Twice Cryptome has been rejected as a journalist
due to not being a "commercial publisher."
Providing free information does not qualify.
Well established is threat to moneymaking as the means for controlling journalism. All "reputable" news outlets check with authorities before publishing official secrets. Boards of directors, editors, investors and journalists just will not jeopardize profits and regulators know that is their Achilles Heel.
Information broker is a new one to us. Appears to be a means to negate constitutional privilege of the press. Problem with it is that every professional is an information broker, so too governments, religions, educators, politician, all shading their information for sales. In the end so are journalists since by fundamental intention their information is lurid, enticing, slanted, biased, "truthy," forever "breaking," headline-hawked, censorious, chaste or sexual, crime-and-war-loving, scandalous, puerile, time-wasting, above all ad-bloated.
WikiLeaks is angelic by comparison with self-obsessed devilish journalism, business, spies and governments. Therefore it must be banished, Assange publicly burned at the stake.
An alternative to being BBQ'd, Assange could revert to his original operation of disparaging journalism as a corrupt industry, forgo hiding behind royal privilege. Popular support could return rather than wither and applaud his losing The Lottery (vite Shirley Jackson).
A government pardon of Assange would commit him to the zoo-cage of New York Times/Washington Post performing monkeys of Ellsberg, Manning and via Putin, Snowden.
Still, pervasive loathing of craven, complicit, vainglorious, greedy publishers and propagandistic columnists by hard-bitten, ill-paid journalists remains promising.
At 11:48 AM 11/18/2018, you wrote:
Question:Â What is the difference between an "information broker" and a
"journalist"?Â Could be important in US law if Assange were to be found
guilty of espionage or whatever other charges the US Justice Department
care to throw at him... It appears that journalists have more rights
under the US Constitution than information brokers.Â I don't know why.Â
Could I for instance, call myself an information broker or a
journalist.Â What would qualify me for either, under US Law?
Just a thought...
On 18/11/2018 16:34, Douglas Rankine wrote:
> Courtesy via Cryptome
> see url: