No, not for me.
Funding to support the creation of a public transcript of Bradley Manning’s trial.
Brian Merchant reports in: The Only Public Transcript of the Bradley Manning Trial Will Be Tapped Out on a Crowd-Funded Typewriter:
The Bradley Manning trial began this week, and it is being held largely in secret—according to the Freedom of the Press Foundation, 270 of the 350 media organizations that applied for access were denied. Major outlets like Reuters, the AP, and the Guardian, were forced to sign a document stating they would withhold certain information in exchange for the privilege of attending.
Oh, and no video or audio recorders allowed. And no official transcripts will be made available to anyone.
But, the court evidently couldn't find grounds to boot out FPF's crowd-funded stenographers, who will be providing the only publicly available transcripts of the trial. (You can donate to the effort and read the transcripts here.)
Which is good news for journalists and anyone looking for an accurate—and public—record of the trial. But the fact that a volunteer stenographer is providing the only comprehensive source of information about such a monumental event is pretty absurd.
The disclaimer that precedes each transcript epitomizes said absurdity. It reads: "This transcript was made by a court reporter who … was not permitted to be in the actual courtroom where the proceedings took place, but in a media room listening to and watching live audio/video feed, not permitted to make an audio backup recording for editing purposes, and not having the ability to control the proceedings in order to produce an accurate verbatim transcript."
In other words, it's a lone court reporter, frantically trying to tap out all the details down, technologically unaided, sequestered in a separate room, in one uninterrupted marathon session. And this will be the definitive record of the trial for public consumption. What's the logic behind this, now? Why allow an outside stenographer but not an audio recorder? Does the court just assume that no one will pay attention to the typed product? Or are they hoping to point to the reporter's fallibility in the instance that something embarrassing to the state is revealed?
In case you missed it: Donate HERE to support public transcripts of the Bradley Manning trial.
Please donate and repost, reblog, tweet, email, etc., the support URL wherever possible.
Whatever the source of the Afghan War Dairies, they are proof that government secrecy is used to hide petty incompetence.
A transcript of the Bradley Manning trial will show government embarrassment, not national security, lies at the core of this trial.
I first saw this at Nat Torkington’s Four short links: 6 June 2013.