nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Press groups demand records on potentially corrupt Paramount acquisitions

May 7, 2026 / Freedom of the Press Foundation, https://freedom.press/issues/press-groups-demand-records-on-potentially-corrupt-paramount-acquisitions/

New York, May 7, 2026 — Today, Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) and Reporters Without Borders, Inc. demanded records from Paramount Skydance Corp. regarding potentially corrupt acquisitions and deals that could result in relinquishing editorial control of major news outlets to the Trump administration. Public reports suggest that David Ellison and his father Larry may have tried to secure regulatory approval to acquire Paramount and now Warner Bros. Discovery by, among other things:

  • Making a “side deal” to settle President Trump’s spurious lawsuit against “60 Minutes” by providing $15 million to $20 million worth of free advertising.
  • Installing a pro-Trump GOP donor without journalism experience as “ombudsman” at CBS News to evaluate complaints of “bias” and to eliminate all diversity, equity, and inclusion practices.
  • Promising to make “sweeping” changes to CNN, and to potentially fire anchors and commentators whom Trump dislikes.

Since Paramount Skydance announced its most consequential Trump-friendly changes at CBS News in October — acquiring The Free Press and appointing Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief — the company’s market capitalization has decreased by 40%, wiping out more than $8 billion in shareholder value. Ratings for key programs, like “CBS Evening News with Tony Dokoupil,” have also dropped precipitously. Freedom of the Press Foundation and Reporters Without Borders, which are both shareholders in Paramount Skydance Corp., are entitled to inspect the company’s books and records related to these developments under Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law.

“Shareholders are entitled to know when the government uses its leverage over corporate transactions as a backdoor to meddle in editorial decisions that the First Amendment leaves to the press,” said Seth Stern, chief of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation. “Larry and David Ellison’s capitulation not only harms the public and our democracy, it hurts Paramount by producing news shows people don’t want to watch and tanking the reputations of news outlets in order to appease Trump. If the Ellisons can’t stand up to their friends in the administration and defend the First Amendment, they should stay away from the news business.”

“We need to know what the Ellisons may have promised the president to secure these deals,” said Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders, Inc. “This acquisition has all the warning signs of a political capture. The American public deserves to know whether the Ellisons are sacrificing editorial independence to appease Donald Trump and secure regulatory approval from an administration that is openly hostile to press freedom.”

“Our clients are entitled to the same records as any other shareholder in Paramount, and legally, the company must comply,” said Brendan Ballou, CEO of the Public Integrity Project. “If Paramount fails to do so, we are prepared to vindicate our clients’ rights in court.”

Under Delaware law, Paramount has five business days to respond to the shareholders’ request. Freedom of the Press Foundation and Reporters Without Borders are being represented by the Public Integrity Project and Ron Poliquin of The Poliquin Firm.

Please email Seth Stern (seth@freedom.press) for any follow-up questions or inquiries.

May 12, 2026 Posted by | media, USA | Leave a comment

CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour expresses ‘concern’ over the future of the network, citing ‘idealogical realignment at CBS

Dominick Mastrangelo, Thu, May 7, 2026 , https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/amanpour-expresses-concern-over-future-171317075.html?ncid=redditnewsus&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cucmVkZGl0LmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAHVoY-FvEsZDNw98FelEskBLQG1bup54CvssULXm_j7NIF2G4lS4nTZgIgRg7TW1unhwmBehMPDJ92nP0Ge8HQEiYxCZaEHey9RdUVWhQUvjBXQhW4CBjRKIFsNBA-a6eqQwTBIVcFc-wbaf2WviF1SKDvhT-D8aQ0WSKJvWMiua


 CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour voiced discomfort with the possibility of Paramount Skydance taking over her outlet if the cable channel’s parent company is allowed to merge with the David Ellison-led media conglomerate.

“Clearly I’m concerned, and I’m not sure how much I’m allowed to say about a corporate thing that’s underway, but I am obviously as a person as a journalist with a record, concerned,” Amanpour said during a journalism summit this week. “And I’m concerned based on what’s happened to the other things that he’s taken over already, like CBS News, right? I mean do I have to list what’s happening there?”

Amanpour also bemoaned what she called the “ideological realignment of CBS and the destruction potentially of ’60 Minutes.’”

The journalist’s comments were first highlighted by Mediaite.

Paramount Skydance is seeking to purchase Warner Bros. Discovery, which owns CNN, a network President Trump has sparred with for years. He said in recent months that he wishes to see the network operate under new ownership.

The president on Wednesday marked the death of CNN founder Ted Turner by saying the news outlet he founded has been “destroyed” by what Trump called the channel’s “woke” coverage.

The president on Wednesday marked the death of CNN founder Ted Turner by saying the news outlet he founded has been “destroyed” by what Trump called the channel’s “woke” coverage.

David Ellison, a media mogul that is seen as an ally of the president, has retooled CBS News in recent months to cater to what he has called a more “diverse” audience, a move seen by many as a rightward shift at the network.

“I would to think we would have the very basic which is editorial independence,” Amanpour said. “And I don’t think I need to say more about that.”

May 11, 2026 Posted by | media, USA | Leave a comment

The mainstream media is finally beginning to echo Americans’ outrage at Israeli slaughter

Over the past two years, Israel has lost the support of the American public and is now losing one of its last bulwarks in the political arena — prominent voices in the mainstream media.

By Philip Weiss  April 29, 2026, https://mondoweiss.net/2026/04/the-mainstream-media-is-finally-beginning-to-echo-americans-outrage-at-israeli-slaughter/

The ‘Cronkite moment’ during the Vietnam War was the night in 1968 when CBS anchor Walter Cronkite said the U.S. was stuck in a “stalemate” and that the only honorable path was to negotiate a withdrawal. President Johnson concluded that he’d lost Middle America and soon decided not to run for reelection. 

Israel lost Middle America at least a year ago, according to opinion polls, and it is at last losing what is more important to its support, prominent mainstream voices, the Cronkites of our era. 

On April 23, Geoff Bennett of the PBS NewsHour did the unthinkable. He sharply questioned the Israeli ambassador to the U.N. over Israel’s (wanton) killings of civilians and journalists in Lebanon. 

“How many civilian deaths per Hezbollah target is acceptable? Is it five? Is it 10? Is it 300? Or is there no ceiling at all?” Bennet said. 

And this, too: “What military objective is served by killing reporters?”

Ambassador Danny Danon did what any self-respecting spokesperson for Israel does in such a spot . . . he accused Geoff Bennett of antisemitism. He said the charges were a lie and a “blood libel.” But Bennett did what no broadcaster does, and fought back.

“I take issue with that, sir,” he said and cited Committee to Protect Journalists figures on 15 reporters and media workers killed in Lebanon. 

The NewsHour surely anticipates criticism of Bennett’s refusal to accept Israeli propaganda (a sharp departure from the Dana Bashes and Jake Tappers of the world). So it has headlined the story, “Israel’s U.N. ambassador says IDF is the ‘most moral military in the world.’” Giving Danon a victory, though Danon is peeved. 

May 9, 2026 Posted by | Israel, media, USA | Leave a comment

Dangers to the Fourth Estate: The 2026 World Press Freedom Index

5 May 2026 Dr Binoy Kampmark, https://theaimn.net/dangers-to-the-fourth-estate-the-2026-world-press-freedom-index/

Scribblers, scribes, authors and publishers – all of these are facing ever worsening conditions in pursuing their work in battling the goons of secrecy and impunity. The Reporters Without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index has rotten news on that score. For the first time since the index came into being, RSF states that “over half of the world’s countries now fall into the ‘difficult’ or ‘very serious’ categories for press freedom. In 25 years, the average score of all 180 countries and territories surveyed in the Index has never been so low.”


In reaching its scores on press freedom, RSF uses five contextual indicators: political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context and safety. The political context evaluates, among other things, the extent of support and respect for media autonomy regarding political pressure from the state or various political actors. Factors important to legal matters include the extent of censorship, judicial sanctions and restrictions on freedom of expression. The economic dimension takes account of such factors as the difficulties of establishing news media outlets, blighting corruption, the allocation of state subsidies, and the interest of media owners. The sociocultural context covers such issues as “denigration and attacks on the press based on such issues as gender, class, ethnicity and religion” and cultural restraints against reporting. Safety focuses on the ability of journalists to identify, gather and disseminate news without facing bodily harm, psychological or emotional distress, and professional harm

There are various reasons postulated by the group for the precipitous decline in press freedoms. Armed conflict plays its inevitable, corrosive role. Iraq (placed at 162), Sudan at one spot above, and Yemen at 164, are cases in point. The ongoing battle between Israel and the Palestinians has been disastrous for press freedom, not least because of the killing, since October 2023, of over 220 journalists in Gaza by the Israeli Defense Forces. 70 of the slain were killed while carrying out their work.

The authoritarian regimes have done little to move up the index. China remains confidently oppressive of reporters at 178, with North Korea stoutly taking the spot below. Eritrea completes the bottom at 180. Russia, at 172, continues to blot its copybook in targeting journalists (as of April 2026, 48 remain in prison), a situation not helped by its ongoing war in Ukraine. The Iranian regime (177) maintains its studied viciousness against journalists. Saudi Arabia, despite its gaudy, kitschy efforts at modernisation headed by the petulant princeling Mohammed bin Salman, has not softened on the issue of press freedom. On June 14 last year, the Saudi journalist Turki al-Jasser was executed after a seven-year spell of arbitrary imprisonment. Al-Jasser had been accused by the Saudi authorities of operating the X account named Kashkool, one inclined to post material linking the House of Saud with human right abuses and corruption.

Of all the states recorded, Niger, at 120, registered the most dramatic fall (down 37 spots). This, according to RSF, underscored “the wider decline in press freedom in the Sahel region seen in recent years as attacks by armed groups and ruling juntas have suppressed the right to balanced information from diverse sources.”

The organisation despairingly notes that the Index’s legal indicator has registered a sharp fall in 2026. “This score deteriorated in more than 60% of states – 110 out of 180 – between 2025 and 2026.” Journalism has been systematically criminalised, a practice “rooted in circumventing press law and misusing emergency legislation and common law.”

Resorting to national security laws and regulations is a favourite. Mention terrorism as a charge, as happened to the journalist Frenchie Mae Cumpio, and a prosecution, however baseless, becomes elementary and successful. (In Cumpio’s case, the shoddy charge was that of financing terrorism.) In Türkiye, the net on national security is drawn widely to include charges of “disinformation”, Article 299 of the country’s Penal Code covering insults of the President, and the charge of “denigrating state institutions.” States, in claiming to use the law appropriately, resort to strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs). RSF underlines Bulgaria (71) and Guatemala (128) as practitioners of the art. Not to be left out, political and business plutocrats make use of laws to curb exposure of their antics in the press. Indonesia (129), Singapore (123), and Thailand (92) are seen as experts in this regard.

Protections for journalists from legal or physical threats was also found to be woeful, with more than 80% of countries having “non-existent or ineffective” measures. Even the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), seen as sound armour for the independence and sustainability of media outlets, has been weakened by domestic legislatures. Hungary (ranked 74), only recently rid of its long serving Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, excelled in this regard, though RSF also notes the programs of such countries as Slovakia (37) and Lithuania (15).

To round up the inglorious list are the United States (64), Argentina (98) and El Salvador (143). US President Donald Trump continues to hound and harry the Fourth Estate, with RSF taking particular issue with cuts to the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) responsible for the drastic slimming of personnel at the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and Radio Free Asia (RFA).

Rankings, in themselves, are cold measures. They can also prove vague. But there is nothing vague about the insatiable appetite towards persecution shown by states of all political persuasions when attacking reporters and publishers. The dictates of the national security state and its desperation in controlling narratives and holding the line on mendacity and the exposure of bad behaviour, remains that most threatening of diseases to the Fourth Estate.

May 7, 2026 Posted by | media | Leave a comment

American Press Freedom on the Brink

 April 30, 2026, Clayton Weimers, https://www.projectcensored.org/american-press-freedom-on-the-brink/

As World Press Freedom Day (May 3) nears, it’s a good time to step back and assess how journalists and news outlets are faring in our current media climate.

President Donald Trump came back to the White House and picked up right where he left off, insulting and attacking the press on an almost daily basis, suing media outlets, and taking a number of concrete actions to restrict press freedom. Against this backdrop, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) will release its 2026 World Press Freedom Index on April 30.

Every year, RSF scores and ranks 180 countries and territories based on their level of press freedom. The Index evaluates five indicators: political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context, and safety. The United States has declined in each of these indicators and steadily fallen on the Index over the past decade, dropping in rank from 49th in 2015 to 57th in 2025.

It may be tempting to blame Trump entirely for the perilous state of journalism in the country, but that steady decline in press freedom over the past decade spans multiple administrations, with both parties holding power in Washington. Such a prolonged decline points to structural deficiencies that cannot be attributed to a single issue, person, or administration.

Media ownership has become increasingly consolidated among a few media moguls, as outlets have also faced major revenue losses.

Local news is also vanishing, and millions of Americans, especially in rural and low-income areas, now live in “news deserts.”

Time and again, Congress has missed opportunities to enact meaningful press freedom protections, such as the PRESS Act, while local and state governments have chipped away at press freedom.

Violence against journalists has risen to stubbornly high levels, according to the US Press Freedom Tracker. And in the last decade, eight journalists in the US were killed for their journalism or while working.

And through this tumultuous period, public trust in news has plummeted.

Now, on top of that overall troubling context, a White House openly hostile to journalism is exacerbating an already fraught situation. Since returning to power, Trump, along with his advisors and allies, has dealt devastating blows to journalism, setting dangerous precedents and inflicting enduring harm.

From limiting journalists’ access to government buildings to cutting public media funding to targeting and threatening disfavored media outlets, the administration has regularly violated press freedom.

While these individual incidents are scandalous, and often unconstitutional, it’s easy for them to be washed away into the constant churn of the news cycle. Put them all together, though, and one conclusion is unavoidable: Trump is waging an all-out war on press freedom and journalism.

Trump promised to be a dictator on just “day one” of his term, but the totality of his anti-press campaign signals that the self-proclaimed “Peace President” is sinking to the depths of authoritarian regimes. His war on press freedom affects all five indicators RSF measures to compile the Index: political, legal, economic, sociocultural, and safety.

Political context

On his first day in office, Trump issued an executive order “ending federal censorship,” effectively eliminating government monitoring of misinformation and disinformation.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr has also weaponized the independent agency to investigate news outlets with coverage that the presidential administration disagrees with.

The administration removed thousands of US government pages that hosted information ranging from vaccines to climate change, vital resources for journalists and the general public alike.

Reporters have been barred from, or had their access severely restricted at the State Department, Air Force One, the Pentagon, and even a section of the White House previously known as “Upper Press.”

Legal framework

In addition to the president’s numerous lawsuits against media outlets, his administration earlier this year raided the home of Washington Post journalist Hannah Natanson and confiscated her personal and professional devices, a truly dangerous and unprecedented assault that puts thousands of Natanson’s sources at risk and is likely to scare off future sources from speaking with journalists. Journalists like Don Lemon and Georgia Fort have been arrested and threatened with criminal charges while doing their work.

Economic context

Trump led the charge to eliminate federal funding for public media. He’s also inserted himself into media company mergers and acquisitions, putting his thumb on the scale to ensure his political allies take control of American media outlets—a move eerily reminiscent of Viktor Orbán in Hungary and even Vladimir Putin in Russia.

Sociocultural context

Trump’s near-daily attacks and insults against journalists have set an example for others, with journalists now facing online and public harassment while doing their job. The bar for attacks against journalists is undeniably lower today thanks to Trump. RSF’s 2024 investigation into the state of press freedom in swing states found journalists reporting alarming instances of direct threats to their safety by local politicians. Threats against journalists by elected officials that once seemed inconceivable have become de rigueur.

Safety

Journalists faced a spike in physical violence by law enforcement and federal agents while doing their work. This was most evident as journalists covered widespread protests against the administration’s sweeping crackdown on immigration in Minnesota’s Twin Cities, Los Angeles, and Chicago.

Press freedom around the world is in trouble, as RSF’s Index has shown in recent years. Notably, the Trump effect extends beyond US borders. The American retreat from foreign aid led to the withdrawal of millions of dollars that supported independent media in developing economies around the world. In one striking example, a safety training session for journalists in the Amazon was abruptly canceled because of the USAID shutdown.

Authoritarian leaders are further emboldened to attack the press with the knowledge that the United States is no longer championing press freedom. When Serbian authorities raided the offices of the country’s largest fact-checker, they cited X posts by Elon Musk in his capacity as the leader of DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) as evidence of the media organization’s crimes. That evidence? Accepting a USAID grant.

This is a moment of crisis for American media. During the twentieth century, press freedom—and free expression more broadly—saw a gradual, if uneven, expansion. Now we’re heading in the other direction for the first time in generations, and RSF isn’t the only organization that’s noticed. The Varieties of Democracy Institute’s 2026 Democracy Report found that US freedom of expression had declined to World War II levels. Freedom House also docked the United States in its latest global report, with freedom of expression cited as a leading factor in democratic backsliding.

We can’t lay all the blame for the state of American press freedom at the president’s feet, but Trump has taken a troubling situation and turned it into a full-blown crisis that we must urgently solve. Our very democracy is at stake.

Clayton Weimers is a recognized leader in press freedom who serves as North America Director for Reporters Without Borders (RSF). He and his team defend press freedom across the English-speaking Americas and advance RSF’s global priorities to advocate for journalists and everyone’s right to information. His writing on press freedom has appeared in publications such as the Guardian, Newsweek, The Hill, and The Independent. He originally joined RSF’s DC team as Deputy Director for Advocacy after a career in political campaigns. He has degrees from the University of Chicago and Pitzer College and a borderline unhealthy relationship with the Chicago Cubs and Everton Football Club.

May 5, 2026 Posted by | media, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear Abolition. A Scenario

Wallis also bats away the patently absurd notion, nevertheless advanced by those same politicians, that somehow having nuclear weapons keeps us safe, something he declares as “nonsense” while reminding us that “Nuclear weapons are the biggest racket of all time — billions of dollars going from taxpayers to giant corporations to produce things everyone hopes will never be used!”

    by beyondnuclearinternational, Linda Pentz Gunter, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2026/04/26/nuclear-abolition-a-scenario/

Tim Wallis’s book provides an optimistic view, but it’s also a methodical journey toward the nuclear-free world we all want, writes Linda Pentz Gunter

The Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) is about to begin in New York City. There is no reason to be particularly optimistic about any positive outcome. Meanwhile, signatories to the treaty itself continue to defy it, most specifically the United States.

The US is a signatory to the NPT, which in its Article VI states: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”

It is the second shortest clause in the entire treaty. And yet, what we are seeing instead is a clear intent by the major nuclear powers, especially the US, Russia and China, to arm up rather than down.

Meanwhile, two nuclear armed states — the US and the undeclared nuclear weapon nation Israel — are busy attacking a non-nuclear armed state, Iran, that is also a signatory to the NPT. (Israel cannot join because it officially neither confirms nor denies whether it has the upwards of 200 nuclear weapons that everyone knows it does have.)

Iran has long declared that it is abiding by the terms of the NPT and enriching uranium for a civil nuclear power program, not to build nuclear weapons. This “inalienable” right is granted to any NPT signatory that forswears nuclear weapons in Article IV that says: “Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.”

Article IV is arguably the fatal flaw of the NPT — and, regrettably, of the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) which repeats the clause verbatim — since it effectively leaves the back door open to transition to nuclear weapons via access to materials, technology and know-how. This is precisely the suspicion harbored by the US, Israel and Iran’s other enemies about Iran’s nuclear program. It was also used as the pretext for the current attack, almost certainly a cover story given both US intelligence and the International Atomic Energy Agency have consistently insisted that Iran is not moving toward nuclear weapons production.

The ramping up of nuclear weapons arsenals by the existing nuclear weapon nations, and the aspirations by other countries to acquire them — now potentially made more keen by the attack on Iran — moves us ever closer to the nuclear abyss. 

It is a frightening scenario, and one brought vividly alive by Annie Jacobsen’s chilling book, Nuclear War. A Scenario.

But, says Timmon Wallis, founder of NuclearBan.US, let’s not abandon our optimism too quickly. Surely there is a different way to think about this, and even a possibility that we can, after all, achieve our global nuclear disarmament goals?

Wallis’s book, Nuclear Abolition. A Scenario, takes a very different tack, and approaches the process through a form of mathematical calculation by subtraction, by moving the arms of the Doomsday Clock — currently at 85 seconds to midnight — gradually further away from that grim moment of Armageddon. (Wallis’s book was published when the clock sat at 89 seconds to midnight, still dire enough.)

Wallis begins by asking the question aspired to by his book — “What if there were no nuclear weapons in the world?” —then asks us to savor the joy of that feeling for a while. It’s what most of us want, after all, but somehow we have elected a rash of megalomaniacs who don’t seem to share that worldview.

Wallis also bats away the patently absurd notion, nevertheless advanced by those same politicians, that somehow having nuclear weapons keeps us safe, something he declares as “nonsense” while reminding us that “Nuclear weapons are the biggest racket of all time — billions of dollars going from taxpayers to giant corporations to produce things everyone hopes will never be used!”

To ensure they are never used, Wallis argues, we must do away with them altogether. But can we really arrive at that moment, when we can turn the Doomsday Clock off altogether? Unlike many of us, Wallis has not lost that hope. His book provides the pathway to get there. The central obstacle, however, is the world’s arms manufacturers, who profit from the existence of nuclear weapons — and of course from the manufacture and unending use of conventional weapons.

Wallis’s central thesis, therefore, is that pressure must be exerted on the nuclear weapons companies to turn them into advocates for nuclear abolition. And that pressure, Wallis asserts, can come first and foremost from the now 99 countries that have signed the TPNW, 74 of which have also ratified it.

And so, Wallis takes us on a trip around the world, showing how countries both large and small can exert that pressure and move us out of the nuclear age. Wallis provides a check box of tactics per chapter, ending with “US bombs out of Europe,” an imperative that has become even more urgent now it is clear that US bombs have likely returned to British soil — at RAF Lakenheath, in reality a US Air Force base — for the first time since 2008. Ironically, this also comes at a time when US President Trump’s rhetoric has threatened a lifting or even folding up of the so-called “nuclear umbrella” with which the US, still a member of NATO, suggests it is protecting its European allies.


Pressure needs to come from within the US, too, Wallis writes. Wallis was an essential ally as we fought here in Takoma Park, Maryland, to maintain our nuclear-free status (we have, but the city has largely abandoned any efforts to promote perhaps its most famous achievement, having been one of the first US cities to become a Nuclear-Free Zone back in 1983.) What if every US city and town declared itself a nuclear-free zone, we had asked our city council? Wallis does not expect every city and state to do so, but he makes a strong case in his book for the power of local activism, especially in boycott and divestment, a proven tactic.

Finally, Wallis expresses the hope that Trump himself could denuclearize. This notion emanated from early, less irrational declarations from the White House at the beginning of Trump’s second term. Trump has indeed said one or two slightly sensible things here and there, denuclearizing being an example. But the ride has become considerably wilder since then.

I wonder if Wallis would feel as optimistic today? We are undoubtedly in an “alternate universe” as he states late in the book. Is it one in which Trump leads the world to nuclear weapons abolition? That’s an optimistic leap that most of us probably aren’t willing to take. But Wallis takes it, because optimism is what drives his writing and his activism, and because it’s an essential fuel if we are to persist in our mission to achieve global nuclear abolition. That work may seem hard to impossible. But what’s the alternative?

The hands of the Doomsday Clock cannot and must not inch any closer to midnight. Wallis’s book gives us a detailed guide to moving the clock — and the world that is watching its inexorable and ominous progress toward zero hour — slowly back to a time when no one had to worry about nuclear weapons. After all, as Wallis points out, that wasn’t really so long ago. Everyone alive before 1945 slept much better at night than we do.

Order the book.

Linda Pentz Gunter is the Executive Director of Beyond Nuclear and writes for and edits Beyond Nuclear International. She is the author of the book, No To Nuclear. Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress And Provokes War, published by Pluto Press.

May 1, 2026 Posted by | media | Leave a comment

Israel Kills Journalist in Lebanon After “Hunting” Down Her and a Colleague

 April 25, 2026, By Sharon Zhang, https://scheerpost.com/2026/04/25/israel-kills-journalist-in-lebanon-after-hunting-down-her-and-a-colleague/

Israel targeted the slain journalist’s colleague with three strikes, including one on an ambulance she was in.

Israeli forces killed journalist Amal Khalil and wounded her colleague, Zeinab Faraj, on Wednesday, firing multiple strikes on the journalists in southern Lebanon in Israel’s latest attack on journalists covering its violence across the region.

Khalil and Faraj were taking cover in a nearby house after an Israeli strike near their car, while they were out reporting on an Israeli strike on another vehicle. While at the house, Khalil reached out to family and Lebanese officials, notifying them of her location, but Israeli forces bombed the house, collapsing it. 

Rescuers pulled Faraj from the wreckage, but Israeli forces fired at emergency workers trying to reach Khalil, delaying her rescue, according to Lebanese officials. Khalil’s body was only recovered hours later from the rubble.

Meanwhile, Israeli forces also fired, for a third time, on the ambulance transporting Faraj to the hospital, Lebanese media reported, in an incident described by critics as the Israeli forces “hunting her down.” Faraj underwent surgery at the hospital and was brought to stable condition.

Khalil was a veteran reporter for the Al-Akhbar newspaper. The left-wing journalist was raised under Israeli occupation in the 1980s in southern Lebanon, and was driven by a desire to chronicle daily life in south Lebanon under constant threat of Israeli invasion and bombardment.

“On a personal level, resistance means everything to me,” Khalil said in an interview, translated from Arabic, with The Public Source last year. “Through my work, I have tried to be in solidarity with these people — the people of the land.”

Khalil was also an animal lover, and devoted her free time to rescuing and sheltering stray cats in her family home in Baysariyyeh, in southern Lebanon.

“This was a blatant murder. This was a targeted assassination,” said independent Lebanon journalist Courtney Bonneau. “The Israeli army committed multiple flagrant war crimes this afternoon, during this incident.”

Lebanon’s prime minister, Nawaf Salam, said in a statement that the strikes on the journalists were war crimes. 

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) condemned Israel’s targeting of the journalists as a “brutal and recurring crime.” “Khalil, an unarmed civilian journalist, remained trapped under the rubble for more than seven hours while the Red Cross was prevented from reaching her,” said Sara Qudah, Middle East and North Africa regional director for CPJ, in a statement.

The multiple strikes on the journalists are seemingly part of a practice by Israel to strike the same or similar locations multiple times in order to kill targets and then attack the people who come to rescue them.

Just a week before the killing of Khalil, Israeli forces carried out a “quadruple-tap” attack on Mayfadoun, in southern Lebanon. Israel struck the city, then struck three more times as successive waves of paramedics arrived on the scene. In all, the attacks killed four medics and wounded six others, The Guardian reported last week.

April 30, 2026 Posted by | Israel, media | Leave a comment

New report lays bare media bias on Gaza

DECLASSIFIED UK, Hamza Yusuf, 23 April 26

A comprehensive, data-rich report released today by UK media monitoring group NewsCord puts hard numbers on the UK media’s failings in reporting on Israel’s crimes in Gaza.The study analyses coverage from Al Jazeera, BBC, The Guardian and Sky News across 686 articles and 11,295 classified excerpts.The findings illustrate how the UK mainstream media methodically sanitises genocide, shields the public from reality and marginalises Palestinian experience.

For example, when civilians are killed in Gaza, the BBC attributes the attack to Israel in only 50% of cases, with the Guardian only marginally better with 54%.

The BBC also labels Gaza’s health ministry as “Hamas-affiliated” in 60% of death toll citations, but mentions that the United Nations considers these figures credible in only 0.6% of cases. Al Jazeera names the perpetrator at nearly twice the rate of the BBC and Guardian.


References to “genocide” in UK outlets are notably limited in the dataset – 15 mentions by the BBC, 12 by Sky News, and 21 by the Guardian – compared to 58 by Al Jazeera.
Just as important as how a story is told is whose story is heard: Sky News gives Israeli perspectives nearly double the space of Palestinian ones.
Meanwhile, when Israeli officials declared explicit genocidal intent, this went practically unreported. The BBC never covered such statements by Israeli figures like Benjamin Netanyahu, Isaac Herzog or Yoav Gallant.

This is despite some of those statements being cited in proceedings at the International Court of Justice in the case against Israel.
Reflecting on the report’s findings, NewsCord founder Nima Akram said: “The data is not opinion, it’s the result of classifying thousands of articles to measure bias. These aren’t isolated incidents, they’re structural patterns that shape how millions understand the genocide in Gaza, and whose suffering deserves attention.”

Their report demands the outlets publicly review their Gaza coverage against the evidence and to disclose and revise their editorial practices.
Simply put, the mainstream media has failed in its duty to report Israel’s actions with accuracy, fairness and integrity. The new data leaves little room for denial.

April 25, 2026 Posted by | Gaza, media, UK | Leave a comment

Assessing Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs) in Canada

Screenshot

20 April 26, https://cedar-project.org/roadmap/

In 2018, Canada published a strategic plan – a roadmap – to develop small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) across the country. An SMR is one designed to generate 300 megawatts (MW) of electricity or less, compared to Canada’s existing CANDU power reactors which generate 500 MW or more.

According to the “SMR Roadmap,” the first demonstration SMR was expected to be operating in 2026. In this milestone year, our report analyzes the financial and developmental status of the 10 SMR designs with some kind of presence in Canada.

On this page are the report and the recording of the report launch webinar on March 18, 2026.

The report authors are Susan O’Donnell, PhD, St. Thomas University and M.V. Ramana, PhD, University of British Columbia. The report was published by the CEDAR research project at St. Thomas University.

Report launch webinar

The SMRs report was launched during a webinar on March 18, 2026, An assessment of SMR projects: the case of Canada. The speakers were the report authors, Susan O’Donnell, PhD, St. Thomas University and M.V. Ramana, PhD, University of British Columbia with moderator Madis Vasser, PhD, Senior expert on SMRs for Friends of the Earth Estonia.

The event was hosted by Nuclear Transparency Watch in Paris and co-hosted by the Sustainability Learning Lab at St. Thomas University in Fredericton.

The webinar recording, below, was published by the NB Media Co-op, a CEDAR project partner.

April 23, 2026 Posted by | Canada, media | Leave a comment

Iran aside, don’t ignore Trump’s war crimes in the Caribbean, Venezuela and Somalia

19 April 2026 AIMN Editorial, By Walt Zlotow , https://theaimn.net/iran-aside-dont-ignore-trumps-war-crimes-in-the-caribbean-venezuela-and-somalia/

 As Trump was cooling his massive, murderous bombing of Iran, he was ramping up his murderous bombing of small civilian boats in the Caribbean. In the last 5 days he obliterated 5 little boats Trump imagined were operated by narco terrorists. Since these dastardly attacks began last October, Trump has wiped out 48 little boats, killing 163 (as of March 2026). Those are war crimes.

On January 3 Trump invaded Venezuela, kidnapped its president Nicholas Maduro, murdering 83 in the process. More war crimes.

Most heinous but most ignored by the media

is Trump’s endless war crimes in Somalia. Last year His African Command bombed pitifully poor, remote Somalia 124 times, likely killing thousands of imagined bad guys. Just last week Trump bombed Somalia 4 times in 2 days, raising the 2026 total to 49 attacks. He’s on track for a record year of war crimes in Somalia.

Why aren’t the media and the American people focused on Trump’s war crimes in the Caribbean, Venezuela and Somalia? Could be simply that these Trump war crimes have not raised a gallon of gas north of 4 bucks and threaten a global recession that will also engulf the Homeland. To put it more bluntly, “Hey, Mr. Trump, as long as your war crimes don’t affect me personally, go for it.”

April 22, 2026 Posted by | media | Leave a comment

Israel Destroys a Synagogue; US Media Yawn

“Iranian Jews are viewed by Iranians as indigenous,” he said. “They’re the original Bundists,” a nod to the Jewish political movement that “stood not just for socialism, but for do’ikayt—Yiddish for ‘hereness,’” the concept that a Jew’s homeland was in whatever nation they resided in (New York Times, 4/6/26).

Ari Paul, April 16, 2026 https://fair.org/home/israel-destroys-a-synagogue-us-media-yawn/

An Israeli missile attack destroyed a Tehran synagogue during the Jewish Passover holiday (Religion News Service, 4/9/26). The Israeli military “expressed regret over what it called ‘collateral damage’ to a synagogue in Tehran caused by an overnight strike,” which was “targeting a senior Iranian commander,” said the Middle East Eye (4/7/26).

Photos of the wreckage at the Rafi-Nia Synagogue have accompanied many of these pieces. The Council on American-Islamic relations condemned the attack in a statement (4/7/26):

We strongly condemn the Israeli regime’s bombing of a synagogue in Tehran, which was the predictable end result of the indiscriminate US/Israel bombing campaign against mosques, hospitals, schools, apartments and other civilian sites across Iran.

The group challenged “various Israel advocacy groups and politicians that support this war in the name of protecting Israel to condemn Israel’s synagogue attack.”

Buried at best

The story of the attack on the Tehran synagogue was, at best, buried in the US corporate media. CNN posted a brief video (4/7/26) about the bombing but had no online article about it. The New York Times (4/7/26, 4/7/26) mentioned the attack, but as background in broader stories about the US/Israel war on Iran.

A search for “Rafi-Nia” on the Washington Post website yields no results. Ditto for the AP, although the news service did post a video to YouTube (4/7/26). Al Jazeera’s coverage (4/7/26) of the attack was a mélange of AP and AFP copy. CBS News (4/7/26) also used a few paragraphs of AFP copy to report on the attack, although it was buried in the middle of a general timeline about the war.

The Wall Street Journal (4/7/26) had the story, but led with Israel’s contrition over the destruction; that’s not a journalistic construction we see in US news coverage when it comes to the Israeli bombings of other civilian structures in Iran, Gaza or Lebanon. When Israel destroys a hospital, apartment building, encampment, etc., the stories don’t lead with official regret, but rather include Israeli claims that the civilian facilities were actually legitimate military targets. The Journal’s lead provided the government with public relations cover over the sensitive issue of destroying a Jewish house of worship.

Newsweek (4/8/26), once a bigger player in the US media landscape, led with condemnation of the attack from Jewish Iranian leaders, who declared “their unwavering solidarity with Iran in defending the homeland.”

Jewish presence in Iran

Underplaying the story obscures not only the wantonness of Israel’s aggression, but the actual nature of Iranian society, which is portrayed as obsessed with wiping Jews off the map (ADL, 6/25/25). “Iranian foreign policy freely mixes anti-Israel furies with anti-Jewish ones,” wrote New York Times columnist Bret Stephens (1/13/26), a pro-war cheerleader (2/22/26, 3/24/26).

In fact, while Israel is obviously the center of Mideastern Jewish life, the Iranian Jewish population dwarfs those elsewhere in the Middle East. “Estimates range from 9,000 to 20,000 Jews currently living in Iran,” according to the Forward (6/18/25).

Wrote the Palestine Chronicle (3/6/26): “The Jewish presence in Iran is among the oldest continuous Jewish communities in the world, with roots that historians trace back more than two millennia.”

Yes, Iran is a theocracy; the government is no model for an open society. But there is a Jewish member of Iran’s parliament, who even went on record this year openly criticizing Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian’s handling of popular unrest (i24, 1/29/26).

‘Well-protected second-class citizens’

US media have covered the Jews of Iran before. USA Today (8/29/18) did a story in 2018, reporting from Tehran. Former Forward reporter Larry Cohler-Esses (8/12/15, 8/12/15, 8/18/15, 8/27/15) reported extensively and critically on Iranian Jews, indicating that the country was at least open to letting a reporter for a Jewish publication do their job.

Cohler-Esses told FAIR that Jews in Iran are “well-protected second-class citizens.” In fact, when he read about the attack, he “wondered if it was the synagogue I spent Shabbat in, but it wasn’t,” because there are more than a dozen active synagogues in Tehran—a reflection of the size of the Jewish community there.

Recalling his 2015 reporting trip, Cohler-Esses said that on Shabbat, Jews would spill out of their synagogues and mingle in the street after services, a sight he didn’t often see in many places in Europe. In one instance, after he left a synagogue service, one of the congregants ran after him through a street teeming with people, wearing a kippah and a tallit (traditional religious attire), and “no one batted an eye.”

The Jews of Iran do suffer discrimination, because Muslims are favored in the legal code over all non-Muslims, Cohler-Esses said. He noted that the Jewish population of Iran has shrunk significantly since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

“Iranian Jews are viewed by Iranians as indigenous,” he said. “They’re the original Bundists,” a nod to the Jewish political movement that “stood not just for socialism, but for do’ikayt—Yiddish for ‘hereness,’” the concept that a Jew’s homeland was in whatever nation they resided in (New York Times, 4/6/26).

Cohler-Esses was hopeful that coverage of the synagogue’s destruction in the Jewish and Israeli press (JTA, 4/7/26; Jerusalem Post, 4/7/26) had the “potential to make Jewish readers of Jewish media outlets go, ‘Oh, they have synagogues there.’” But with the underplaying of the story in US media, it’s a missed teachable moment for news consumers generally.

More robust press coverage of the attack could have taught Americans that the Jews of Iran do have something to fear: Israel.

April 22, 2026 Posted by | Iran, Israel, media, USA | Leave a comment

NYT’s Investigation of How Trump’s War on Iran Started Leaves Out the Paper’s Own Silence

Luca GoldMansour, April 17, 2026, https://fair.org/home/nyts-investigation-of-how-trumps-war-on-iran-started-leaves-out-the-papers-own-silence/

A New York Times exposé (4/7/26) detailed a presentation by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to President Donald Trump in the White House Situation Room—meant to sell the president on a war with Iran roughly two weeks before the US’s initial attack—and Trump’s subsequent discussions with his inner circle.

The Times report, headlined “How Trump Took the US to War in Iran,” is sparking renewed corporate media attention to how this conflict began. But that discussion has been clouded by the report’s fixation on Netanyahu’s sway over Trump and alleged divisions among his advisers.

That Trump was narcissistic and gullible enough to believe lies Netanyahu told him, as the report lays out, was undoubtedly an important factor in the time and manner of a US/Israeli assault that has killed thousands and effectively widened the scope of the Gaza genocide.

But buried within the report is an interesting detail indicating more structural forces were also at work: The Times‘ Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman reported that the US intelligence community determined that, while the prospect of regime change was “farcical,” “crippling Iran’s capacity to project power and threaten its neighbors” was “achievable with American intelligence and military power.” Iran’s continued capacity to close the Strait of Hormuz and exact a heavy toll on US bases in the region demonstrates this was a faulty assessment.

Whether it was by groupthink, incompetence or the influence of neoconservatives and the Israel lobby, the fact that the national security state came to such an erroneous determination is going criminally underdiscussed.

Military/industrial megaphone

A full accounting of how this disaster came about must grapple with the US military/industrial complex and its push for war. No less important is reckoning with that complex’s megaphone: the compliant US corporate media. And juicy scoops on palace intrigue concerning the leaders in the White House and Tel Aviv won’t wash away the Times’ participation in that push.

The Times’ streak of failing to challenge, or even actively encouraging, major US wars (FAIR.org, 10/23/17) remains unbroken during this latest misadventure. Their approach this time was more disjointed than in the past: First, the usual bluster. But then, an all-too-conspicuous silence.

When war with Iran—a heavily armed nation of 90 million people with eminent geographic advantages—was just theoretical, the New York Times’ editorial board was as hawkish as usual. That included cynically deploying humanitarian concerns in Iran to advocate for regime change just 12 days before the armada’s arrival in the gulf (FAIR.org, 2/10/26).

In that January editorial (1/14/26), headlined “Iran’s Murderous Regime Is Irredeemable,” the Times pulled out arguments from the old regime-change playbook. The Iranian government, the Times said, is “among the world’s most nefarious regimes, and the people who bear the biggest cost are the citizens of Iran.”

Having neatly packaged their argument urging empathy for the Iranian people, the Times then offered a familiar sleight-of-hand for its readers: It is possible—natural even—for coercive US power to be utilized to help the Iranian people “achieve liberty.” Offering the considerations it thought Trump should be taking into account, the Times wrote:

The crucial question is what measures—diplomatic, economic and potentially militarily—have the best chance to strengthen the protest movement and sow division among elites allied with the Khamenei government.

Never mind that US policy has been to the detriment of Iranians’ “liberty” for the better part of a century. The papers’ editors advised Trump that, if  he chooses the military option, he should do so “much more judiciously than he typically does.”

Suddenly silent

As war became increasingly likely—that is, once Trump began amassing his “armada” in the Persian Gulf—the editorial board went silent. No more calls for coercive force. No more discussion of Iran at all.

From January 26 to February 27—the 32-day period of military buildup, during which Trump was weighing one of the most consequential US foreign policy decisions of this century—the Times’ editorial board had nothing to say.

That is unprecedented, given the page’s historic role in promoting US adventurism. In the 32 days preceding the US invasion of Iraq, for instance, the New York Times published 13 editorials perpetuating the weapons of mass destruction myth, which to them was sufficient justification for a war against Iraq.

The public debate over whether or not to go to war with Iraq was so ubiquitous leading up to the invasion that one of the Times’ pro-war editorials (2/23/03) acknowledged that “the debate over Iraq has exhausted everyone.”

That voluminous public debate, replete with fabrication and misinformation as it was, manifested in broad public support for the war. In the first days of the conflict, 76% of the US public favored military intervention in Iraq.

The Iran War, on the other hand, is only the second major US war (after the 2011 Libyan intervention) in the era of modern polling to start with more Americans opposed than supportive of it. Any propaganda campaign in favor of war with Iran would have a steep hill to climb after two decades of experience with Middle East interventions.

Mirroring Democratic silence

In the last two weeks before Trump launched his attack, details of his military deployment, like the inclusion of E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft, indicated that the potential for war was serious.

Still, the Times editorial board found no reason for comment. Given that the editors were advocating for regime change mere days before Trump took up their suggestion by ramping up its forces in West Asia, it is highly doubtful that they learned from their history of mistakes and had a change of heart. In any case, if they did, they didn’t voice it.

What can be said is that the Times’ silence mirrors that of Democratic leaders in Congress, who also barely let out a peep during this period. For their part, it is clear that they aimed to conceal their support for the war from their base, who overwhelmingly oppose it. Within that dynamic, congressional Democrats waited until after the war began to propose a war powers resolution—demonstrating their issues, if any, were about process, not substance.

The Times likewise saved its feckless criticism until after the war began, penning an editorial (2/28/26) the day Trump launched the war (proving their capacity to move quickly when convenient) voicing process concerns: Trump lacked clear achievable objectives, threatened to mire the US in another “endless war,” and failed to consult Congress. Like Democratic leaders, the Times failed to reject—and indeed reiterated—the logic of the war itself: that article of faith that Iran is an intolerably evil and belligerent state (FAIR.org, 3/13/26).

Just like Democratic leaders, the New York Times failed to use its outsized influence to challenge this monstrous war. Instead, it participated in its genesis, through cowardice as much as through sanctimony.

April 22, 2026 Posted by | media | Leave a comment

Israeli Journalist With Deep Ties to IDF Admits West Bank Violence ‘Looks Like… Ethnic Cleansing’

In conversations with Israeli settlers, Ben-Yishai often found that they believed they were entitled by God to take all land where Palestinians reside.

April 16, 2026 , Brad Reed for Common Dreams https://www.commondreams.org/news/west-bank-ethnic-cleansing

West Bank settler attacks on Palestinians are “rather sophisticated, organized, and funded systematic actions,” with the goal of “cleansing” the entire region, said journalist Ron Ben-Yishai.

An Israeli war correspondent who has been described as having deep ties to the Israel Defense Forces said that intensifying settler violence in the occupied West Bank appears to be “ethnic cleansing.”

In an column published by Ynet titled “This looks like blue and white ethnic cleansing,” journalist Ron Ben-Yishai wrote that, during a recent tour of the West Bank, he observed “a disturbing reality” of Israeli teenagers “who go on ‘intimidation tours’” in Palestinian villages, attacking Palestinians while members of the Israeli military frequently either stand by or actively join in the attacks.

“In some cases, these are reservists who also identify ideologically with the rioters, and therefore stand by and do not prevent them from going wild—and sometimes even help them,” explained Ben-Yishai. “Even in the regular IDF units stationed in the territories, there have been quite a few cases in which commanders and fighters have deviated from the norms and the IDF’s code of ethics for religious-nationalist reasons.”

In conversations with Israeli settlers, Ben-Yishai often found that they believed they were entitled by God to take all land where Palestinians reside.

“The confident reliance on God’s command as the answer to all moral and practical questions and concerns,” he wrote, “gave me a disturbing feeling that this was a type of Jewish terrorism motivated by religious and nationalist motives.”

Ben-Yishai also described ways in which Israeli settlers surround Palestinian communities “in order to prevent them from moving freely and strangle them economically.”

Taken as a whole, Ben-Yishai concluded that the Israel settler attacks on Palestinians are a “rather sophisticated, organized, and funded systematic actions—with the long-term strategic goal being to ‘cleanse’ most of” the West Bank and Gaza of Palestinian presence.

In a social media post, geopolitical analyst Shaiel Ben-Ephraim explained how significant it was for someone like Ben-Yishai, whom he said has “the deepest ties to the IDF of any reporter,” to describe West Bank settlers’ actions as ethnic cleansing.

“Observers have been saying for years that what is happening in the West Bank is ethnic cleansing,” he wrote. “But now voices from the heart of the Israeli consensus are admitting it as well.”

April 21, 2026 Posted by | Israel, media | Leave a comment

US’s Erosion of the Right to Cartoon Is No Laughing Matter

Hank Kennedy, April 9, 2026 https://fair.org/home/uss-erosion-of-the-right-to-cartoon-is-no-laughing-matter/

During World War II, cartoonist Bill Mauldin was summoned to a meeting with Gen. George S. Patton. Mauldin’s Stars and Stripes cartoons drew Patton’s ire over his matter-of-fact depictions of war and American GIs.

To Mauldin, war was no fun adventure. In Up Front, his Willie and Joe were war-weary and disheveled soldiers, not heroes ready for movie stardom. They expressed a darkly comic view of the life of an infantryman. In an exemplary cartoon, one of the duo says to a medic attempting to hand out a medal: “Just gimme th’ aspirin, I already got a Purple Heart.”

Mauldin avoided punishment when Gen. Dwight Eisenhower circulated a letter instructing all officers “not to interfere” with “such things as Mauldin’s cartoons” (Oklahoman, 4/16/82). Mauldin won the Pulitzer twice for his editorial cartooning, once during the war and once afterwards.

Perhaps Donald Trump’s Pentagon saw itself as acting in the Patton tradition when it eliminated comics from Stars and Stripes. As FAIR (3/20/26) previously documented, Pete Hegseth has taken steps to crack down on the independence of the Pentagon’s own newspaper. Among the new guidelines to promote “good order and discipline” is a ban on syndicated material, including comics (Stars and Stripes, 3/13/26). US servicemembers have now been saved from the woke, subversive influences of Doonesbury, Pearls Before Swine and, perhaps worst of all, Beetle Bailey.

A global trend  

Hegseth’s anti-comics viewpoint is part of a global trend. Cartooning for Peace, Cartoonists Rights, Reporters Without Borders and several others have teamed up to produce Under Pressure; the March 2  report surveys the status of caricaturists around the world.

Under Pressure collects the stories of some of the most grave casualties in the global war on satire. Egyptian Ashraf Omar has been imprisoned for over a year, awaiting trial under specious charges of terrorism (Committee to Protect Journalists, 3/2/26). Saudi Cartoonist Mohammed Al Ghamdi (pen name Al Hazza) faces a 23-year sentence for “sympathizing with Qatar” (Reporters Without Borders, 7/23/25)—reflecting a since-resolved quarrel between the two governments—and because he allegedly “insulted the kingdom of Saudi Arabia” . In 2024, Palestinian cartoonist Mahasen al-Khateeb was killed in Gaza by Israeli bombardment (Middle East Eye, 10/20/24).

When the survey turns to the United States, things remain ominous. Kak, the president of Cartoonists for Peace whose work appears in L’Opinion, found the “same tactics” that appear in authoritarian regimes, or those headed in a dictatorial direction, “are being used” in the US. He continued that “the ‘Land of the Free’ is now flashing bright red on our threat map,” putting the US in the same crowd as Iran, India, Turkey and Russia.

It’s quite a shift from the 2023 report Cartoonists on the Line, which had no section dedicated to the United States. Much has changed for the worse in three years.

Trump has long mused about using official pressure to suppress satirical responses to his government. In 2018, he threatened to sue Saturday Night Live over their mockery of his administration (Mother Jones, 12/16/18). His FCC chair, Brendan Carr, argued that it was in the “public interest” to threaten Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night ABC show over the host’s comedy (Variety, 12/17/25). These words and deeds have created a climate of fear in the United States, one that political cartoonists are feeling.

‘Long overdue for a housecleaning’

The report cites a few US examples that paint a dark portrait of freedom of expression under the second Trump administration. Some of them have previously been covered by FAIR, including the resignation of Ann Telnaes from the Washington Post (FAIR.org, 1/7/25), the firing of Palm Beach Post editorial page editor Tony Doris (FAIR.org, 3/27/25) and Bob Whitmore’s firing and belated reinstatement to Creative Loafing (FAIR.org, 9/30/25). 

There are other examples, however, that deserve more examination.

In 1999, Felipe Galindo (Pen name Feggo) drew “4th of July From the South Border,” an endlessly reproduced and reprinted piece criticizing the militarization of the border with Mexico. Starting in 2022, Feggo’s work hung in the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History as part of the ¡Presente! A Latino History of the United States exhibit. Feggo’s illustration was taken down after the Trump White House (8/21/25) attacked it as part of an “anti-American exhibition” that showed the US’s legacy of “colonization” and the history of Latino “victimhood and exploitation.” A crowing editorial in the Washington Examiner (8/24/25) asserted “the Smithsonian is long overdue for a housecleaning” over its “fashionable, culturally Marxist ideas.” The New York Times (3/28/25) described Trump’s interference with the Smithsonian as seeking “a more positive view of American history.” More positive for whom, is a question left unasked. Artist Rigoberto Gonzalez, whose “Refugees Crossing the Border Wall Into South Texas” was likewise removed, compared the administration’s censorship to the Nazi campaign against “degenerate art” (NPR, 8/24/25).

Julie Trébault of Artists at Risk Connection, who wrote Under Pressure‘s section on the United States, said it was a “rare and significant move” for the executive branch to single out “a specific work for removal from a federal museum.”

‘Direct threats’

The report cited another Pulitzer winner, Adam Zyglis, in its section on the United States. His July cartoon for the Buffalo News (7/7/25) on flooding in Texas showed a MAGA hat-sporting Texan being swept away while proclaiming, “Gov’t is the problem not the solution!”

The New York Post (7/10/25) reran a Fox News piece (7/9/25) that slammed the cartoon as “vile.” The Post’s conscience is an interesting development, considering that the paper ran a cartoon in 2009 comparing President Obama to a chimpanzee (Guardian, 2/18/09), echoing a well-known racist trope.

The slings and arrows of press criticism were nothing compared to what was to come. In response to this cartoon, Zyglis was subject to numerous death threats. An appearance at Buffalo Museum was canceled over public safety concerns (Politico, 7/11/25). The Association of American Editorial Cartoonists, the Society of Professional Journalists and the Committee to Protect Journalists all released statements condemning the threats and supporting Zyglis (Daily Cartoonist, 7/17/25).

Trébault notes this as a sinister development. To criticize “the government’s actions or positions,” she wrote, “now exposes artists to direct threats.”

Heads in the sand

Unfortunately, Under Pressure has received little coverage in the United States, excepting the Daily Cartoonist (3/4/26). This contrasts with the coverage in New African Magazine (3/2/26), which gave the incidents the report highlights on that continent wider publicity.

The lack of attention media outlets gave to Under Pressure comes at a dangerous time for press freedom. The Inter American Press Association, a hemispheric media watchdog, recently classified the United States as a nation with “‘restrictions’ on freedom of speech” and of the press (AP, 3/10/26). By not giving reports like Under Pressure attention, media outlets are placing their heads in the sand.

Beyond open political censorship, there are also economic pressures on political cartoonists. Many newspapers do not employ their own cartoonists. Instead they choose material from syndicates, which reduces the amount of total cartoonists employed. It’s simple math. Why hire a dedicated cartoonist when syndicated material can be purchased for a fraction of the price?

The venues for cartoonists are also shrinking and sometimes disappearing. Since 2005, around 3,500 newspapers have shut down (Poynter, 10/20/25). Publications like the Atlantic Journal-Constitution, the Newark Star-Ledger and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette are either ending their print editions or shutting down entirely. Cartoonist Walt Handelman (Editor & Publisher, 2/18/26), recently retired from the New Orleans Times-Picayune and the Advocate, said he was “optimistic about satire…. The real question is, how do you make a professional living doing it.”

Are there still political cartoonists out there worth looking for? Of course. In These Times has a vibrant comics section with witty and insightful commentary from the likes of Mattie Lubchansky, Jen Sorenson, Tom Tomorrow and others. The annual collection World War 3 Illustrated provides a perspective not likely to be found in other outlets, as exemplified by last year’s issue dedicated to Palestinian cartoonists. In between winning awards for Insectopolis, his comic study of creepy crawlies, Peter Kuper’s work enlivens The Nation. Cartoonists may be “under pressure,” but the best of them are capable of rising to the challenge.

April 15, 2026 Posted by | media, USA | Leave a comment

U.S. Media finally acknowledging Israel’s central role in Trump’s criminal war on Iran

11 April 2026 AIMN Editorial, By Walt Zlotow  , https://theaimn.net/u-s-media-finally-acknowledging-israels-central-role-in-trumps-criminal-war-on-iran/

For the first 5 weeks of President Trump’s criminal war on Iran, mainstream media pretended this was totally a US war to defend the Homeland by destroying Iran’s nuclear bomb capability and neutering its missile arsenal. Israel was barely mentioned tho they started the war by assassinating Iranian leader Ali Khamenei. Israel’s relentless bombing of Iran was largely ignored to focus on the devastating US bombing. Also ignored was Iran’s robust retaliation causing the greatest damage to Israel in its 78 year history.

The reality is that on February 28th Israel realized its three decade dream of getting a US President to serve as their proxy to destroy Iran as Israel’s last hegemonic rival in the Middle East. Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has spent the entire 21st century lobbying George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump in term one and Joe Biden to take out Iran. Netanyahu finally hit pay dirt with Donald Trump in term two. On February 11 Netanyahu met with Trump, assuring him that once Israel assassinated Iranian leader Ali Khamenei, the regime would collapse within a few days with Iran’s populous rallying around their US liberators.

Gigantic mistake. The Iranian populous coalesced around the regime which retaliated with devastating effectiveness, not only inflicting massive damage on US, Israeli resources but shutting down the Strait of Hormuz, inflicting worldwide economic decline.

Knowing he’s lost, Trump is seeking an off ramp to save his presidency. Netanyahu, the lead actor in this lost war, will have none of it. He’s sabotaging the ceasefire Trump agreed to which would have allowed Iran to survive, retain control of the Strait and keep its nuclear enrichment and its defensive missile arsenal. Netanyahu’s massive bombing of Lebanon, forbidden by Iran’s 10 Point peace plan, puts the ceasefire hanging by a thread.

Mainstream media has taken note, beginning to allow analysts to publicly state this was largely Netanyahu’s war, not Trump’s. MS NOW’s Jen Psaki gave former Secretary of State John Kerry, who negotiated the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement, extensive time to review Netanyahu’s endless demands that US presidents destroy Iran on their behalf. Kerry noted how Netanyahu hyped the imminent Iranian nuclear threat to each president which was swallowed whole only by President Trump. A nuclear agreement meant nothing to Netanyahu. Regime change in a failed state Iran was the sole goal.

The more mainstream media tells the truth about Israel’s central role in Trump’s lost war upending the world economy, the more Trump will be pressured to break with Israel. Whatever Netanyahu has on Trump, whether the hundreds of millions in campaign cash or scandalous Epstein secrets, must be disregarded if Trump has any chance of salvaging his presidency, and more importantly, the world economy.

Keep it up, mainstream news. Expose the dirty secret of Trump’s dirty war launched on orders of Benjamin Netanyahu. If Trump does cut off the weapons train, Israel’s rampage against Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and Yemen may be over. Time to force Israel to make peace with their neighbours, not endless war.

Mainstream news can assist that noble goal.

April 14, 2026 Posted by | media, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »