On Jan. 24, 2003, a new law enforcement and investigatory agency whose duties include functions taken from as many as 22 other federal agencies came into existence. The reorganization of these operations reportedly marks the biggest government bureaucratic shake-up since the creation of the Department of Defense half a century ago.
Even before the new Department of Homeland Security opened its doors, controversies arose over not just how it would operate and exercise its powers, but what level of access to information it would allow, and how it would respond to news media requests. Will new exemptions be carved out of the FOI Act, either by law or by practice? Will officials and agents feel free to tap phones of journalists, or subpoena their records during investigations? Will the new director consider procedural safeguards, like those adopted years ago by the Department of Justice, to ensure that freedom of the press will not be denied? And will those practices be followed?

But "homeland" security is not the only concern for journalists covering anti-terrorism initiatives; military actions abroad often present a greater challenge, as questions over disclosure of information, access to troops, and restraints on reporting seem to resurface anew with each conflict.

Questions and issues like these led the Reporters Committee to launch this "weblog," so that there will be a centralized site on the Internet for journalists who want to follow these issues and pass along information they learn while covering — or worse, being covered by — the new department and other anti-terrorism actions. Please submit comments and pass along tips to make this project as useful, thorough and up-to-date as possible.

A few words about what this project will not do. We do not intend to cover many of the issues that will undoubtedly come up as the Department takes shape, even if those issues are the ones generating headlines. We will cover information access and free press issues, but will not follow debates over many civil liberties issues that, while important, are outside of our domain.

Funding for the launch of this site was provided by The Robert R. McCormick Tribune Foundation.

Jul. 17, 2007

REUTERS WANTS DEATH INVESTIGATION Reuters is asking the U.S. military to conduct a full investigation into the deaths of an Iraqi photographer, Namir Noor-Eldeen, and driver, Saeed Chmagh, who were working for the news service. — Posted at 4:41 pm

Jul. 9, 2007

PHOTOGRAPHER: HERE'S WHY YOU DON'T SEE PHOTOS OF THE WOUNDED. Recounting his experiences covering the war in Iraq, photographer Ashley Gilbertson writes that the agreement that embedded journalists must sign, which prohibits publishing a picture of a wounded soldier without prior written consent, effectively ensures those pictures will never be taken. He says soldiers would never sign a consent form and journalists would not have the nerve to ask. "If you've ever wondered why photographers don't take many pictures of death and horrible injuries -- the ugly facts of war -- now you know," Gilbertson writes in The Virginia Quarterly Review. — Posted at 12:28 pm

Jul. 6, 2007

DOMESTIC SPYING LAWSUIT DISMISSED. A federal appeals court in Ohio dismissed a lawsuit against the Bush administration's domestic spying program on the grounds that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue since they could not show definitively that they were subject to surveillance. The three-judge panel opinion was split down party lines, with the two Republican-appointed judges siding with the adminstration and the Democratic-appointed judge dissenting. — Posted at 11:46 am

Jul. 5, 2007

JUDGE WILL RULE ON REPORTER SUBPOENAS IN ANTHRAX CASE U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton began hearing arguments on July 3 in the latest battle between anthrax investigation "person of interest" Steven Hatfill and the news media. Hatfill, who is suing the U.S. government under the Privacy Act, wants to compel journalists to testify as to which individuals in the Department of Justice and the FBI publicly identified Hatfill as a suspect in the attacks. A decision is expected next week. — Posted at 1:44 pm

Jul. 3, 2007

BUSH COMMUTES LIBBY'S PRISON SENTENCE, CALLS IT "EXCESSIVE." In a statement released Monday that criticized both the judge and jury in the I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby trial, President Bush announced that Libby will not serve any time in prison for perjury and obstruction of justice. Bush noted that even though "a jury of citizens weighed all the evidence and listened to all the testimony and found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstructing justice," Bush himself had concluded that the prison sentence was "excessive" and would therefore spare Libby from prison. Libby will still be fined $250,000 and remain on probation. — Posted at 11:39 am

UNSEALED DOCUMENTS SHOW FITZGERALD SUSPECTED LIBBY'S GUILT IN 2005. Documents that were unsealed last week in response to requests by news organizations revealed that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was already building his perjury and obstruction of justice case against White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby when he subpoenaed former New York Times reporter Judith Miller in 2005. — Posted at 11:38 am

Jul. 2, 2007

LIBBY CANNOT REMAIN FREE DURING APPEAL. Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby has lost his bid to stay out of prison while he appeals his convictions for perjury and lying to investigators probing the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity. A three-judge panel of the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., said today that Libby had not raised a "substantial question" under federal law that would justify delaying his 2 1/2-year sentence. The decision will likely increase the pressure on President Bush to decide whether to pardon Libby. — Posted at 2:42 pm