I find it hard to believe that the original intent of the rule was to curtail free speech, freedom of the press, etc. but it seems to have been twisted around somehow. Press credentials are often required at media events. I know because in '92-'93, I worked for a foreign newspaper's Washington office. I had one such credential (hanging around my neck like an ID badge) for Congress, one for the Pentagon, and in addition had access to the White House press room by being on some kind of approved database after a security check that took a few months. There must be a procedure for freelance reporters to get these credentials, although mine were sponsored by a media organization. It would be a shame if terrorists were somehow able to exploit the journalist loophole [although they could also exploit the tourist loophole in many cases], so perhaps there should be some kind of process. It should not take a long time and it should not be burdensome or arbitrary (e.g., not based on writing samples but perhaps you need some media organizations to vouch for your professional credibility). Seems like the State Department is trying to give people a chance to become aware of the requirement by allowing them to enter once with a warning.
You could have a visa, even press credentials, and still not have access to the information you need. (case in point: Japan's "press clubs.") There are subtler ways to control the media than to deny visas.
Are you saying that the whole of the United States is a media event that warrants requiring press credentials?
Actually what I am saying is that the problem is with requirements for visas and immigration, not freedom of the press. Once we start looking at the whole system, there are plenty of unfair rules. Students, for example, have had a harder time getting into the U.S. since 9/11. Sometimes the requirements are causing headaches for the State Department, too. For example, now you must have an interview at the Embassy and a few select Consulates to get even a student visa. These students have to prove that they have been accepted at a university in the United States and have enough money to support themselves. They could enter the country on tourist visas but then they wouldn't be able to enroll here. Is this a restriction of academic freedom?
P.S. I'm always up for a good healthy debate... I just don't see one happening here.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Are you saying that the whole of the United States is a media event that warrants requiring press credentials?
(no subject)
Actually what I am saying is that the problem is with requirements for visas and immigration, not freedom of the press. Once we start looking at the whole system, there are plenty of unfair rules. Students, for example, have had a harder time getting into the U.S. since 9/11. Sometimes the requirements are causing headaches for the State Department, too. For example, now you must have an interview at the Embassy and a few select Consulates to get even a student visa. These students have to prove that they have been accepted at a university in the United States and have enough money to support themselves. They could enter the country on tourist visas but then they wouldn't be able to enroll here. Is this a restriction of academic freedom?
P.S. I'm always up for a good healthy debate... I just don't see one happening here.
(no subject)
The problem was possibly that not being a native speaker of English, I was unable to comprehend your earlier comment in sufficient depth.