cities — Los Angeles, California, and Chicago, Illinois — are expecting their largest protests since federal judges issued multiple rulings exempting the press from general dispersal orders and restricting law enforcement use of “less lethal” munitions.
Those are big wins on paper, but only if you know how to use them.
The law exists in two separate but unequal places: the court and the street. And you’ll never win a philosophical argument on a skirmish line.
Sure, you’re probably right. You’re armed with the First Amendment. But the average police officer is armed with a baton, handcuffs, body armor, tear gas, and at least a couple of guns. They may also be tired, overwhelmed, hungry, and see you standing between them and a bathroom break.
As they’ve been known to say, “You can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride.”
It’s no longer “Listen to me,” it’s ideally “Here’s a signed order from your boss.”
Covering a protest, an immigration raid, or an immigration hearing is no place to give up your rights. Instead, you can learn to invoke them more effectively.
The press is one of two professions (alongside religious practitioners) distinguished by its constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. Policing is the opposite, marked by rigid command structure and a sworn duty to enforce very specific codes and regulations.
But cops are supposed to be trained and held accountable by their department. They shouldn’t need reminding of the law they’re supposed to uphold. And it’s not the job of journalists to train them.
As professional communicators, journalists may find it more productive to translate conversations into the language of law enforcement.
For example, in California, it won’t get you very far to tell an officer you’re exempt from dispersal orders thanks to “Senate Bill 98.” You might be talking to a kid fresh out of the police academy or a detective pulled off desk duty to earn overtime. They have no idea what passed the statehouse four years ago. At best, they’re trained to speak in terms of “penal code.” Mentioning “Penal Code 409.7,” the statute established by that bill, might be your better ticket out of handcuffs. (This state law only applies to local law enforcement, not to federal operations like Immigration or Customs Enforcement or other Department of Homeland Security agencies.)
For journalists in the Chicago and Los Angeles areas, recent court rulings, including one for the LA Press Club in which I’m a plaintiff, have made things much clearer. Ideally you don’t need to print out 80 pages of preliminary injunctions. An officer will likely ignore that anyway, figuring it’s up to department lawyers to interpret. Instead, try to print the version of orders their boss(’s boss’s boss) was required to issue. The following list of PDFs are being updated as those materials are released by each agency, so use your judgment and print what might be applicable to your situation.
This is an earlier version based on an initial TRO. It will be updated with a newer version based on a more recent preliminary injunction, which is even more favorable to press.
DHS has not shared details on how this order was distributed. As a longer document, you may wish to only print the cover page along with pages 43 to 45, which contain the injunction itself.
This puts things in law enforcement terms — from the top of their command structure. It’s no longer “Listen to me,” it’s ideally “Here’s a signed order from your boss.”
You want a printed copy, since your phone could run out of battery, be lost, or shatter. And it’s never a good idea to hand your unlocked phone to police. Also, if you need to pull out these orders (or a press pass), state clearly what you’re reaching for before placing your hand in a pocket or bag. Officers don’t love those sorts of unannounced movements.
A piece of paper isn’t much of a shield from a raging officer swinging a baton and screaming, “Leave the area.” But if you can engage with them, you want to ensure the precious few words that they hear will resonate. And it bears repeating: Everyone has a boss.
Protests involve a lot of turnover on the front line, so you may never see the same officer twice. If possible, communicate early and often. Ask to meet a supervisor or public information officer during a calm moment, and get their name so you can ask for them if you have trouble later on.
Unfortunately, even a signed order from the chief isn’t always a “get out of jail free” card. After a temporary restraining order was issued against the LAPD this summer, officers still put several journalists in zip ties during a protest. Two lawyers who had won the TRO showed up with a copy of official paperwork instructing officers to leave press alone. After they handed it to the incident commander, police still drove two photojournalists away in the back of a squad car.
The LAPD later suggested those photographers were ”pretending to be media.” The pair’s credits include The Atlantic, The New Yorker, Business Insider, The Washington Post, New York Magazine, Rolling Stone, Mother Jones, and even a cover for Time magazine.
A federal judge later wrote of the LAPD, “The Court expresses no approval for this conduct. To the contrary, the evidence presented is disturbing and, at the very least, shows that Defendants violated the spirit if not the letter of the Court’s initial restraining order.”
Of course, the photojournalists beat the rap. But they didn’t beat the ride.
Attending a protest outside of LA or Chicago? You still have First Amendment rights, even if you don’t have a court order. The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker has been investigating and documenting serious violations in cities from New York to Portland, Oregon. If you experience or witness law enforcement violating press rights anywhere in the country, please send us tips and any available evidence to tips@pressfreedomtracker.us.
It’s been two weeks since Atlanta journalist Mario Guevara was deported and 207 days since Rümeysa Öztürk was arrested for co-writing an op-ed. Read on for more about this weekend’s planned protests, actions you can take to protect journalists, and events you can catch us at this month.
When the law’s on your side but ICE doesn’t care
As protesters paint signs for another round of “No Kings” demonstrations this Saturday, journalists are getting ready in their own way: charging camera batteries, notifying emergency contacts, and rinsing old tear gas residue off their shatter-resistant goggles.
Two cities — Los Angeles, California, and Chicago, Illinois — are expecting their largest protests since federal judges issued multiple rulings exempting the press from general dispersal orders and restricting law enforcement’s use of “less lethal” munitions.
Those are big wins for journalists, but only if they know how to use them. Our new deputy director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), Adam Rose, wrote about how journalists can prepare for the weekend. Read more here.
Administration ignores flotilla abuses
Three U.S. journalists have been abducted from aid flotillas bound for Gaza and detained by Israel. All three reported experiencing or witnessing abuse and even torture.
Photojournalist Noa Avishag Schnall recalled, “I was hung from the metal shackles on my wrists and ankles and beaten in the stomach, back, face, ear and skull by a group of men and women guards, one of whom sat on my neck and face, blocking my airways … Our cell was awoken with threats of rape.”
Jewish Currents reporter Emily Wilder said she “announced … ‘I’m a journalist, I’m press.’ The woman to my left hissed, ‘We don’t give a fuck,’ and the other dug her nails into my scalp and pulled me by my hair across the port.”
In normal times, this would be a major scandal. We joined Defending Rights & Dissent and others in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio explaining what should be obvious — the U.S. shouldn’t sit silently as its ally assaults its journalists. Read it here.
First rule of Qatari jets? Don’t talk about Qatari jets
We sued the Trump administration for refusing to share its legal rationale for approving the president’s acceptance of a $400 million jet from the Qatari government, despite the Constitution saying he can’t do that. Now the administration wants to strike our complaint, claiming the background discussion of the gifted jet is “impertinent” and “scandalous.”
That’s rich, especially weeks after the president’s frivolous defamation lawsuit against The New York Times got dismissed for rambling on about how he was once on WrestleMania and “The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air” (he’s since filed an amended complaint).
If fewer newspapers exist to request public records, does the government become less transparent? That’s the question at the heart of “Dark Deserts,” a new research paper by David Cuillier of the Freedom of Information Project at the Brechner Center for Advancement of the First Amendment and law student Brett Posner-Ferdman.
Cuillier told us about what he and Posner-Ferdman found and what it means for the public’s right to know. Read the interview here.
Standing with student journalists
Last week we told you about the lawsuit filed by The Stanford Daily to stop the Trump administration’s unconstitutional and appalling push to deport foreign students who say or write things it doesn’t like.
This week we joined the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, the First Amendment Coalition, and others in a legal brief in support of that important lawsuit.
The Senate passed Sens. Ted Cruz and Amy Klobuchar’s bill to protect themselves — but not you — from data broker abuses and otherwise allow federal lawmakers to censor the internet.
FPF’s Caitlin Vogus wrote for The Dallas Morning News about how the bill threatens journalism — for example, by stifling reporting on its co-sponsor vacationing while his constituents endure natural disasters. Read more here.
Pentagon reporters have now turned in their badges – but plan to keep reporting (The Guardian). Journalists told The Guardian, “the restrictions won’t stop the work, with some even saying they plan to take a more aggressive tack.” Good. The policy is highly unconstitutional, but it’s an opportunity to omit Pentagon lies and spin from reporting.
LAPD wants judge to lift an order restricting use of force against the press (LAist). Rose, who is also press rights chair for the LA Press Club, said that “Instead of holding the department accountable, the city is spending even more money to hire an outside law firm so they can effectively beg a judge for permission to keep assaulting journalists for just doing their job.”
Oct. 22: Join FPF’s Adam Rose and others on Oct. 22 at 3 p.m. EDT for an online conversation hosted by the American Constitution Society about the impact of federal law enforcement violence on your First Amendment rights. Register here.
Oct. 24: If you’re in Chicago and fortunate enough to not have to hide from ICE invaders, come to Northwestern for a panel on Oct. 24 at 10 a.m. CT featuring FPF Advocacy Director Seth Stern. We’ll discuss the numerous digital and physical challenges journalists are facing. Register here.
Oct. 29: FPF’s Caitlin Vogus will join an online panel of experts to break down how the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Trade Commission are targeting journalists and the First Amendment and how to fight back. Register here for the Center for Democracy and Technology’s Future of Speech 2025, “Working the Refs” panel on Oct. 29 at 12:10 p.m. EDT.
That same day, join us for a conversation about making public records-based reporting free, featuring Vogus as well as our Chair on Government Secrecy Lauren Harper, in conversation with leadership at Wired and 404 Media, including Wired global editorial director and FPF board member Katie Drummond. The event starts at 2 p.m. EDT; RSVP on Zoom here.
Oct. 30: Join an online discussion on Oct. 30 at 1 p.m. EDT about digital safety and legal rights for journalists reporting on immigration in the U.S., featuring FPF Director of Digital Security Harlo Holmes and several other experts from the U.S. Journalist Assistance Network. Register here.
A Creative Triage for a Feverish Planet: PACESETTERS Summit Polyclinic of Creative Practice
This November, the @pacesetters consortium is not hosting a conference. It is opening a Polyclinic of Creative Practice—a five-day, live-diagnosis summit in Málaga for Europe’s cultural immune system.
Forget siloed panels. This is a creative field hospital with seven distinct departments, each treating a different symptom of our stagnant status quo. We will be:
Featuring a keynote from Teresa Ribera, the Horizon Europe project will showcase its mid-term findings: proof that culture isn't a decorative flourish, but the very substrate of climate and social transformation. This is more than a meeting. It's a triage unit for the imagination. Your participation is a diagnostic tool.
👉 Arrive with symptoms. Leave with a treatment plan.
If fewer newspapers exist to request public records, does the government become less transparent? That’s the question at the heart of “Dark Deserts,” a new research paper by David Cuillier of the Freedom of Information Project at the Brechner Center for Advancement of the First Amendment and law student Brett Posner-Ferdman.
Cuillier, who’s taught more than 10,000 journalists, students, and citizens how to wrest public records from government agencies, told us about what he and Posner-Ferdman found and what it means for the public’s right to know.
Let’s start with the big finding of “Dark Deserts”: States with fewer local papers and weaker press associations are more likely to break public records laws. Why does that matter for everyday people?
This is incredibly important for all of us because we are reaching the transparency tipping point — where we will lose any effective ability to see what our governments are up to.
We know from research that public record laws directly lead to less corruption, cleaner drinking water, and safer restaurants. According to Stanford economist James Hamilton’s research, for every dollar spent on public records journalism, society benefits $287 in saved lives and more efficient government. Freedom of information ensures concrete benefits for all of us.
Yet, we are losing it very quickly. According to the Department of Justice’s own statistics, if you asked for a record in 2011, you would get it about 38% of the time. Now it’s down to 12%. We see the same downward trends in the states. What happens when it gets to 0%?
The death of transparency will affect all of us in the pocketbook, in the quality of government services we receive, and in the loss of liberties we hold sacred as Americans.
The death of transparency will affect all of us in the pocketbook, in the quality of government services we receive, and in the loss of liberties we hold sacred as Americans.
David Cuillier
Surprisingly, you found that having more digital-only media outlets doesn’t result in better public records request compliance. Why do you think that is, and what advice would you give to digital outlets trying to hold government accountable?
It is difficult to know for sure. For one, there aren’t as many data points to effectively measure their effects as well as we would like. For example, the Institute for Nonprofit News membership stands at about 500 so far and there are 3,143 counties in the country. A strong, local, independent digital outlet might have an effect on local compliance with public record laws, but there probably aren’t enough to have an impact on state agencies.
Also, while many are doing great work, I suspect they have less influence at a statewide level than newspapers. A lot of digital-only outlets don’t have the funds to sue for public records. Also, my sense is that government officials don’t take digital-only media outlets as seriously, and that politicians are essentially blowing them off and not considering them “real” journalism. That is too bad, because many are doing better journalism than legacy media.
Digital-only outlets will need to double down on public records. And support organizations like Freedom of the Press Foundation, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, MuckRock, state FOI coalitions, and others can help.
Beyond subscribing to their community’s newspaper or supporting funding for journalism, what can people who care about press freedom and transparency do to encourage state governments to take their public record laws seriously?
Of course, write to your local city council, legislator, governor, and congressional representatives. They listen if enough people speak up. But everyone says that, right? And how many people actually act?
The solutions will take much more work than strongly worded letters. It’s time for other institutions to fill the gap. Nonprofits with an agenda are probably our last hope — American Oversight, Heritage Foundation, Judicial Watch, ACLU, League of Women Voters, etc. A new citizen-driven nonprofit in Jacksonville, “Nassau County DOGE,” has been pushing for public records. Environmental groups and those seeking police reform and rights for transgender Americans are pushing for records. Whatever your passion is, join an organization that will fight for your right to know.
The solutions will take much more work than strongly worded letters. It’s time for other institutions to fill the gap.
David Cuillier
Then, we need strong coordinating bodies, such as state freedom of information coalitions, to help direct these energies toward real legislative reform and litigation. One thing I’ve noticed is that all it takes is one or two passionate people in a state to make a huge difference in freedom of information. It really is doable!
What states have the strongest public records law, and what sets them apart? If you had the power to rewrite public records laws, what’s the one thing you’d add or fix right away?
No state is perfect. But most of the studies indicate that the states with the best compliance overall with public record laws tend to be Washington, Idaho, Connecticut, and some others. The most effective changes to public records laws rely on four things.
First, we need mandatory attorney fee-shifting in every state, where agencies are required to cover the attorney fees of people who sue for public records and prevail. In the third of the states that have this, there are attorneys happy to sue on behalf of journalists and others, with the hope they will get paid.
Second, strong financial penalties for noncompliance are critically important. Washington is probably the most transparent state overall, because if an agency breaks the law, is sued, and loses, it can be forced to pay up to $100 per record per day that it dinged the requester around. That can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Third, elimination of search and redaction fees, which are abused terribly. There are some countries where no fees are charged at all, and it works very well. In reality, fees collect very little of the actual cost of administering public record laws — less than 1%-3% according to most studies. Yet, they are wielded by agencies to make people go away, particularly journalists.
Lastly, and probably most importantly, we need alternative enforcement mechanisms in addition to court. Not everyone can afford to hire an attorney and sue. We need independent information commissions in every state to enforce the law and punish bad agencies, as they have in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, and in more than 51 nations across the planet.
You’re also a member of the federal Freedom of Information Act Advisory Committee. What’s something you’d fix in the federal FOIA?
So many fixes, so little time.
The FOIA Advisory Committee, since its inception in 2014, has provided 67 recommendations to improve the law and process, yet the most substantive suggestions have mostly been ignored. Amendments every decade or so tweak the law but are insufficient in keeping up with increasing secrecy.
I’ve noticed that in Washington, D.C., there tends to be a culture of exceptionalism, that we are the king of democracy in the world and have the best law on the books. In reality, FOIA’s strength on paper is rated in the bottom half of the 140 nations that have public record laws — 78th, to be exact. That is embarrassing. So many improvements could be made if we swallow our pride and look to other countries for guidance.
FOIA’s strength on paper is rated in the bottom half of the 140 nations that have public record laws — 78th, to be exact. That is embarrassing.
David Cuillier
For example, we need an independent agency with the power to enforce the law on behalf of citizens, like we see in dozens of other countries. We need stiff penalties — even firing and jail time — for intentional noncompliance of FOIA, as they have in Ghana, Barbuda, and Finland. We need direct funding of FOIA offices by Congress to carry out the FOIA mission, particularly now as agencies are gutting staff. We need better technology to search for records and redact. We need FOIA to be applied to all branches of government, and to private corporations that conduct taxpayer-funded business on behalf of the government, as in South Africa, Armenia, and Colombia.
A lot of people consider these ideas extreme, yet they are common in other countries. We can do better.
La Quadrature du Net
in reply to La Quadrature du Net • • •Fin de Windows 10 : faisons le point
Framablogreshared this
Marie_Odile_Morandi e Framasoft reshared this.
Pezito
in reply to La Quadrature du Net • • •Arsène Ω🔻🌐🏳️🌈
in reply to La Quadrature du Net • • •Orlando
in reply to La Quadrature du Net • • •Numericatous
in reply to La Quadrature du Net • • •El_otro
in reply to La Quadrature du Net • • •Afchouya
in reply to La Quadrature du Net • • •vincent
in reply to La Quadrature du Net • • •