In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.

Meryl Streep’s Golden Globes speech was felt both emotionally and tangibly for at least one press freedom group. 
  
 Poynter first reported Monday that the Committee to Protect Journalists received a spike in donations Sunday night following the speech criticizing President-elect Donald Trump and supporting continued freedom of the press. The group got more than 700 donations totaling over $60,000, a rep told The Huffington Post, far more than the “handful” it typically sees on a Sunday evening. 
  
 “That was pretty exciting,” Courtney Radsch, advocacy director for CPJ, told Poynter. “I don’t think any of us were expecting such a ringing endorsement for our work and the right of journalists to report the news, which is our mission ... Most of them were small, individual donations coming from people who appear to have been inspired by her speech.” 
  
 Donations continue to roll in. 
  
 Thank you Meryl Streep for your support of CPJ and #pressfreedom at the #GoldenGlobes. Donations can be made online https://t.co/xAd0NgiTa7 — CPJ (@pressfreedom) January 9, 2017 
  
 At CPJ we defend the right of journalists to report the news without fear of reprisal https://t.co/UgM4C3OQDZ #GoldenGlobes — CPJ (@pressfreedom) January 9, 2017 
  
 Streep gave the powerful address while accepting this year’s Cecil B. DeMille Award for “outstanding contributions to the world of entertainment.” 
  
 “Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence. When the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose,” Streep said. 
  
 “This brings me to the press,” she continued. “We need the principled press to hold power to account, to call them on the carpet for every why our founders enshrined the press and its freedoms in our constitution. So I only ask the famously well-heeled Hollywood Foreign Press and all of us in our community to join me in supporting the committee to protect journalists. Because we’re going to need them going forward. And they’ll need us to safeguard the truth.” 
  
 At tonight's #GoldenGlobes we honor Hollywood legend Meryl Streep with the prestigious Cecil B. Demille Award. pic.twitter.com/dxpeCDNXY6 — Golden Globe Awards (@goldenglobes) January 9, 2017 ||||| The head of the Committee to Protect Journalists tells THR that hundreds of “average people” have been making donations to the organization since the actress’ fiery anti-Trump speech. Says Joel Simon of the president-elect: “He’ll be angry, no question.” 
  
 The most explicit call to action in Meryl Streep’s memorable, now-viral speech about Hollywood, media and President-elect Donald J. Trump at the Golden Globes on Jan. 8 was her plea to join in support of The Committee to Protect Journalists. 
  
 The 35-year-old, New York-based nonprofit primarily defends reporters at risk of imprisonment or death for their work in repressive countries and conflict zones. But lately it’s raised concerns about press freedom in the United States. 
  
 The Hollywood Reporter talked to CPJ head Joel Simon the morning after Streep spoke. (Update: As of Tuesday afternoon at 3 p.m., the organization had received upwards of 2,000 donations totaling nearly $250,000.) 
  
 Did you know Streep was going to mention the CPJ? 
  
 We had no idea. 
  
 What’s the response been so far? 
  
 Amazing – we got 500 new donations overnight and a couple hundred more during the day. They continue to come in and it’s mostly average people based on the size of the donation, so that’s really encouraging. Obviously, separately, it’s just enormous visibility and resonance about what’s at stake here. The thing about Meryl Streep is that we’re used to journalists championing this issue. She said the press needs to go out there and do what it needs to do and needs to be defended by all of us. 
  
 This was the first time most people had heard of the organization – it’s not a household name. 
  
 We’re primarily a front-line organization, protecting journalists who are doing this day-to-day work that’s incredibly dangerous and difficult. When we were founded, the U.S. media was really strong and there was a sense that we needed to look outward from our privilege and help others. And now that gap has narrowed and we are facing a press freedom challenge at home. While we of course recognize the challenges are different – it’s not Syria – the U.S. has been in a position of global leadership, the example we set for the press in this country has resonated all over the world, and so we expect to be very engaged during the Trump administration. 
  
 The CPJ harshly criticized the Obama administration over its own leak investigations and use of surveillance. 
  
 I think it’s laid a legal framework, and a kind of rationale, that’s very threatening in terms of what might come. When Trump tweeted out his displeasure that some of the information from the [Russian hacking] intelligence briefing leaked before he got it, that was a very menacing message. But that’s also a message the Obama administration sent pretty frequently in its own way. What’s fundamentally different is the overt hostility with Trump, the attacks on individual reporters, the threats to weaken libel laws. There’s a heightened rhetoric that is different. 
  
 How has the rise of social media weakened accountability reporting? 
  
 I think what keeps the press safe, what allows it to challenge powerful forces, is its utility. The press serves a vital role in terms of its ability to reach a mass audience with information that these powerful forces want to disseminate. But what’s happened is that technology has created a disintermediation, where if you’re ISIS you don’t need to talk to journalists, and you also can kill journalists. And if you’re a powerful politician, you previously needed to grapple with journalists, and now you can use your Twitter feed to do an end-run and disparage them and mock them. So essentially the media has less power. 
  
 What has the CPJ seen elsewhere that causes it to sound its alarm domestically now? 
  
 One of the things we’ve seen, without a direct analogy, is that if you look at the way autocratic leaders consolidate power, they challenge media as corrupt or that it doesn’t represent the views of the people. You see that rhetoric in Russia and Venezuela and Turkey. It’s not even ideological. If you can reduce the influence of the press, then if the public encounters reporting that might be threatening to you, and the general confidence in information is already low, it’s already much easier to dismiss it. 
  
 What’s the biggest open question of the Trump administration pertaining to the press? 
  
 Trump does not like to be criticized in the media. The media will criticize him and expose him in ways he doesn’t like. He’ll be angry, no question. Will it just be angry rants and tweets, or will it be translated into policies that are detrimental to how the media functions? We’ll see. 
  
 Will White House correspondents exist at the front lines of this dynamic? 
  
 The White House press corps has a role, but there was a time when it was more significant. The symbolism of the spokesperson for the administration submitting to harsh, hostile questions – difficult, probing questions from the media – is almost the most important thing itself. That’s a visible manifestation of that accountability role. 
  
 The White House Correspondents’ Association dinner has taken on an outsized, polarizing cultural role in Washington in the past couple of decades. Reporters hobnob with officials and Obama roasted Trump, seated nearby, in 2011. Will the party change? 
  
 That event does the media no favors. I would not be sad to see its demise. 
  
 To learn more about supporting the Committee to Protect Journalists, click here. 
  
 Jan. 10, 3:15 p.m. Updated with donations total ||||| Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window) 
  
 Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window) 
  
 Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) 
  
 Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) 
  
 Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window) 
  
 By Benjamin Mullin • January 9, 2017 
  
 Courtney Radsch was just sitting down to watch the Golden Globes when Meryl Streep came on. 
  
 Radsch, a fan of Streep's, sat down to watch the awards show with her husband and heard the Academy Award-winning actress make an unexpected plug for the Committee to Protect Journalists. 
  
 "That was pretty exciting," said Radsch, advocacy director at CPJ. "I don’t think any of us were expecting such a ringing endorsement for our work and the right of journalists to report the news, which is our mission." 
  
 Quickly, Radsch opened up her laptop and began logging into the committee's social media accounts. She instant messaged her colleagues, who were equally surprised and determined to seize the moment: 
  
 Thank you Meryl Streep for your support of CPJ and #pressfreedom at the #GoldenGlobes. Donations can be made online https://t.co/xAd0NgiTa7 — CPJ (@pressfreedom) January 9, 2017 
  
 Streep's plug helped. As of Monday afternoon, the committee has received about 1,000 donations totaling more than $80,000. On a normal Sunday night, Radsch said, the committee receives about a handful. 
  
 The Committee to Protect Journalists doesn't yet have a final tally from Sunday night, Radsch said. But a cursory look shows that the contributions were fairly modest. 
  
 "Most of them were small, individual donations coming from people who appear to have been inspired by her speech," Radsch said. 
  
 Although Streep's speech was made in the context of Donald Trump's tumultuous relationship with the media, Radsch noted that there are huge challenges facing journalists abroad. Last year was the worst on record for journalist imprisonment around the world, with Turkey alone jailing 81. 
  
 Other news organizations have benefitted from celebrity support. ProPublica, an investigative nonprofit based in New York City, saw a surge in donations after John Oliver suggested his audience contribute to its work. ||||| Donate Today 
  
 We appreciate your generous support in protecting press freedom worldwide. 
  
  
  
 (Video courtesy of CBS) 
  
 Click below to donate through PayPal. |||||
Meryl Streep's now-famous speech at the Golden Globes had some perhaps unintended consequences, and one that was quite intended: the Committee to Protect Journalists saw a surge in donations that hasn't stopped after the actress called on viewers to open their wallets, the Huffington Post reports. Calling the outpouring "amazing," CPJ chief Joel Simon tells the Hollywood Reporter that 500 donations were posted Sunday night after Streep's plug, and a few hundred more poured into the New York nonprofit on Monday. "It's mostly average people based on the size of the donation, so that's really encouraging," he says. The CPJ aims mainly to protect reporters in war zones and countries where the press faces restriction—which hasn't historically been a domestic concern. Says Simon, "And now that gap has narrowed and we are facing a press freedom challenge at home." The CPJ's Courtney Radsch tells Poynter, "I don't think any of us were expecting such a ringing endorsement for our work and the right of journalists to report the news, which is our mission." (A list of people and things besides Streep that Donald Trump finds overrated.)