Example collocations logo

Press in sentence

1835 examples of Press in a sentence

The real surprise was the reaction of the Romanian press as a whole, including opposition magazines.
Nearly 400 years ago, in 1644, John Milton published his Areopagitica, an essay denouncing a measure in Parliament for licensing the press that was intended, among other things, to suppress libelous publications.
That essay is widely regarded as the start of the worldwide movement for freedom of speech and the press.
Of course, Russia’s formal institutions of democracy remain in place; but, in the absence of a free press, an independent judiciary and free elections in the regions – where Kremlin cronies, like Ramzan Kadyrov in Chechnya, now hold sway – they have been hollowed out.
Yet, while large global firms habitually use their high concentration of financial resources to press for further de-regulation (“or we will go somewhere else”), the crisis has turned their size into a liability.
As conflicted as many Americans are about their country’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, this is no time to contemplate overhauling it, or to otherwise press for “change” in the Kingdom, as much as that may be needed.
International press reports showed Ukrainian and Russian fans fraternizing like old friends.
In a joint press conference with his Syrian counterpart, Walid al-Moallem, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov tabled a proposal, originally agreed with Iran, calling for Syria to “place chemical weapons storage sites under international control.”
The US declined to cooperate with Iran to press ahead on the case.
Eighth, US involvement in Syria will breathe new life into efforts to press for a wider war between the US and Iran.
Respect for press freedom grows out of a respect for pluralism as a cornerstone of peace and progress.
Instead, the power of the press is used to turn traditional value systems on their heads – to make the irrelevant seem essential and the trivial titillating.
The official Chinese press is full of corruption scandals of this type.
In fact, one can find similar achievements in Chile and Brazil, which have not given up on democratic checks and balances, political pluralism, or freedom of the press, and have not enjoyed the luxury of $300 billion in oil revenue in the space of one decade.
LONDON – The poisoning of Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia at an Italian restaurant in Salisbury has driven an important story off the front pages of the British press.
The basic plot goes back to the foundation of the free press with the abolition of licensing in 1695.
To fulfill what has been seen since then as its distinctive purpose – holding power to account – a free press needs information.
We expect a free press to investigate the exercise of power and bring abuses to light.
But actual scandals are not necessary for the press to do its job.
The very existence of a free press is a constraint on government.
We continue to view the press as our defender against an over-mighty state, despite politicians’ often-craven performance in the face of media pressure.
They lack any power of compulsion, so there is no need to guard against the abuse of press power.
But while a press monopoly in its pure form does not exist, oligopoly prevails in most countries.
Were it not for the success of the press in rendering its own power invisible, we would never rely on self-regulation alone to keep the press honest.
Efforts to bind the British press to a standard of “decent” journalism have been tried – and failed – repeatedly.
First, no politician wants to turn the press against him: Tony Blair’s wooing of Murdoch, owner the Sun, the Times, and the Sunday Times, is legendary, as was its pay-off.
The Murdoch press backed Labour in Blair’s three election victories in 1997, 2001, and 2005.
In 1989, following pressure from Parliament, the government commissioned David Calcutt to chair a committee to “consider what measures (whether legislative or otherwise) are needed to give further protection to individual privacy from the activities of the press and improve recourse against the press for the individual citizen.”
The same year, following criminal prosecutions for telephone hacking which led to the closure of Murdoch’s News of the World, then-Prime Minister David Cameron appointed Lord Justice Brian Leveson to head an inquiry into “the culture, practices and ethics of the press; their relationship with the police; the failure of the current system of regulation; the contacts made, and discussions had, between national newspapers and politicians; why previous warnings about press misconduct were not heeded; and the issue of cross-media ownership.”
Leveson tackled his remit – to make recommendations for a new, more effective way of regulating the press – with “one simple question: who guards the guardians?”
BackNext