Gov. Healey wants to remove public access to vital records. So we’re giving her a Muzzle Award — her third.

Gov. Maura Healey, left, with Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll. 2023 photo in the public domain.

Six years ago, then-Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, a moderate Republican, earned a New England Muzzle Award — then hosted by GBH News — for proposing a change in the public-records laws so that access to birth, death and marriage records would not be available to the public for many decades. The delay would have amounted to 90 years in the case of birth and marriage records and 50 years after a person’s death.

Follow my Bluesky newsfeed for additional news and commentary. And please join my Patreon for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a supporters-only newsletter every Thursday.

Fortunately, the bill didn’t pass. But now Baker’s successor, Gov. Maura Healey, a liberal Democrat, is back with a similar bill. As The Boston Globe put it in an editorial (sub. req.) on Thursday:

In a state that already has a dreadful reputation for its lack of transparency and will probably face a ballot question over the exemptions from the state’s public records law accorded the governor’s office and the Legislature, this is simply the wrong law at the wrong time.

The Globe observes that Healey, in her announcement touting the legislation, emphasizes one of its few positive aspects — the end of references to “out of wedlock” on birth and marriage certificates. The rest of it, though, would deprive researchers of information they need to do their work in areas such as public health and genealogy. And she has stacked the deck in favor of passage by making it part of a budget bill that must be approved and for which debate is limited.

As I wrote in 2020, these records have been freely available to anyone who asks for them since the early Puritan era. Investigative reporter Jenifer McKim of GBH News said on Twitter at the time: “As MA governor [Baker] works to make birth, death records secret, thinking of the stories I’ve written and produced with the help of these key, currently public, documents, including suicides at colleges and universities.”

And in a 2020 interview with the Chelsea Record, Ryan Woods, executive vice president of the New England and Genealogical Society, said, “Unequivocally it was a surprise to us. There had not been any public discussion about this until it appeared in the budget.”

This is not Gov. Healey’s first time around with the Muzzle Awards. In 2015, when she was the state attorney general, I singled her out for defending a 1946 state law that criminalized political lies aimed at influencing an election, as if that were even theoretically possible.

In 2018, also a time when she was AG, she won another Muzzle, this one for upholding rulings that public information should, in some cases, remain private. Then-Globe reporter Todd Wallack, now with The Washington Post, documented a number of Healey’s attempts to suppress public records. His most startling finding: Healey’s office had upheld a ruling by the Worcester district attorney that records pertaining to the 1951 murder of a state trooper should not be made public. Healey’s decision reversed a ruling by Secretary of State Bill Galvin’s office and denied a friend of the murder victim the opportunity to follow up some leads on his own. The friend had since died.

Massachusetts has one of the worst reputations in the country with regard to public records. All too often, Maura Healey has been part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

Thinking through the legal and ethical issues raised by Kash Patel’s libel case against The Atlantic

Kash Patel. Photo (cc) 2022 by Gage Skidmore.

FBI Director Kash Patel’s $250 million libel suit against The Atlantic may prove to be nothing more than bluster. Nevertheless, it’s already raised some interesting issues about ethics and defamation law, and I thought it would be useful to walk through some of them here.

Follow my Bluesky newsfeed for additional news and commentary. And please join my Patreon for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a supporters-only newsletter every Thursday.

Patel sued after Sarah Fitzpatrick reported Friday that Patel’s tenure at the FBI has been marred by excessive drinking, lapses in judgment and a shocking lack of discipline. The story, she writes, was based on “more than two dozen people I interviewed about Patel’s conduct, including current and former FBI officials, staff at law-enforcement and intelligence agencies, hospitality-industry workers, members of Congress, political operatives, lobbyists, and former advisers.” There are no named sources who say they’ve had first-hand knowledge of Patel’s alleged misbehavior. Still, that’s a lot of sources.

Continue reading “Thinking through the legal and ethical issues raised by Kash Patel’s libel case against The Atlantic”

A Muzzle to the town of Hanover, N.H., for refusing to release arrest records after a Dartmouth protest

Dartmouth College. 2007 public domain photo by Kane5187.

When the police arrest someone, the public has a right to know the reason. That’s why virtually every public-records law in the country requires that the police release basic information about those they’ve taken into custody, including name, address and the charges filed against them. And as long as there’s no danger of compromising an investigation, the police are required to release more detailed information as well.

But apparently that’s not how they conduct business in the town of Hanover, New Hampshire. Because when two student protesters at Dartmouth College were arrested in October 2023, the town refused to release the reports. The Valley News, the local newspaper serving that area, took the town to court. And when a state judge in August 2024 ordered the town to produce the records, local officials not only dragged their feet for a few more weeks but they also refused to pay The Valley News’ legal fees, which is required under state law.

Last week, the town lost that case as well. And thus we present town officials in Hanover with a New England Muzzle Award for gross interference with the public’s right to know. Here’s how the state Supreme Court put it in a 3-0 decision:

Having concluded that this lawsuit was necessary to enforce compliance with the Right-to-Know Law and that Hanover knew or should have known that its blanket denial violated that law, we necessarily conclude that Valley News is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs under RSA 91-A:8, I. [That’s a reference to the state’s Right-to-Know Law.]

According to Claire Shanahan of The Valley News, those legal costs are in the process of being calculated.

After the records were released in September 2024, John Lippman of The Valley News reported that they revealed the two students were arrested “at the behest of college officials who wanted them cited for criminal trespass.” The students had set up a tent as part of pro-Palestinian protests aimed at pressuring Dartmouth to divest from investments “that are complicit in apartheid and its apparatuses.” Lippman wrote:

Although the demonstration was peaceful, Hanover police prepared for the students’ arrests as if they were undertaking a major police operation by dividing into double-officer teams called “arrest team 1” and “arrest team 2” which were staged behind Parkhurst Hall, out of sight of the protesters.

The students were charged with misdemeanor offenses. According to Alesandra Gonzales of The Dartmouth, the two students were found guilty and, in February 2025, were sentenced to 20 hours of community service each plus a $310 fine that could be satisfied through that service.

After last week’s state Supreme Court ruling on legal fees, Valley News publisher Rich Wallace hailed the decision as a blow for governmental transparency:

This ruling affirms a simple but essential principle: the public has a right to know, and that right must be defended. Awarding fees in this case recognizes that transparency should not come at a financial penalty to those willing to stand up for it. We pursued this not just for our newsroom, but for the community we serve — and today’s decision strengthens accountability for everyone.

Shanahan wrote that the town and the police department withheld records because of their “active criminal prosecution of the case” — an argument that clearly did not impress Judge Steven Houran, who ordered that the records be released, or the state Supreme Court.

The Washington Star is back, and so is its long-running rivalry with The Washington Post

Maybe not quite so final after all. Photo via eBay.

Forty-five years after The Washington Star closed its doors, its long-running rivalry with The Washington Post is lurching back to life. NOTUS, a fledgling digital publication, is rebranding itself as The Star in June and is expanding in an attempt to take advantage of recent deep cuts at the Post, especially in local news and sports.

Katie Robertson reports in The New York Times that The Star plans to expand its newsroom from about 45 to 95 staff members by the end of the year. That’s still well short of the 400 to 500 that the Post employs, but The Star should presumably be able to carve out a niche by focusing on areas where the Post is weak. (Robertson’s story makes no mention of whether there will be a print edition. My guess is no.)

Continue reading “The Washington Star is back, and so is its long-running rivalry with The Washington Post”

Registration is now open for our free What Works webinar on ‘Audience, AI and Events’

We’re excited to announce an all-star lineup for our 2026 What Works webinar, “Audience, AI and Events,” aimed at practical skills for local news publishers. This free, all-day teleconference will be held on Thursday, May 21. You’ll be able to sign up for interactive workshops facilitated by leaders in their fields. Please register today!

What Works is part of Northeastern University’s School of Journalism and is affiliated with the Center for Transformative Media.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette will go nonprofit after being acquired by The Baltimore Banner’s owner

Pittsburgh. Photo (cc) 2017 by Patrick Kinney.

When the owners of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette announced earlier this year that the paper would shut down in May, it was widely noted that such a move would leave Pittsburgh as the largest city in the country without a daily newspaper. That said, it seemed unlikely. The very fact that the Block family decided to keep operating the paper until May all but guaranteed that some new ownership possibilities would emerge.

And today, that’s exactly what happened. The Venetoulis Institute for Local Journalism, which owns the nonprofit Baltimore Banner, will buy the Post-Gazette and operate the paper as a nonprofit. If I’m not mistaken, that will make the Post-Gazette the second metro daily to go the nonprofit route, following The Salt Lake Tribune. A few other large regional dailies, most notably The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Tampa Bay Times, are for-profits owned by nonprofits.

The Venetoulis Institute was established by Baltimore billionaire Stewart Bainum as his vehicle for launching The Baltimore Banner, a digital-only news organization that he started after he was spurned in his attempts to buy The Baltimore Sun. The Banner has grown into one of the most admired news outlets in the country, and it recently announced it would expand its coverage area and sports reporting in response to massive cuts at The Washington Post. Ted Venetoulis was a friend of Bainum’s and an advocate for local news in Baltimore.

The Post-Gazette has been riven in recent years by a long-running battle between management and the union as well as racial turmoil, so its acquisition by a public-minded institution like Venetoulis is good news indeed.

“Venetoulis is committed to solving a national problem, to providing high-quality local journalism where it’s most needed,” Venetoulis CEO Bob Cohn was quoted as telling the Banner. “That is our civic mission. And here is an opportunity to do that in a market where the 240-year-old incumbent is going out of business or could be sold.”

In an interview with The New York Times, Bainum said, “The Block family should be recognized for selling this at a huge discount for the price they could have received.”

The change will also lead to the return of former Post-Gazette executive editor David Shribman, whose previous stops include a Pulitzer Prize-winning stint as Washington bureau chief for The Boston Globe. Shribman, who was the Post-Gazette’s top editor from 2003 to 2019, will served on the Venetoulis board.

The Internet Archive faces a new threat: Wary publishers who opt out to stop scraping by AI bots

Ruins of the Library of Pantainos in Athens, Greece. Photo (cc) 2018 by Michael Kogan.

Has the Internet Archive reached the end of the line? The 30-year-old nonprofit, which has saved and made searchable more than a trillion webpages, has proved itself to be of enormous value over the years.

I’ve used it to track changes in reporting, including this blog post about The New York Times’ shifting coverage of an explosion at Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza City in the days after Hamas’ October 2023 terrorist attack on Israel. The Times and other news organizations initially reported that Israeli forces had bombed the hospital, but they later had to walk back that unverified claim.

Follow my Bluesky newsfeed for additional news and commentary. And please join my Patreon for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a supporters-only newsletter every Thursday.

The Internet Archive is also home to The Boston Phoenix’s online digital and print archives thanks to an agreement that it made with Northeastern University, which acquired the Phoenix’s intellectual property after the legendary alt-weekly went out of business in 2013. (Note: I was a longtime staff columnist for the Phoenix, and I helped arrange the donation to Northeastern.)

Now, though, the Internet Archive and its Wayback Machine, which reproduces web content from years past, are facing an existential threat. News organizations ranging from the Times to USA Today are inserting code into their sites that blocks the Archive from crawling their content, mainly to prevent AI companies from accessing their journalism without permission.

As Katie Knibbs reports for Wired, the irony is that USA Today recently published an important piece of investigative journalism documenting ICE detention statistics that wouldn’t have been possible without the Archive. Knibbs writes:

According to analysis by the artificial-intelligence-detection startup Originality AI, 23 major news sites are currently blocking ia_archiverbot, the web crawler commonly used by the Internet Archive for the Wayback project. The social platform Reddit is too. Other outlets are limiting the project in different ways: The Guardian does not block the crawler, but it excludes its content from the Internet Archive API and filters out articles from the Wayback Machine interface, which makes it harder for regular people to access archived versions of its articles.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is helping to lead a signature drive in support of the Archive, compares the publishers’ actions to “a newspaper publisher announcing it will no longer allow libraries to keep copies of its paper,” according to a recent EFF article by Joe Mullin, who writes:

For nearly three decades, historians, journalists, and the public have relied on the Internet Archive to preserve news sites as they appeared online. Those archived pages are often the only reliable record of how stories were originally published. In many cases, articles get edited, changed, or removed—sometimes openly, sometimes not. The Internet Archive often becomes the only source for seeing those changes. When major publishers block the Archive’s crawlers, that historical record starts to disappear.

This is not the first time the Archive has run into legal problems. One major challenge was of its own making: a project begun during the COVID pandemic to make books available for free without permission and without any compensation to publishers or authors. Not surprisingly, the Archive lost that case in a federal appeals court in 2024. As I wrote in describing that decision: “The Archive claimed that it was in compliance with copyright law because it limited e-book borrowing to correspond with physical books that it had in its collection or that was owned by one of its partner libraries. That’s not the way it works, though.”

The current threat involves the right of publishers’ to make the content available as they see fit, which they have a legal right to do. They are under no obligation to let the Internet Archive repurpose it. Ideally, they will come to understand the incalculable damage they are doing.

As EFF’s Mullin puts it: “There are real disputes over AI training that must be resolved in courts. But sacrificing the public record to fight those battles would be a profound, and possibly irreversible, mistake.”

A Muzzle for Teresa Riley, the chief immigration judge, for her silence over a censorious firing

ICE goons grab Rümeysa Öztürk near Tufts.

Eleven months ago, I handed a New England Muzzle Award to Donald Trump’s thuggish immigration czar, Stephen Miller, for the arrest and detention of Rümeysa Öztürk. The Tufts University Ph.D. student’s only offense was to help write an op-ed piece in The Tufts Daily that was critical of Israel and sympathetic to the pro-Palestinian cause.

Follow my Bluesky newsfeed for additional news and commentary. And please join my Patreon for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a supporters-only newsletter every Thursday.

Now Roopal Patel, the Boston immigration judge who ended deportation proceedings against Öztürk, has been fired. And thus I’m awarding another New England Muzzle, this one to Teresa Riley, the chief immigration judge who was appointed to her position by the Trump regime. I don’t know whether she was involved in Patel’s firing. What I do know is that Riley has neither resigned in protest nor raised her voice in outrage since Patel was dismissed on Friday.

Patel was actually one of two immigration judges fired Friday who had been involved in high-profile immigration cases. The other, Nina Froes, had ruled similarly that Trump officials had no right to detain Mohsen Mahdawi, a green card holder who’d been involved in pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University. There’s another New England angle as well — Froes’ court is based in Chelmsford, Massachusetts.  The New York Times reports:

Ms. Patel, like many immigration judges interviewed by The Times, said the Trump administration had made it clear that it wanted more immigrants ordered deported.

“It was a pressure I at least tried to actively resist,” she said in an interview. “All people in the United States are entitled to due process, and everyone deserves to have their cases adjudicated fully and fairly.”

According to The Boston Globe (sub. req.), Patel “was nearing the end of her two-year probationary period” when she was fired. “Even though I was expecting it, it was still sort of shocking,” Patel told the Globe. “The consequences are immediate.”

The Globe reports that 113 immigration judges out of more than 700 have been fired since January 2025. The paper quoted Patel as saying:

It’s creating this climate of fear where judges are worried that if they misstep and do something that’s out of line with what the administration wants, they’re more subject to firing. That can erode judicial independence, it can erode due process, and it can make people more likely to be ordered removed from this country.

Unlike most judges, who are part of the independent judiciary, immigration judges are considered members of the executive branch and are appointed by the attorney general. “The judges there need more judicial independence,” Patel told the Times in speaking about her former colleagues.

This is the way repression works. Just as international students learned from the Öztürk and Mahdawi cases that the price of avoiding arrest and detention is to refrain from their First Amendment-protected rights to write and to protest, immigration judges have learned from Patel and Froes that they should place Trump’s agenda above the law if they want to hold onto their jobs.

A ‘NewsHour’ exchange highlights the endless debate over Biden’s and Trump’s mental acuity

Like Hillary and Bernie in 2016, or Grady Little’s decision to send Pedro Martinez back out for the eighth, the media’s coverage of Joe Biden’s decline in 2024 is going to be litigated forever.

Follow my Bluesky newsfeed for additional news and commentary. And please join my Patreon for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a supporters-only newsletter every Thursday.

The latest example came Friday night on the “PBS NewsHour,” when Geoff Bennett asked Jonathan Capehart why coverage of Donald Trump’s mental state hasn’t matched similar coverage of Biden’s decline two years ago. Here’s how it went down:

Continue reading “A ‘NewsHour’ exchange highlights the endless debate over Biden’s and Trump’s mental acuity”

Celebrate the first annual Local News Day by supporting journalism in your community

Art Cullen in a scene from “Storm Lake.”

Today is Local News Day — the first of what we can hope will become an annual reminder of the importance of community journalism. Organized by the nonprofit Montana Free Press, the event “is a national day of action connecting communities with trusted local news. Our mission is simple: reconnect people to trusted local outlets, empower newsrooms to grow, and spark a national movement that sustains local news for generations.”

We gave Local News Day a plug on the latest episode of “What Works,” our podcast about local news that I host with Ellen Clegg. The day is sponsored by a number of heavy hitters, including Press Forward, a major philanthropic effort that supports community journalism; and The New York Times; the American Journalism Project, another large philanthropy.

You may be seeing messages in your inbox and on social media asking you to support your local news organization. You should.

Poynter media columnist Tom Jones reports that MS NOW, newly freed from NBC, is investing in local news in a big way, lending support to investigative and local reporting by partnering with the Pulitzer Center, States Newsroom and The Marshall Project. “Perhaps it’s no coincidence that the announcement comes today, which is Local News Day,” Jones writes.

On Wednesday evening, I showed my students a documentary I never tire of watching — “Storm Lake,” about the Storm Lake Times’ struggle to stay afloat in rural Iowa despite the demise of local businesses at the hands of corporate agriculture. (The paper is now known as the Storm Lake Times-Pilot following a 2022 merger.) We follow Pulitzer Prize-winning publisher-editor Art Cullen and his family as they report on everything from the precarious corn crop to a member of the Latino community who’s competing in a Spanish-language talent competition on television; from the 2020 Iowa caucuses (do we know who won yet?) and into the early months of the COVID pandemic, which is where the film concludes.

Local news is the lifeblood of democracy. Not to sound defeatest, but there’s not much we can do about Donald Trump’s authoritarian regime, enabled by a supine Republican Congress, other than to vote. But we can work with our neighbors to support each other and solve problems in our own communities. We need reliable news in order for that to happen.