Journalism is under attack. The tensions between the responsibilities of journalists and the prerogatives of the government when dealing with issues of national security are exacerbated by a body politic fortified by partisan certitude, by technology designed to ferret out confidential sources, and by nation-states with unknown agendas.
The U.S. government suffers from significant and damaging disclosures of classified information, and the secrecy bureaucracy is struggling to adapt to a world where the locus of control over national security information is distributed, and where secrets themselves are an increasingly perishable commodity. And whistleblowers find themselves in the most precarious state of all. There is no guidebook for them; there are few means for them to convey their concerns responsibly without attracting a partisan following that can diminish or cast aspersions on their own motives and efforts.
This conference hopes to meaningfully advance the understanding of four broad challenges, using the conference as a point of departure to inject fresh thinking about these critical issues into the public sphere.
The first issue involves the responsible reporting of national security crises: while such events are inherently newsworthy, journalists must grapple with the troubling reality, born out by experience and by scholarship on how audiences consume information, that such reporting can fuel more terrorist attacks by stoking public fear and providing the terrorists with the kind of visibility they seek for their cause. Independent media coverage of their actions can have a reinforcing impact on terrorists’ violent narratives while glorifying the image of those in charge.
The second topic for discussion is how best to ensure the physical and legal safety of journalists, as well as the integrity of the constitutionally protected freedom of the press. Journalists can face, easily, and without consequence for the perpetrators, malevolent online harassment campaigns, hate-based attacks, or related physical threats or intimidation, due to their race, religion, or nationality, and such conduct can affect the coverage of national security matters, whether directly or indirectly. Because newsroom budgets have been pared down, reporters are often sent into disaster zones and denied areas without back-up. The best efforts to protect critical sources can now be bypassed using communications metadata to identify sources who may be reluctant to reveal their communications with the media.
Third: the re-publishing of unauthorized disclosures of classified information by WikiLeaks or other such third-party, quasi-journalistic outlets, or independent platforms with cultures of disclosure that differ from the established media’s formal processes and well-considered habits. In such cases, the disclosed information usually remains classified, and intelligence agencies are unlikely to acknowledge whether the leaks are based on bona fide classified documents regardless of independent coverage. When dealing with these disclosures, how should news organizations that operate according to more conventional ethical codes disseminate such information?
The fourth challenge relates to the advent of “fake news” and its use as a weapon of asymmetric warfare. It has become a national security threat. Our recent electoral experience with foreign disinformation raises the question of the responsibilities vested in journalists, private firms, and the government to protect democracy from foreign political subversion through the dissemination of “fake news” intended to affect political discourse or undermine national security. The field is professionally unprepared for this new reality.
This two-day, workshop-style conference consisting of experts from such diverse fields as the law, academia, the media, the national security establishment, and the whistleblowing community, will explore these complex legal and ethical problems through a series of moderated sessions.
The objective is to foster a constructive, interdisciplinary dialogue among people who do not often talk with one another and to provide all participants with a more nuanced appreciation of the issues that lie at the intersection of journalism and national security. We also hope to provide solutions, even temporary ones, to the problems we’ve identified.
This event is co-sponsored by the Annenberg School for Communication (ASC), the Center for Advanced Research in Global Communication at ASC, the Middle East Center at the University of Pennsylvania, and the law firm of Miller & Chevalier.
All private conference proceedings will be held in Room 500 of the Annenberg School for Communication (ASC) at 3620 Walnut Street on the University of Pennsylvania campus.
Public Keynote Address:
The public keynote portion of the conference will be held in Kirby Auditorium at the National Constitution Center (NCC) at 525 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106.
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9
|8:30 – 9:30 am:||Registration and Continental BreakfastAnnenberg School For Communication3620 Walnut Street – Room 500Transportation to conference not provided|
|9:30 – 9:45 am:||Welcoming Remarks: Claire Finkelstein, Algeron Biddle of Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy, University of Pennsylvania Law School and CERL Faculty Director Michael Delli Carpini, Walter H. Annenberg Dean and Professor of Communication, Annenberg School of Communication, University of Pennsylvania|
|9:45 – 11:00 am:||Session 1 – The carnage of war, terrorist attacks, and classified information: What are a journalist’s ethical limits on reporting? Beyond the coverage of acts of terror, journalists’ textual and photographic coverage of armed conflict and violent atrocities abroad (e.g., lines of refugees, grief-stricken mothers, images of American soldiers in body bags) can have a direct influence on public opinion and, thus, impact the counterterror efforts of governments. News outlets say they operate with the understanding that what they choose to cover and how they choose to do so shapes public discourse. To what extent, then, should journalists and their publishers pursue the dissemination of coverage related to violence and terror given the risk of dangerous blowback at home and abroad? How should this risk be balanced against the need for an informed society and educated public debate? What actual choices do editors have, given the constraints of audience, budget and attention?Moderator: Prof. William Burke-White, Director, Perry World House|
|11:00 – 11:30 am:||Break (refreshments served)|
|11:30 am – 12:45 pm:||Session 2 – Leaks of classified information and whistleblower protection: Do the laws strike the right balance for journalists? A surplus of leaks of national security information in recent years has turned into a geyser in the new administration. Has the relationship between the executive branch changed enough to warrant a more adversarial approach? Is it time for a federal shield law with teeth? What steps should journalists take before publication to balance equities? How can whistleblowers utilize formal and informal mechanisms to make their cases public? Under what circumstances (if any) may whistleblowers violate their oaths? Should the motive of the whistleblower —or the source of classified information — matter? How can whistleblowers better protect themselves from criminal, civil, and governmental harassment? Moderator: Marc Ambinder, journalist-in-residence, CERL and ASC|
|12:45 – 2:15 pm:||Lunch at The Inn at Penn|
|2:15 – 3:30 pm:||Session 3 – Court subpoenas and government surveillance: Have our laws left journalists too exposed? Mass surveillance, targeted surveillance, data retention, expanded and broad anti-terror measures and national security laws all compromise the ability of journalists to protect the confidentiality of their sources. Journalists have also been complicit: their cyber hygiene is often subpar. What are best practices in this area? Should reporters’ metadata be granted additional protection under the law? Do laws and governmental practices intimidate and inhibit effective journalism?Moderator: Carrie Cordero|
|3:30 – 4:00 pm:||End of Conference Programming – Day 1|
|3:45 – 4:30 pm:||Participants are transported to the National Constitution Center (NCC)|
|5:00 – 6:30 pm:||Keynote Panel – Freedom of the Press and National Security in the Trump Era: Reconciling Competing Values in Democratic Governance – (moderated discussion) at the NCC|
This Keynote Panel has been approved for 1.5 ethics CLE credits for Pennsylvania lawyers. CLE credit may be available in other jurisdictions as well. Attendees seeking CLE credit should bring separate payment in the amount of $60.00 ($30.00 public interest/non-profit attorneys) cash or check made payable toThe Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania.Moderator: Jeffrey Rosen, President and CEO, National Constitution CenterKeynote participants: Helle Dale, Laura Handman, James Risen, Charlie Savage
|6:30 – 7:30 pm:||Cocktails for conference participants at the NCC|
|7:30 – 9:00 pm:||Dinner for conference participants at the NCC|
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 10
|8:30 – 9:30 am:||Registration and Continental BreakfastAnnenberg School For Communication3620 Walnut Street – Room 500Transportation to conference not provided|
|9:30 – 10:45 am:||Session 4 – Protecting society from fake news and weaponized information: European and American perspectives. Does the government and private sector have an ethical duty to do more? Prior restraints and media blackouts under European law are counterbalanced in the United States by an influential lobby that argues loudly that any legal constraints on technology will stunt its development, and by a strong (perhaps overbroad?) First Amendment tradition. Do new times — and new weapons — call for new compromises? Moderator: Dean Michael Delli Carpini|
|10:45 – 11:15 am:||Break (refreshments served)|
|11:15 am – 12:30 pm:||Session 5 – Journalists at risk: online harassment, physical attacks and intimidation: Journalists can face, easily, and without consequence for the perpetrators, malevolent online harassment campaigns, hate-based attacks, or related physical threats or intimidation, due to their race, religion, or nationality, and such conduct can affect the coverage of national security matters, whether directly or indirectly. In conflict zones, as embedded journalists or while on their own, the risks are acute and the ethical challenges can be significant. Is there a distinction between the way the government and companies should protect ordinary citizens and journalists? Is embedded journalism inherently “tainted” by the circumstances under which it is produced? Because newsroom budgets have been pared down, reporters are often sent into disaster zones and denied areas without adequate back-up; what legal and ethical responsibilities do corporations have to protect their employees?Moderator: Susan D. Moeller|
|12:30 – 1:30 pm:||Lunch at The Annenberg School For Communication – Plaza Lobby|
|1:30 – 2:45 pm:||Session 6 – National Security Journalism In the Age of Trump: Although change in journalism is constant, no single factor has so rapidly upended the decision rules that reporters and editors abide by than the man who now has the power of the executive branch at his command: President Donald Trump. Should journalists treat him as simply another power to hold to account? As an existential threat to democracy? Do aggressive efforts to restore political norms violate journalism’s ethical codes? How can journalists better persuade audiences about the importance of critical national security matters in this age of information anarchy? Moderator: Katherine Eban|
|2:45 – 3:00 pm:||Concluding remarks by CERL Faculty Director Prof. Claire Finkelstein|
CERL journalist-in-residence, editor-at-large, The Week
Columbia Law School (Emeritus)
Freelance Journalist; former senior journalist, Center for Public Integrity; former Moscow bureau chief and diplomatic and military editor, Associated Press
Clinical Lecturer in Law; Associate Research Scholar in Law; and Stanton First Amendment Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School
Dean of the Klein College of Media and Communication, Temple University
Executive Director, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Richard Perry Professor and Inaugural Director, Perry World House, and Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania
Counsel, ZwillGen PLLC
Chairman, Federal Systems; CERL Board Member
Chief Administrative Officer, Avaya; Member, Penn Law Board of Overseers
Vice President and Editor at Large for Standards, Associated Press
Dean, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania
Former Senior Executive, National Security Agency
Investigative Journalist; Contributor, Fortune; former staff writer, The New York Times and New York Observer
Partner, Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP; CERL Board Member
Co-Founder and Faculty Director of CERL, Algernon Biddle Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy, University of Pennsylvania
Brian Fleming, Esq.
Member, Miller & Chevalier Chartered
Lecturer, Marketing Officer, University of South Hampton
Professor of Law, Ave Maria School of Law; CERL Board Member
Clinical Associate Professor, New York University
CERL Executive Board Chair; Board of Directors, National Public Radio; Chairman of the Board, Capital Research and Management Company (ret.)
Partner, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Director of Innovation Projects, Lenfest Institute for Journalism
Director of Business & Sponsorships at The American Law Journal
Kenneth W. Gemmill Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School
Director of the Ph.D. Program and Assistant Professor, George Mason University
Professor and Department Chair, Department of Philosophy, Dalhousie University; CERL Board Member
National Security Legal Fellow, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Executive Director, National Security Counselors
Vice President and Assistant General Counsel, The New York Times
Executive Vice President/Chief Operating Officer, WHYY
Professor of Media and International Affairs and Director of the International Center for Media and the Public Agenda, Philip Merrill College of Journalism, University of Maryland
Professor and Department Chair, Department of Philosophy, University of Maryland; CERL Board Member
Norman Dorsen Professor of Civil Liberties and Founding Legal Director of the Brennan Center for Justice, New York University School of Law
Retired Colonel of combined service in the United States Marine Corps and the United States Army and AGOGE founder
Investigative Journalist, The Intercept and First Look Media
Associate Professor of Philosophy, University of Arizona; CERL Board Member
President and Chief Executive Officer, National Constitution Center
CERL Executive Director
Washington Correspondent; The New York Times
Senior Medical Journalist, Reuters; Ethics Committee Chairperson, Society of Professional Journalists
President and Director of the Sheller Family Foundation
Director, Customer Success at CrossLead, Inc.; Former Senior CIA Case Officer
Executive Director, Women in International Security Canada Inc.
CNN National Security Affairs analyst, and former Director of Public Affairs, Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Brigadier General and Medical Corps officer (ret.), United States Army; CERL Board Member
Attorney at Law; CERL Board Member
Raymond Williams Professor of Communication, Director, Scholars Program in Culture and Communication, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania
Panel 1: The carnage of war, terrorist attacks, and classified information: What are a journalist’s ethical limits on reporting?
Paul Chadwick, Reporting on Terror Without Feeding It, THE GUARDIAN (June 9, 2017), https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/09/reporting-on-terror-without-feeding-it
Raphael Cohen-Almagor, Media Coverage of Acts of Terrorism: Troubling Episodes and Suggested Guidelines, 30 CANADIAN J. COMMUNICATION, no. 3, 2005, http://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/viewFile/1579/1735
Marc D. Felman, The Military/Media Clash and the New Principle of War: Media Spin, SCHOOL OF ADVANCED AIRPOWER STUDIES (2012), http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?rep=rep1&type=pdf&doi=10.1.1.176.4411
Megan Garber, The Malaysia Air Crash: Should We Publish Pictures of Bodies?, THE ATLANTIC (July 17, 2014), https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/a-verified-newsphoto-doesnt-have-to-be-a-published-news-photo/374626/%C2%A0
Brigette L. Nacos, Revisiting the Contagion Hypothesis: Terrorism, News Coverage, and Copycat Attacks, 3 PERSP. ON TERRORISM, no. 3, 2009, http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/73/html
Karen C. Sinai, Shock and Awe: Does the First Amendment Protect a Media Right of Access to Military Operations, 22 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT. L.J. 179, 218 (2004), http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/caelj22&id=187&collection=journals&index=
THE WAR YOU DON’T SEE (Dartmouth Films 2011), https://vimeo.com/67739294
Panel 2: Leaks of classified information and whistleblower protection: Do the laws strike the right balance for journalists?
Court case: Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 US 514 – 2001
Criminal Prohibitions On the Publication of Classified Information (CRS, 2013), at https://fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf
Cory Bennett, Charges show peril for leakers, journalists alike, POLITICO, (June 6, 2017), http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/06/journalists-leaks-security-government-239215
Yochai Benkler, A Free Irresponsible Press: Wikileaks and the Battle Over the Soul of the Networked Fourth Estate, 46 HARV. C.R.-C.L. L. REV. 311 (2011), https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/10900863/benkler.pdf?sequence=1
Suelette Dreyfus, Reeva Lederman, Simon K Milton & Jessie Schanzle, Human Sources: The Journalist and the Whistleblower in the Digital Era, in JOURNALISM RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION IN A DIGITAL WORLD, 48 (A.J Brown, David Lewis, Richard Moberly & Wim Vandekerckhove ed., 2014), https://andrewclausen.net/HumanSources.pdf
Thomas Drake, “Why Are We Subverting The Constitution In The Name of Security,” Washington Post, August 25, 2011. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-are-we-subverting-the-constitution-in-the-name-of-security/2011/08/25/gIQANnrheJ_story.html?utm_term=.3b08dc67faeb
Hannah Gurman, Unfit to Print: The Press and the Credibility of the Contra-gate Whistleblowers. An original paper produced for the CERL conference.
Sam Lebovic, Free Speech and Unfree News: The Paradox of Press Freedom in America (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2016) (EXCERPTS)
Mary-Rose Papandrea, Leaker, Traitor, Whistleblower, Spy: National Security Leaks and the First Amendment, 94 B.U.L. REV. 449 (2014), http://www.bu.edu/bulawreview/files/2014/05/PAPANDREA.pdf
David E. Pozen, The Leak Leviathan: Why the Government Condemns and Condones Unlawful Disclosures of Information, in Harv. L. Rev. 127, 512 (2013), https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/vol127_pozen.pdf
Nathan Alexander Sales, Can Technology Prevent Leaks?, 8 J. NAT’L SECURITY L. & POL’Y 73 (2015), https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2668646
CITIZENFOUR (HBO Films 2014), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8nU6Suh57k
Panel 3: Court subpoenas and government surveillance: Have our laws left journalists too exposed?
Matt Apuzzo, Times Reporter Will Not Be Called to Testify in Leak Case, N.Y TIMES, Jan 12, 2015, at A1, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/13/us/times-reporter-james-risen-will-not-be-called-to-testify-in-leak-case-lawyers-say.html?mcubz=3
Brad A. Greeneburg, The Federal Media Shield Folly, 91 WASH. U. L. REV. 437 (2013), http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6047&context=law_lawreview
William E. Lee, A Revisionist View of Journalist’s Privilege: Justice Powell, Branzburg and the “Proper Balance”, 34 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT LJ 113 (2016), http://www.heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/caelj34&id=127&collection=journals&index=
William E. Lee, The Demise of the Federal Shield Law, 30 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT LJ 27 (2012), http://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/Journal%20Issues/Volume%2030/Issue%201/Lee.pdf
Jack Lerner & Rom Bar-Nissim, Law Enforcement Investigations Involving Journalists, Chapter 10 in WHISTLEBLOWERS, LEAKS AND THE MEDIA: THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND NATIONAL SECURITY (2014), https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2530799
Adam Liptak, A High Tech War on Leaks, N.Y. TIMES (Feb 11, 2012), http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/sunday-review/a-high-tech-war-on-leaks.html?mcubz=3
Jonathan Peters & Edson C. Tandoc, Jr., People Who Aren’t Really Reporters At All, Who Have No Professional Qualifications: Defining a Journalist and Deciding Who May Claim The Privileges, 2013 N.Y.U. J. LEGIS. & PUB. POL’Y QUORUM 34,http://www.nyujlpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Peters-Tandoc-Quorum-2013.pdf
Charlie Savage & Leslie Kaufman, Phone Records of Journalists Seized by U.S., N.Y. TIMES (May 13, 2013), http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/14/us/phone-records-of-journalists-of-the-associated-press-seized-by-us.html?mcubz=3
Gabriel Schoenfeld, Time for a Shield Law?, NATIONAL AFFAIRS, Spring 2014, at 87, https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/time-for-a-shield-law%C2%A0
Edward Wasserman, Safeguarding the News in the Era of Disruptive Sources, 32 J. MEDIA ETHICS, no.2, 2017, at 72, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23736992.2017.1294020
UNESCO, Protecting Journalism Sources in the Digital Age (April 27, 2017), 11-13, 87-94, http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002480/248054E.pdf
Panel 4: Protecting society from “fake news” and weaponized information:
Michael Barthel, Amy Mitchell & Jesse Holcomb, Many Americans Believe Fake News Is Sowing Confusion, PEW RESEARCH CENTER, (Dec. 15 2016), http://www.journalism.org/2016/12/15/many-americans-believe-fake-news-is-sowing-confusion/
Naima Bouteldja, Fake news ‘symptomatic of crisis in journalism’, Aljazeera (Apr 12, 2017), http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/04/fake-news-symptomatic-crisis-journalism-170412092154717.html
Helle Dale, “Russian Weaponization of Information.” Testimony presented to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, April 15, 2015. http://www.heritage.org/testimony/russias-weaponization-information
Elizabeth Dwoskin, Caitlin Dewey & Craig Timberg, Why Facebook and Google are Struggling to Purge Fake News, WASH. POST, (Nov. 15 2016), https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/why-facebook-and-google-are-struggling-to-purge-fake-news/2016/11/15/85022897-f765-422e-9f53-c720d1f20071_story.html?utm_term=.43bf788b5d25
Anthony Faiola & Stephanie Kirchner, How do you stop fake news? In Germany, with a law, WASH. POST (Apr. 5, 2017), https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/how-do-you-stop-fake-news-in-germany-with-a-law/2017/04/05/e6834ad6-1a08-11e7-bcc2-7d1a0973e7b2_story.html?utm_term=.9295be74774d%C2%A0
Matthew Hindman, Journalism Ethics and Digital Audience Data, in REMAKING THE NEWS: ESSAYS ON THE FUTURE OF JOURNALISM SCHOLARSHIP IN THE DIGITAL AGE 177 (Pablo J. Boczkowski & C.W. Anderson ed., 2017), https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1pwt5kk
David O. Klein & Joshua R. Wueller, Fake News: A Legal Perspective, 20 J. INTERNET L., no. 10, 2017, at 1, 6-13, http://www.kleinmoynihan.com/fake-news-a-legal-perspective/
Meredith A. Levine, Journalism Ethics and the Goldwater Rule in a “Post-Truth” Media World, 45 J. AM. ACAD. PSYCHIATRY & LAW, no. 2, June 2017, at 241, http://jaapl.org/content/45/2/241
Philip N. Meyer, A Tale of 2 Stories, A.B.A.J., June 2017, at 22, http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/alternative_facts_law_justice_reality
Angela Phillips, Transparency and the New Ethics of Journalism, 4 JOURNALISM PRAC. 373 (2010), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233355222_Transparency_And_The_New_Ethics_Of_Journalism
Jacob L. Nelson, Is ‘fake news’ a fake problem?, COLUM. JOURNALISM REV. (Jan. 11, 2017), https://www.cjr.org/analysis/fake-news-facebook-audience-drudge-breitbart-study.php
Scott Shane, The Fake Americans Russian Created To Influence the Election, New York Times, October 30, 2017, at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/politics/russia-facebook-twitter-election.html?_r=0
Amanda Taub, The Real Story About Fake News Is Partisanship, N.Y. TIMES, Jan. 11 2017, at A3, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/upshot/the-real-story-about-fake-news-is-partisanship.html?mcubz=3
Aidan White, Facebook and Matters of Fact in the Post-Truth Era, in ETHICS IN THE NEWS, 14 (Aidan White Ed., 2017), https://blog.wan-ifra.org/2017/01/10/facebook-and-matters-of-fact-in-the-post-truth-era
Panel 5: Journalists at risk: online harassment, physical attacks and intimidation
Committee To Protect Journalists: Covering News In A Changing and Dangerous World, Chapter 4: Armed Conflict: https://cpj.org/reports/2012/04/armed-conflict.php
Patrick Cockburn, “Embedded Journalists: A Distotred View of the War,” The Independent, 2010 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/opinion/embedded-journalism-a-distorted-view-of-war-2141072.html
Fahmy, S., & Johnson, T. (2007). Embedded Versus Unilateral Perspectives on Iraq War.Newspaper Research Journal, 28(3), 98,99-98,99. Retrieved March 25, 2015, fromhttps://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=Embedded Versus Unilateral Perspectives on Iraq War&btnG=&as_sdt=1,39&as_sdtp=
Kylie Tuosto, The “Grunt Truth” of Embedded Journalism: The New Media/Military Relationship, 10 STAN J. INT’l L. 18-31 (2015) https://web.stanford.edu/group/sjir/pdf/journalism_real_final_v2.pdf
Wojciech Adamczyk, Killed in Action: Female Investigative Reporters, War Correspondents and Local Journalists, and the Risk of Death or Becoming a Victim of Violence, 3 SRODKOWO EUROPEJSKIESTUDIA POLITYCZNE 77 (2014), https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=290112
Stephen Jukes, Journalists at risk: looking beyond just physical safety (Sept. 2015) (unpublished working paper) (on file with Cardiff University School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies), http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/23308/
Joanne M. Lisosky & Jennifer Henrichsen, Don’t Shoot the Messenger: Prospects for Protecting Journalists in Conflict Situations, 2 MEDIA, WAR & CONFLICT 129 (2009), http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1750635209104651
Ben Saul, The International Protection of Journalists in Armed Conflict and Other Violent Situations, 14 AUSTRALIAN J. HUM. RTS 99 (2008), https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1485844
Panel 6: National Security Journalism In the Age of Trump
Samantha Power, Why Foreign Propaganda Is More Dangerous Now, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 19, 2017, https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/why-foreign-propaganda-more-dangerous-now
S.I. Strong, Alternative Facts and the Post-Truth Society: Meeting the Challenge, 165 U. PA. L. REV. 137 (2017), http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review_online/vol165/iss1/14/
For any questions regarding the conference or registration, please contact: Jennifer Cohen at email@example.com