 |
USA Edition | Today Is Sunday, May 19, 2013 |
|---|
Welcome To Newsroom Magazine
|
|---|
|
|
Thanks To You We're Growing Faster Than Ever Before
Chances are you've noticed that Newsroom Magazine is a very different publication.
We care about journalism -- and we're well aware many other organizations do it far better than we.
Our editorial standards, rules of custody, and skeptical editing for everything we produce, disseminate or expose to public viewing reflects a seriousness of purpose.
Six years after our founding, Newsroom Magazine continues to evolve the online publishing and preservation model we pioneered.
There is good news to share: Newsroom Magazine is is thriving.
And some less good news: Our limited resources, both journalistically and financially, are limiting our expansion of content.
Online News Preservation
In the six years since its founding, Newsroom Magazine has extended the field of news publishing into previously uncharted areas.
We take a long range view of news -- one that considers both timeliness and historical merit.
What we do, and how we do it, was not possible in the print media era -- for our content is both timely and timeless in the sense that we share the power of immediacy with all online media plus the perseverance of an encyclopedia.
Newsroom Magazine's publishing model goes beyond immediacy -- for unlike the newspaper era -- what we publish is permanently preserved. And tagged, indexed, and constantly updated by automated sitemap sharing with Google, Yahoo, Bing, Yandex, Baidu, Sogou, Ewatch, Alexa, Facebook, and others at home and far away.
All of our content, is meant to be preserved. Thanks to the capture and storage of our content at Google, including all updates and changes, and full collection archiving by the U.S. Internet Archives, everything we say, write, opine -- whether wise, foolish, or inconsequential-- is preserved.
Newsroom Magazine content remains forever online, searchable and accessible 24 hours a day worldwide.
What's Hot Is Rarely What Matters
What we publish today is rarely as timely as the more traditional publications and online newspapers. What we choose to publish, sometimes days or months after a story first breaks, or on a subject neglected by most commercial media, is chosen to reflect one aspect of an ongoing reality for long term preservation.
From a handful of English-only readers when we published our first article -- the 1958 Edward R. Murrow speech before the Radio Television Directors Association in Chicago -- we have grown and wizened about our responsibilities to our readers and our own limitations and shortfalls.
Our most read article so far this year, The Adventures Of Bernie In Wonderland, was published November 23rd, 2009. The article consists of the unexpurgated SEC interview of Harry Markopolos in the Bernie Madoff Ponzi swindle case. It is not very interesting reading and it is very long -- but we published it in the belief that what it revealed was important and unlikely to remain online in its original format.
Newsroom Magazine's Storehouse Grows Every Day
The number of publications who devote themselves to publishing credible, responsible and probative content for posterity has dwindled.
Today Newsroom Magazine publishes a storehouse of credible, probative and relevant content -- well over 5000 articles including commentaries, essays, definitions, photographs, stories, reviews, discussions, tutorials, and logical explanations.
Our readership is nearly three times was it was only last year. Few might come to our content for entertainment -- for our purpose is otherwise.
If You Publish, They Will Come
We are read on Capitol Hill, along K Street, and in the halls of government inside the beltway and around the world.
We are read daily on college campuses at home and abroad. We're visited from military ships at sea. We serve law-firms, major corporations, Wall Street the UK Parliament, state governments and cities with credible useful information.
Some of the world's most prestigious news organizations use Newsroom Magazine for fact-checking.
Government Information Unfiltered, Sometimes Imperfect
The amount of official news proffered each day by government, whether at home or abroad, is accelerating. Some of it newsworthy, most of it not.
Our job is to thoughtfully choose what's worthy of the attention of our readers.
About 1% of government issued news we receive each day qualifies as newsworthy. Only the most relevant, or reflective of government at its best, or at its worst, or evidence of overreach, or ineptitude makes it newsworthy.
We leave the issue of deciding which if any of these qualifications applies to what we publish up to the reader.
Formatted For People On The Go, Or On The Hunt
All of our government news content includes above the headline call out meant to convey the principal facts, action or information for those with little time to read a long document.
Our job is to carefully and skeptically choose relevant governmental content for our readers -- and to include the unexpurgated original source material, whose chain of custody we control.
Online Editorial Standards, Ethics And Purpose
Our commitment to time-honored journalistic standards and a clear statement about the ethics to which we agree to be held today and tomorrow, Newsroom Magazine began publication when the Internet was young -- 2006.
Our prime mission then, as now, is to publish non political ideas, definitions, essays and editorials.
To speak to the state of this honorable calling.
And to inform the public about those things, events and ideas that matter most to us all.
Today, tomorrow, forever.
Editorial Standards & Policies
| Joint Chiefs Chairman Joins In Condemnation Of Pakistani Military | Browse All Content | UN Observers In Syria Detail Military Obstruction Following Hama Massacre | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Previous In Section | Browse Law Section |
Army Capt. Joshua Tooman, one of Manning’s two military lawyers, asserted that this threatens the defense team’s strategy of proving that Manning caused little or no damage in leaking the classified documents while serving as a military intelligence analyst in Iraq.
Washington
Alleged WikiLeaker Returns To Fort Meade Courtroom
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press ServiceFORT MEADE, Md. , June 6, 2012 – Army Pfc. Bradley Manning returned to the courtroom here today as lawyers spent most of the day wrangling over the release of documents associated with what’s considered the largest intelligence leak in U.S. history.
Dominating the first of what is expected to be a three-day pre-trial hearing was Manning’s civilian attorney, David Coombs, arguing that the prosecution is withholding key materials needed to build a solid defense.
On the other side of the aisle, Army Maj. Ashden Fein, the lead prosecutor, called the defense’s “unreasonable” request for documents, many of which he said were irrelevant to the case, a ploy to slow down the proceedings. He insisted, however, that the government is going “above and beyond” its legal obligations and is turning over the materials as quickly as possible.
Coombs, also an Army Reserve lieutenant colonel who has deployed to Iraq, accused the government of providing the requested records too slowly, in a piecemeal fashion or not at all. He complained of confronting “roadblock after roadblock” in attempting to get these documents, which include various federal agencies’ official assessments of actual damages caused by the alleged leaks.
Coombs also protested that many of documents received so far are so heavily redacted — meaning specific parts have been blacked out — that they’re of limited value.
Army Capt. Joshua Tooman, one of Manning’s two military lawyers, asserted that this threatens the defense team’s strategy of proving that Manning caused little or no damage in leaking the classified documents while serving as a military intelligence analyst in Iraq.
Fein noted that the time and manpower needed to review the massive number of documents from multiple entities threatens to unnecessarily drag out the legal process and deny Manning an expeditious trial. “The government has been [reviewing] and continues to review the documents,” he said. “But it is a massive amount of documents.”
Fein told the court that some of the materials are so sensitive that they cannot be used in the trial. He repeated his concern about “graymailing” this and future legal proceedings with requirements that threaten to disclose national secrets. Graymailing refers to using classified information or the threat of exposing it as a way to circumvent the legal process.
Military judge Army Col. Denise Lind reported that she has personally reviewed the documents turned over so far, and noted that the CIA’s submission will require additional information before being turned over to the defense. Lacking that, the prosecution would not be able to use it during the trial, a military legal officer familiar with the case told reporters.
To address the opposing concerns and limit further legal delays, Lind ruled that the court will add additional hearings between those already scheduled leading up to the trial date to assess progress and break through any logjams.
The next pre-trial hearings are slated for July 16 to 20; Aug. 27 to 31; and Sept. 19 to 20.
Manning’s trial is scheduled to begin Sept. 21 and continue through Oct. 12. However, that timeline could slip if Lind grants the defense’s request for more time to review documents it claims could reveal that Manning caused minimal damage.
His defense team will decide if the case will be heard by a judge alone, by a jury to consist of all officers, or by a mixed panel that includes one third enlisted members from within Manning’s current command, the Army’s Military District of Washington.
Manning sat quietly during today’s proceedings in his Army service uniform, flanked by his two military attorneys. In the coming days of this pre-trial hearing, the defense is expected to ask Lind to dismiss 10 of the 22 charges against Manning.
Coombs plans to argue that eight of the charges are overly broad and vague and therefore, unconstitutional, the legal officer told reporters. The defense will ask Lind to dismiss two additional charges that Manning exceeded his authorized access to classified networks and argue that the prosecution has not made the case for a prosecutable offense, the officer said.
During Manning’s pre-trial hearing in April, Lind rejected the defense’s argument that all charges against Manning should be dismissed. She also upheld the most serious charge, that he aided the enemy by disclosing classified military and diplomatic material.
The 24-year-old military intelligence analyst was arrested at Contingency Operating Base Hammer near Baghdad on May 25, 2010. A former 10th Mountain Division soldier, Manning is accused of installing unauthorized software onto government computers to extract classified information, unlawfully downloading it, improperly storing it, and transmitting the data to the whistle-blowing group WikiLeaks.
WikiLeaks, in turn, released thousands of these documents, including classified records about military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, on its website.
The specific charges against Manning as outlined on his charge sheet include aiding the enemy, wrongfully causing intelligence to be published on the Internet knowing that it is accessible to the enemy, theft of public property or records, transmitting defense information, and fraud and related activity in connection with computers.
The charges include violation of Army Regulations 25-2 “Information Assurance” and 380-5 “Department of the Army Information Security Program.”
The maximum sentence Manning could receive, if found guilty of the charges, is life in prison.
He also could be reduced to E-1, the lowest enlisted grade, and face a total forfeiture of all pay and allowances and dishonorable discharge, officials said.