The Walkley Foundation an Alliance Initiative

Ten years ago, the world was shaken when the World Trade Center towers collapsed after a terrorist attack. Journalists were concerned too – not just by the terrorist attacks, but by government statements that hinted at looming restrictions on the US media.

The then US attorney-general, John Ashcroft, said that criticism of the Bush administration “only aids terrorists” and “gives ammunition to America’s enemies”. Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, warned that “all Americans... need to watch what they say, watch what they do”. And Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told television executives they should not air videos from Osama bin Laden because these could contain coded messages.

Some of that fear has abated in the decade since September 11: there have been no sweeping legislative attacks on the First Amendment. Nevertheless, press freedom has been eroded around the world.

Official secrecy has increased, and President Obama has shown himself to be a zealous classifier of government documents. The lack of federal shield laws means journalists find themselves pressed in the courts to reveal confidential sources – and face the prospect of jail if they do not comply with a federal subpoena. The US Justice Department has sought to imprison government employees for leaking classified information to journalists.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, the US military has detained journalists without charge for long periods – and failed to properly investigate the deaths of 16 journalists from US forces’ fire. (Documents indicate, however, that the killings were not the result of deliberate attacks on the media.)

Media blackouts and restrictions on allowing journalists access to war zones are common. In many parts of the world, journalists who are merely going about their jobs face anti-state charges or are labelled terrorists, and killings of journalists go uninvestigated.

The statistics are telling. At the end of 2000, 81 journalists were in jail around the world. A year later, that number had increased to 118. Today, 145 journalists are imprisoned, most of them held on state security charges. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), in 2010 the imprisonment of journalists was most often justified by the “abusive use of national security charges”.

In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, repressive regimes around the world seized the opportunity to further limit press freedom within their borders. The despotic Central Asian regimes in Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan suddenly found themselves key to the war on terror; all stepped up their own wars against dissidents and independent media, using anti-terrorist rhetoric. Russian authorities routinely use the threat of terrorism to justify repressive policies and limits on the press in the North Caucasus. And Pakistan has given a free hand to its brutal spy agency, which has been accused of involvement in the murder of several journalists.

Ethiopia has retained relative stability by repressing dissent and increasing restrictions on the press. Since September 11, the country has been active in US counterterrorism in Somalia, but Ethiopian journalists who report on terrorism face the very real prospect of jail. Anti-terrorism laws are routinely used to suppress information and to accuse journalists of giving a platform to rebel groups. Ethiopia’s government is also a notorious internet censor.

Local journalists are not the only ones to suffer. Two Swedish journalists who reported on Ethiopia’s armed separatists were detained this year, along with two local journalists. They were held incommunicado and were recently charged with terrorism. Previously, the government made similar accusations against the Kenya-based broadcaster Nation Television (NTV) and Al Jazeera. In 2007, three New York Times journalists were detained for similar reporting. In Latin America, drug traffickers were re-branded as “narco-terrorists”, first by former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, and more recently in Mexico.

This repositioning allowed governments in both countries to portray their efforts to crush the cartels as part of a global anti-terror campaign. Uribe even labelled his critics in the media “terrorists”. There are documented cases of journalists being detained, harassed and beaten by soldiers on patrol.

For five years Yemen, which has instituted a near-total blackout on media reporting from the war-afflicted Saada region, has also silenced news and opinion on the basis of anti-terrorism. Reporting on Yemen’s counterterrorism efforts customarily result in questioning, intimidation and detention by security forces. Yemeni freelance journalist Abdulelah Shaea reported on Al Qaeda and ended up in prison. In Syria, CPJ research shows at least 11 journalistic bloggers have been found guilty of anti-state crimes under the emergency law in recent years.

The actions of the US military in Afghanistan and Iraq have also changed the ways wars are covered. Although the embedding program that allows journalists to accompany the US military has provided new opportunities for coverage, it has also created a dichotomy between embedded and “unilateral” journalists. The latter are often viewed with suspicion by US forces.

More than a dozen journalists have been detained by the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan and held for extended periods without charge or due process. Al Jazeera correspondent Sami al-Haj was held for more than six years as a prisoner at Guantanamo and never charged with a crime. The US also bombed Al Jazeera offices in both Kabul and Baghdad, leading to the death of one reporter.

These actions sent a powerful message to militaries around the world that an embedded journalist is the only acceptable way to cover their activities. The Israeli military, for example, denied the media access during their 2008 Gaza invasion. Journalists were mostly forced to cover that event from inside Israel.

The Sri Lankan government used the same approach during its brutal final offensive against Tamil separatists in 2009. The absence of any independent media gave government forces a free hand, which they used to carry out massive human rights abuses, including indiscriminate fire that killed thousands of civilians.

Ten years on, it’s clear that the anti-terror rhetoric developed by the United States has provided effective cover for the erosion of civil liberties around the world.

Joel Simon is executive director of the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists