Bill Overview
Title: PRESS Act
Description: This bill prohibits the federal government from compelling journalists and providers of telecommunications services (e.g., phone and internet companies) to disclose certain protected information, except in limited circumstances such as to prevent terrorism or imminent violence. Specifically, the bill protects from disclosure any information identifying a source, as well as any records, contents of a communication, documents, or information obtained or created by journalists in the course of their work. Further, the bill protects specified third parties, such as telecommunications carriers or social media companies, from being compelled to provide testimony or any document consisting of a record, information, or other communication that is stored by the third party on behalf of a journalist.
Sponsors: Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8]
Target Audience
Population: Journalists and their sources
Estimated Size: 1000000
- Journalists worldwide rely on confidential sources to report on issues of public interest.
- The bill provides protections for journalists against federal government pressures, which reinforces press freedom.
- Telecommunications providers will also be impacted as they handle journalist data and communications.
- Individuals who act as sources for journalists will be protected, potentially leading to more willing whistleblowers.
Reasoning
- Journalists are the primary beneficiaries of this policy, as it ensures their sources remain confidential, thus enabling them to conduct more thorough investigations without fearing federal disclosures.
- Telecom companies will have to adjust to new regulations, which might incur some administrative costs but ultimately align with privacy objectives and create trust.
- Potential whistleblowers across industries such as government, finance, and tech might feel more secure in coming forward, knowing there are protections in place.
- The general public might not experience direct impacts but could benefit from improved journalism quality as a result of this policy.
Simulated Interviews
Investigative Journalist (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial for my work as maintaining source confidentiality is paramount.
- I can pursue more leads without fear that my sources will be compromised.
- It improves trust with my sources and might even encourage more people to come forward with information.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Telecommunications Executive (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aligns with our increasing focus on consumer privacy and trust.
- There will be some initial costs to comply with the new demands, but it’s a worthwhile expenditure to maintain a positive public image and trustworthiness.
- In the long term, it’s beneficial for our brand to protect journalism and free speech.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Government Whistleblower (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy makes me feel like I can come forward without fear of immediate backlash or exposure through my communication channels.
- It doesn't solve all problems but is a step toward ensuring whistleblowers are better protected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
University Professor in Media Studies (Austin, TX)
Age: 51 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is vital for maintaining a free and open press, which is essential for democracy.
- It will likely improve the quality of investigative journalism over time as more sources feel safe to speak up.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cryptocurrency Technology Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 37 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's refreshing to see policies that support privacy, which is aligned with the ethos of our work in secure communications.
- Although some might think it doesn’t impact beyond journalism, increasing privacy measures can have far-reaching positive implications.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Freelance Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The legislation seems less pertinent to my daily work since entertainment reporting rarely involves confidential sources.
- However, it's comforting knowing the protection is there should I ever need to report on more sensitive issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Corporate Compliance Officer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy indirectly affects my role because stricter enforcement of journalist protection may lead to more whistleblowing, thus requiring us to be more compliant with ethical standards.
- Increased transparency can sometimes be challenging but necessary.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Software Engineer (Boston, MA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This legislation reflects a broader appreciation and demand for privacy protections, something that aligns well with the projects I develop.
- While my day-to-day might not change, it positively aligns with my values.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Media Company CEO (Miami, FL)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My journalists will feel empowered and secure, which will likely enhance the quality of the content we produce.
- Implementing and adhering to this law might entail administrative adjustments but it ultimately supports our mission of honest journalism.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired Government Worker (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Press protections are crucial for democracy and holding those in power accountable.
- Though I may not be directly affected, I appreciate policies that ensure integrity and transparency in journalism.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5200000 (Low: $3100000, High: $7300000)
Year 3: $5400000 (Low: $3200000, High: $7600000)
Year 5: $5800000 (Low: $3500000, High: $8100000)
Year 10: $6500000 (Low: $4000000, High: $9000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $140000000)
Key Considerations
- Potential legal challenges and their associated costs/verdicts
- Administrative resource allocation for compliance and enforcement
- Impact on the telecommunications sector, especially in exploring compliance strategies