Almost every day, we as ordinary civilians hear about the ‘War on Terror’, or the ‘War on Drugs’. Another war is often forgotten and is becoming especially prevalent under the Trump Administration. This is the War on Journalism.

Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, was charged with violating the Espionage Act on a total of 17 new counts. Whether you hate Assange or love Assange, this does indeed mark a crucial point surrounding the concept of a War on Journalism. These new charges are maintained by the role that Assange played in regards to the publishing of secret and classified documents leaked by Chelsea Manning, who is also currently in jail for refusing to testify in front of a grand jury for a second time.

Photo by Joël de Vriend on Unsplash

So what does this mean for the future of journalism?

Well, it sets a dangerous precedent for all future potential governmental leaks, regardless of how they are obtained in the first place. If Assange is eventually found guilty by the United States authorities, then this prevents investigative journalism from fulfilling its job. What job might be obscured? That would be the former of the occupation: investigating.

This decision made by the Department of Justice (DoJ) creates an atmosphere of fear for aspiring journalists as well as already existing and prominent journalists around the world. Regardless of whether or not people acknowledge the journalism of Assange and WikiLeaks, the difference between traditionally accepted journalistic organizations and WikiLeaks is rather small. This is due to a lack of radical difference in publishing, whereas most differences that are highlighted are usually from an ideological standpoint.

As a result, the mere publication of leaked documents could be subject to an assault from the DoJ and state authorities, regardless of the involvement with the leaker(s) themselves.

When people exclaim the notion that WikiLeaks is not a journalistic organization, or that Assange is not a journalist, individuals can now point to the critical issues with pursuing Assange through the legal process. The supporting of free and open journalism lies heavily in going against the United States in this particular regard.

Under the Obama Administration, the idea of pursuing Assange was very much there but eventually amounted to nothing because of potential implications with the First Amendment and journalism as a field entirely.

Since the advent of the events that took place on September 11th, 2001, state authorities have been prosecuting and harassing journalists far more regularly, as a result of an increased involvement by various government agencies in the so-called ‘fight against terror’. In turn, the War on Terror has also simultaneously contributed to the spawning of the War on Journalism.

Usually, when people hear about censorship or the lack of press freedom, they think of so-called totalitarian dictatorships that have a publicly available strict limit on what can and cannot be shown. People do not usually think of developed countries (like Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, etc.) known for their supposed freedom as places of censorship. There is a fine difference between dictatorships and democratic states in regards to the media and its openness. One is rather overt in their censorship, while the other attempts to maintain a state of quietness surrounding it.

More recently, however, many organizations have come forth in highlighting the deteriorating conditions for journalists inside the United States. People in support of press freedom should not undermine this development in the case against Assange. Regardless of if you agree with WikiLeaks, Assange or the methods utilized to obtain and publish such documents, this is a direct attack against all journalists, both in the present and in the future. In short, the indictment of Assange should be opposed at all costs, in order to protect a free and open press around the world.