The debate over who qualifies as “press” —and who gets to call themselves a journalist— has stirred controversy for years in Puerto Rico and in the United States. So has the legitimacy of the so-called “official” press pass issued by the Puerto Rico Department of State. Most local reporters, including the team at the Centro de Periodismo Investigativo (CPI), don’t request or use it. They see it as an undue interference by the State in determining who can act as press.
The Department of State’s “official” press pass merely “confirms” that a journalist works for a news outlet or that a freelancer has previously done journalistic work. Nothing more, nothing less. A newsroom-issued credential should be enough to cover any event. There’s no need for a government-issued one. And people who aim to inform the public ought to be allowed to cover events —with or without a credential— because journalists today are no longer confined to the dwindling, traditional newsroom. There are many ways to report the news.
Even so, the current administration has begun treating the Department of State’s “official press pass” as a prerequisite to attend public events held by Governor Jenniffer González Colón. Despite this order, reporters who show their outlet’s credential generally get in. But this new directive is hard to square with the reception that the governor and her husband have given a small army of influencers and content creators without the Department of State credential to generate “positive” public relations content braided into the daily news. Do these personalities enjoy more privileges than independent media even without an “official” press pass?
The Press Office at La Fortaleza —the governor’s executive mansion— knows it cannot demand the Department of State’s credential as a condition to attend a press conference. Doing so would plainly violate Puerto Rico’s guarantees of freedom of expression and of the press. And running to court to seek an access order, although possible, shouldn’t be the default remedy either. We should fix the root problem: government officials must not be the ones who decide who can scrutinize them or who may act as press at government pressers, whether at La Fortaleza or anywhere else.
Courts interpreting Puerto Rico’s Constitution and the First Amendment have developed a straightforward “press” definition: anyone who engages in newsgathering and publishing to inform the public is performing constitutionally protected functions, regardless of formal journalism training or whether they’re employed by a media outlet.
Today, under modern free speech principles, there is no legal distinction between a journalist and an ordinary citizen performing journalistic functions. Our Supreme Court has explained that the “mission of the press” in Puerto Rico is broad. It includes providing “a vehicle for information and opinion, informing and educating the public, offering criticism, creating a forum for discussion and debate, and serving as a proxy for obtaining news and information on behalf of readers.”
Last year, the Overseas Press Club, one of Puerto Rico’s press associations, ran an educational campaign —“We Are Not the Same”— to draw distinctions among journalists, political analysts, and influencers. Indeed, they aren’t the same. Journalists have the obligation to publish the truth without embellishment and adhere to a professional code of ethics. By following these principles and respecting colleagues who uphold these values, journalists cement their credibility and independence before their audiences.
But titles aside, if a person gathers and disseminates news, they enjoy the same constitutional protections ‘as if they were a journalist.’ That’s a pillar of modern democracies: the principle of consent of the governed requires that anyone can question those who govern them. The opposite opens the dangerous door to official censorship, the kind that ruled Puerto Rico in earlier centuries and still lingers elsewhere around the world.
Under Spanish colonial rule, newspapers needed official licenses to publish, had to post bonds or pay fines, and, even with these prior restraint practices, “printing press” judges and prosecutors went after editors, reporters, and readers who opposed the government, as Antonio S. Pedreira recounts in El periodismo en Puerto Rico (1941). The same happened in the early days of U.S. imperial rule on the island, when the State allowed private groups to attack papers that criticized the military government. Opposition mobs went on to destroy the offices of Diario de Puerto Rico, then directed by Luis Muñoz Rivera.
It is worth asking, should an “official” press pass continue to exist? What function does the credential issued by the Department of State serve?
In the late 1990s, in Disidente Univ. de P.R. v. Depto. de Estado, a majority of the Puerto Rico Supreme Court upheld the regulation authorizing the Department of State to issue the “official” credential. The court found it constitutional because it was tied to special license plates for vehicles used by accredited members of the press. But today, are there even press parking spots in government buildings for everyone holding that credential? If parking is limited, who decides who gets to cover an event? Only “recognized” corporate outlets? What about independent, community, or freelance journalists? And if those special license plates no longer serve any real function, what’s the credential for?
The Department of State’s current regulation sets out several certification document requirements that, on their face, appear straightforward. A commission made up of media representatives appointed by the Secretary of State is responsible for verifying that an applicant submits a certification document showing they work for “a journalistic enterprise.” In the case of independent or freelance journalists, they must submit a sworn statement attesting to their work and providing evidence of their previous news reporting. Under the regulation, the commission only issues a recommendation; it is the government that ultimately issues and signs the final resolution.
Those freelance requirements were shaped, in part, after a 2012 Court of Appeals ruling found that Juan Carlos Pedreira —then operating the CaribNews platform primarily on Twitter— had been arbitrarily denied the “official” credential despite showing he worked as a freelance reporter. For the first time, an independent journalist reporting to his audience from a social media platform received an “official” press pass.
In theory, the idea behind a press credential is not pointless. It helps identify people covering news events and aids with logistics and space constraints. They’re common in recent journalism history. In several European countries, for instance, press associations —not the government— issue them. The problem starts when the credential is formalized as a government requirement for events featuring public officials. That narrows who can question policy decisions that affect all of us. Or is the government’s goal to pack its press conferences with sycophants and loyalists?
A research study conducted by Harvard’s Digital Media Law Project (2014) —the academic initiative that has studied this issue most thoroughly— found that one in five journalists surveyed had been denied a credential at least once. Freelancers and photojournalists were among those most likely to be turned down.
The credential has become a mechanism for exercising arbitrary governmental control over press freedoms. Today, only a few independent media, community press, and freelancers have been subject to this state censorship. But what happens if this arbitrariness is allowed to pass? What stops a government from shutting out watchdog outlets of any size —big or small, corporate or nonprofit, daily or monthly— from covering La Fortaleza?
We can’t let the government decide who is or isn’t a journalist. This stance, of course, must go hand in hand with a steadfast defense of the ethical principles that anyone who claims to practice this profession is expected to uphold. More importantly, if the mission of the press in Puerto Rico includes “offering criticism, providing a forum for discussion and debate,” the “official” press pass cannot become a hurdle or a government-imposed condition for exercising our free speech.
This translation was generated with the assistance of AI and reviewed by our editorial team to ensure accuracy and clarity.
