Freedom

A ‘ban on the free press’: White House bars journalists from three outlets | Freedom of the Press News

Reporters from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico were denied access to White House after Trump calls news outlets ‘fake news’.

Journalists from CNN, MS NOW and Politico have been barred from entering the White House and have had their press credentials deactivated or confiscated, as United States President Donald Trump’s ban on the three news organisations took effect.

Journalists were turned away from the grounds on Saturday after Trump announced on Friday that CNN, MS NOW and Politico would be barred from the White House, accusing the outlets of reporting what he called “fake news”. Trump has said other outlets could also face bans.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

CNN White House reporter Betsy Klein and MS NOW White House correspondent Akayla Gardner both reported on air that they had been denied access. Gardner said an officer confiscated her badge after telling her it had been disabled and that the decision was “above him”. An MS NOW photographer also had their badge disabled, she said.

Politico reporter Cheyenne Haslett was subsequently turned away, with Politico saying the Secret Service denied her entry and confiscated her White House access pass.

“A few minutes ago, our colleague Cheyenne Haslett attempted to enter the White House to do her job as a POLITICO reporter,” the news organisation said. “Secret Service denied her entry to the complex and confiscated the pass that allows her access to the White House.”

“We stand by her and all reporters here covering the White House,” Politico added. “As we said yesterday, we will vigorously defend our First Amendment rights.”

“The White House belongs to the American people and the decisions made inside are funded by our tax dollars,” MS NOW said in a statement. “MS NOW intends to take any and all steps necessary to defend our First Amendment rights and the essential role of independent journalism in our democracy.”’

CNN media analyst Brian Stelter called the move “a direct threat to press freedom in the United States”.

“It’s so much bigger than CNN,” Stelter said. “This is a free speech test in America.”

The White House Correspondents’ Association said Trump had described “his own planned action as a ‘ban on the free press’”, and said constitutional press protections do not depend on whether a president approves of a news organisation’s coverage.

The ban is the latest in a series of confrontations Trump has had with news organisations during his first and second term.

In 2025, his administration restricted Associated Press access to the Oval Office and presidential travel after the agency declined to adopt the administration’s preferred name, “Gulf of America”, for the Gulf of Mexico. That case remains ongoing.

A key precedent is a 1977 federal appeals court ruling, Sherrill v Knight. The court found that once the White House establishes press facilities for credentialed journalists, access cannot be denied arbitrarily or for less than compelling reasons. It also said journalists denied credentials must receive notice of the factual basis, an opportunity to respond, and a final written explanation.

It is not yet clear what legal recourse CNN, MS NOW or Politico may pursue, or how courts would apply Sherrill to the administration’s decision to revoke existing credentials.

Al Jazeera’s Alan Fisher reported from Washington, DC, on Friday that Trump’s ban will likely be challenged soon.

“The United States has the First Amendment [of its Constitution] that says the government cannot restrict access to this sort of thing,” he said.

Press freedom advocates are watching closely.

Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, said in a news release that the move raises constitutional concerns.

“If President Trump means to expel these news organizations from the White House press pool, his action is doubly unconstitutional because the press pool is a ‘public forum’ under the First Amendment, which means the president can’t exclude journalists from it on the basis of their viewpoints,” Jaffer said.

The fight over access could now become a broader test of the limits on the White House’s ability to control which journalists can cover the administration.

“It’s difficult to imagine a more blatant violation of the First Amendment than Trump banning news outlets from the People’s House for criticizing the government,” said Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. “It’s also hard to imagine a dumber move.”

Source link

Hong Kong court rules Dow Jones tried to stop journalist taking union role | Freedom of the Press News

Court also acquits Dow Jones on the charge of dismissal over Selina Cheng’s leadership role with the Hong Kong Journalists Association.

A Hong Kong court has convicted Dow Jones for trying to deter a journalist from taking a union role, but also acquitted the publisher on the charge of dismissal over the role, in a case that raised concerns about media freedom in the city.

Selina Cheng, who was fired by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) in July 2024, had accused the newspaper’s publisher Dow Jones of unlawfully terminating her employment over her role chairing the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) and of trying to prevent her from standing for a union position.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The court found the company guilty on Thursday of trying to prevent Cheng’s right to run for the union chairmanship.

However, the judge sided with Dow Jones’ argument that she was made redundant because of corporate restructuring, and not due to her role as HKJA chair.

The right to take part in a trade union is protected by Hong Kong’s labour laws. An employer found guilty on “prevent or deter” charges could be fined up to 100,000 Hong Kong dollars ($12,755).

“If reporters’ employment rights are not sufficiently safeguarded, or when their rights are violated and not enforced in law, then we can no longer work safely as reporters,” Cheng told reporters outside the court after the ruling.

The judge said the company’s requirement that Cheng seek prior permission to take a union role was an “unjustified deterrent” of her rights.

Dow Jones said it disagreed with the ruling and was evaluating next steps.

“The Wall Street Journal has a long and proud history as an employer in Hong Kong. Throughout that time, we have remained deeply respectful of its labour laws and supportive of our employees’ rights, while publishing excellent, impartial journalism about the region,” a spokesperson said.

Sentencing is expected to be handed down at a later date.

Cheng launched a private prosecution last year for illegal termination, after filing a complaint with the Labour Department that did not result in a prosecution.

Founded in 1968, the HKJA is Hong Kong’s longest-established journalists’ organisation and one of the last remaining groups advocating for media rights in the city.

Although Hong Kong was once known for its independent news outlets, media freedom has come under strain and many outlets have disbanded since Beijing imposed a 2020 national security law following sometimes violent pro-democracy protests, according to international rankings and HKJA surveys.

Source link

Arab News | Susan Sarandon on fear, freedom, and refusing to change

When Andrea Pallaoro’s The Echo Chamber premiered at the 83rd Venice International Film Festival on Sunday evening, it earned an eight-minute standing ovation. For its stars— Luca Marinelli, Alicia Vikander, and Susan Sarandon— it was a warm reception to one of the festival’s most anticipated world premieres.

Based on Bernardo Bertolucci’s final screenplay and reworked with his original co-writers, Ilaria Bernardini and Ludovica Rampoldi, the film is both intimate and unsettling, telling a story in which physical pain, emotional dependence, desire, and love gradually become impossible to separate.

At its center is Leo, played by Marinelli, a troubled music producer whose life has been pushed to the edge by addiction and chronic pain. He meets Anne, a physiotherapist played by Vikander, who comes into his life initially to treat his body but ends up reaching something much deeper. Both carry the scars of painful pasts.

Their relationship is vivid, sensual, and sometimes overwhelming: two damaged souls who must learn not simply to love one another, but to let love pass through them and inhabit them without turning it into dependence, possession, or control. Anne becomes Leo’s lifeline. But the rescue is mutual. In trying to save him, she is also brought back to life herself.

Running through their story is another presence: Ava, the aging singer played by Sarandon. Once celebrated for her voice, Ava now confronts the changes age has brought as she works on what may become her final album. Leo becomes her producer. He is emerging from an overdose; she is emerging from the loss of a long relationship and grappling with the uncomfortable question of who she is when the person who shared so much of her life is gone.

The three characters are therefore connected by different forms of damage — and by the possibility that another person can become both a mirror and a way back to oneself.

The danger of being comfortable

For Sarandon, who admits she rarely arrives on a film set feeling safe, that emotional instability made the role frightening. But fear is part of the process, she says. “I would always rather surrender to a director that has a vision than somebody who is already got it marketed and, you know, the studios figured it out.”

Pallaoro had approached her about the role after taking on the daunting task of adapting Bertolucci’s screenplay. Sarandon initially had questions about the character and even imagined a somewhat different musical direction, suggesting artists such as Joni Mitchell. But the director persisted. He traveled to London to meet her and eventually won her trust.

She had trepidation about singing, even though she had once heard Marianne Faithfull perform a duet with David Bowie that, she believed, sounded awful — so why not? “I am always frightened,” she admits. “It takes me weeks to settle down.

And if I am on stage, it takes many performances before I feel like I know what I am doing. I think the fear is part of the responsibility. I don’t have a plan, but I know what I don’t want. To be comfortable for me is always dangerous.”

It is an unexpectedly revealing sentiment from an actress whose career has often been associated with confidence, sensuality, and political fearlessness. But what Sarandon describes is something very different from fearlessness: a willingness to remain exposed. She speaks of waiting for the other actors, staying open to the unexpected, and letting a scene change her. That surrender— to uncertainty, to other people, and to forces beyond her control — runs through The Echo Chamber, a film about what happens when people stop controlling every part of themselves.

Two broken souls learning how to love

Leo and Anne’s relationship is at the heart of the film. He is a man whose body and mind are both in crisis; she is a woman whose own emotional history has left her vulnerable. Their attraction is immediate and intense, but so is the danger it contains.

The film repeatedly asks where care ends, and dependence begins. Pallaoro himself describes the story — the first he has ever directed that was written by someone else — as one in which physical and emotional pain distort the search for intimacy, while tenderness can gradually become control and possession.

Their love becomes a kind of mutual resurrection. Neither arrives whole. Neither can simply ‘fix’ the other. Instead, they have to learn to let themselves be changed by the encounter. This is one reason Sarandon sees her own character’s relationship with Leo as so important. Ava, too, is at a threshold. She has lost the person who defined much of her adult life and is suddenly forced to confront an unfamiliar version of herself.

Sarandon understands that loss as something more complicated than simply losing another person. “When you form any kind of a partnership, that becomes an identity too,” she says. “The partnership identity. And I remember going off on location and being kind of scared. Because I’d be in some terrible motel or hotel in the middle of Texas somewhere. But I was like, okay, I remember, this is who I am. Opening your bag by yourself and you’re scared. But at the same time, it’s good to kind of review that. Before someone dies, it’s good to remember who you are.”

Ava’s aging voice

Ava is a singer, and her voice is no longer what it once was. That becomes part of the character’s vulnerability. She records a new album with Leo, whose own artistic ambitions and personal demons collide. The songs become more than music: they are fragments of Ava’s former self, echoes of a woman she once was.

The Echo Chamber offers no clean transformation. The past does not disappear simply because the future arrives. Instead, Ava has to find a way to carry the woman she used to be into the person she is becoming. Sarandon compares it to a butterfly: transformation is not an erasure of what came before, but a continuation of it. That idea is particularly poignant because the character’s voice— her most obvious instrument of power — is precisely what has changed with age.

Asked about the power of using one’s voice — and why people so often fail to use it — Sarandon does not immediately talk about speaking. She talks about listening.

“People speak out; they do. But do you know what people don’t do? They don’t listen. When my boys were starting to date, I would say, look, learn to cook two meals, and learn to listen. You don’t have to be entertaining, trust me. Just really listen, and you’re going to be fine with everybody. Because I think listening is a lost art. On screen, my superpower… I am a good listener,” she adds with a laugh. “Being present and really listening.”

That quality is perhaps one of the keys to understanding her performance. Sarandon does not approach acting as a demonstration of emotion. She describes it instead as an act of openness— allowing another actor, a piece of music, or an unexpected moment to reach her. “I’m against that theory that you have to be really messed up to be talented,” she says. “I think it’s harder to be both a human being and an artist, but it is possible.”

Social activism and Palestine

That philosophy extends well beyond the set. Sarandon has spent years speaking publicly about AIDS activism, Haiti, social justice, and, more recently, Palestine. Her outspoken support for Palestinians has had professional consequences: she continues to lose film roles, and agencies have discouraged producers from hiring her. The United Talent Agency dropped her in 2023 because of her political statements and pro-Palestinian activism.

Yet when asked about courage, Sarandon rejects the word. “I don’t feel like I have courage at all,” she says. Instead, she describes what she calls an “overdeveloped need for justice,” tracing it back to her childhood. She remembers being disturbed by unfairness even as a child, swapping her dolls’ dresses to make sure they would all take turns wearing the best outfit, and later becoming involved with ACT UP when the mainstream media was failing to adequately cover the AIDS crisis.

“I just see myself as a little flashlight to put on information that maybe…” She pauses before returning to the same principle that seems to guide her acting: she does not claim to know what effect she will have. “It’s not that it’s necessarily successful or that I think I can make a huge difference or change them, but … I don’t want to change myself.”

There is also a lighter side to Sarandon’s relationship with her public image. For audiences across the Arab world, where her outspoken positions have made her a beloved figure, the word ‘queen’ has become part of the vocabulary surrounding her. During our conversation, I tell her that someone in the newsroom had essentially instructed me: ‘You have to speak to Susan. She’s our queen’.

Sarandon bursts out laughing. “Wait, does that include real estate?” Beneath the joke lies something touching: the affection she has accumulated far beyond the borders of Hollywood.

Her political positions have cost her professionally in the US, but they have also reinforced her connection with international audiences who see her as an artist unwilling to separate her work from her conscience. In Venice, she spoke openly about the price she has paid for her positions on Palestine, while also making clear that she feels welcomed by filmmakers and audiences outside the US.

The Bertolucci echo

There is, inevitably, another voice inside The Echo Chamber: that of Bertolucci. Pallaoro inherited the screenplay rather than writing it himself, taking on the challenge of making his own film from the final work of one of cinema’s great auteurs. The director has spoken about the freedom that distance gave him— allowing him to approach themes that were already close to his own cinema while making the material his own.

For Sarandon, Bertolucci’s presence was also personal. She knew him and remembers the profound effect his films had on her, particularly The Conformist. The visual world of The Echo Chamber carries traces of that legacy without attempting simply to reproduce it.

The apartment becomes both refuge and prison. Rooms, mirrors, corridors, and reflections constantly alter the distance between the characters. Music exists inside the world of the film rather than simply sitting on top of it. Pallaoro has described the apartment as a space where care and control become increasingly difficult to distinguish.

And that is where the title becomes particularly resonant. An echo is not an original voice. It returns, changed by the space through which it has traveled.

“That’s what keeps you hooked“

For Sarandon, acting seems to work in much the same way. She never studied acting formally and does not describe herself as someone who retreats into a method and stays there. She can reach an emotional state, she says, but she also wants to be surprised — by another actor, by music, by something that happens in the moment. When she goes home to her children, she leaves the character behind.

Sarandon’s outspoken positions on Palestine have made her a beloved figure in the Arab world where she is often referred to as the ‘queen’

The vulnerability comes not from living permanently inside the role, but from being willing to open the door again every time she returns to set. “That’s what keeps you hooked, I think.”

In The Echo Chamber, almost everyone is looking for a way out: from addiction, grief, an old identity, loneliness, the fear of aging, and intimacy itself. But perhaps the film proposes something more complicated than escape. Maybe we do not evolve by leaving our broken selves behind, but by allowing another person, another voice, another love to reach the places we had stopped allowing anyone to enter.

And for Sarandon, the answer seems simpler still: listen, remain open, accept the fear, and refuse to become someone else simply because the world would find it more convenient. “I don’t want to change myself,” she says.

At 79, in a film about voices, echoes, and reinvention, it is a fitting place to leave her.

Source link

How the West’s promise of freedom created a world of anger | History

In Deja Vu’s next episode, Pankaj Mishra traces today’s political anger to the Enlightenment and empire.

Why does anger seem to rule the world today? Pankaj Mishra traces our age of anger to the collision of Enlightenment promises of liberty and equality with empire, nationalism and capitalism. He asks what happens when those promises are broken – and when the Global South turns Western ideals back on the West itself.

In this episode: 

  • Pankaj Mishra, Author, Age of Anger

Episode credits:

This episode was produced by Mohamed Hassan, Marcos Bartolomé and Sonia Bhagat. It was edited by Alexandra Locke. Our engagement producer is Adam Abou-Gad. Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. 

Connect with us:

@AJEPodcasts on X, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube



Source link