|
Two versions of a bill in Congress would enshrine a journalist’s right to keep his or her sources confidential, effectively banning the government from forcing journalists to reveal whistleblowers. One version though—the House version—gives an incredibly stupid definition of journalist that excludes not only bloggers, but freelancers, independents, and nonprofit journalists as well.
For the most part, the Senate and House agree on what a journalist’s duties are and what journalism entails:
But only the House version, which has more cosponsors than brains apparently, adds to that definition:
So, in effect, if journalism is a hobby or passion you do as a public service, or if you are a freelancer without a boss—both of which easily describe a blogger—then the government reserves the right to force you to tell them who told you something, much like the government tried to do with New York Times journalist Judy Miller under the Bush Administration.
Apparently our “representatives” have a real problem with citizen journalism done for the sake of journalism and for the good of democracy, and believe protecting the “free flow of information” is only reserved for officially approved press. No bloggers, no patriotic radicals, no underground agitator pamphleteers like the ones who actually founded and fought for this country to begin with.
Hate to (once again) school our freaking government about the freaking Constitution they freaking pledge to uphold, but this is Congress making a law abridging the freedom of the press, a violation of the First Amendment. I might be more sympathetic if they missed one further down the list, BUT IT’S THE FIRST FREAKING ONE.
By defining who is and who is not considered press, and therefore deciding who is entitled to special protection—in this case, especially, where they base it on who does it for money and who does it for passion (hint: the latter one is more likely to dig up something that matters)—the House of Representatives are doing us all a huge disservice if they don’t change that language.
>>> Do you think bloggers should be considered journalists?
Well, its because, its not beneficial to them, Mind you if blogging or blogger for that matter benefits them then I am sure another bill would be passed catering to their whim and caprice.
Well, its because, its not beneficial to them. Mind you, if blogging or blogger,for that matter, benefits them then I am sure another bill would be passed catering to their whim and caprice.
Looks like bloggers will have to unite (BPI – Blogger Press International), get paid $1 for each story by someone to come close to the definition of “press”.
If the goverment keeps this up, they will have to worry more about We the People raiding government offices with sticks and torches, than bloggers.
Tell me – if a press reporter blogs, are they now a blogger or still “press”. As a blogger I demand equal rights and protection under the law!
This is a typical Nazi like reaction to the demise of the press, and it’s being carried out by their lackeys in the Congress, from all people the folks who say they want “balance” and “fairness”. Sure, right. I’m not a political blogger but anyone who wants to mess with free speech in this manner may just turn me into one. Barry has a great idea. We could set up PayPal accounts and “pay” each other a buck a story or just a buck a week and just let that buck spread around the internet, and leave notes or even a html image saying “Blog Buck Pay”. This bill is a serious threat to free speech, bloggers and anyone who cares about free speech anywhere. What’s next? Are they going to outlaw anyone who wants to say nasty things about politicians? Don’t think it’ can’t happen. Speak up now or lose your blogging rights.
According to the definition you need to be making a “significant income”.
I understand why the bills excludes bloggers or anyone that isn’t actually paid for being a journalist.
ANYONE can be a blogger or write ‘articles’ and post to the Internet.
When does one draw the line between releasing ‘sources’ vs ‘so & so told me this.’
Sure, it is easy to say ‘First Amendent Rights’ – but actually that is not covered under this. Just try, for a second to consider this:
Blogger A – says ” I know who raped your sister.” (mother, et al).
How much protection should Blogger ‘A’ really have.. if you are trying to confirm / deny actual facts.
Please.. invoke some ‘reasonability’ standards.
…and anyone can start a religion too so should that not be protected as well?
I suspect Thomas Paine would not be considered a journalist by this measurement. Since when is financial gain, let alone “substantial financial gain”, a determinant of anything? Is an artist who died penniless less of an artist because he was less of a businessperson? Perhaps I choose NOT to make money in order to maintain my independence and objectivity. Perhaps our representatives should try NOT taking money in order to maintain their indepence and objectivity.
Sickening.
Free speech is dieing along with our constitutional rights.
What the house is saying is that you are only a journalist if you are financially successful in your venture? That’s rubbish! Are you only a Doctor if you are financially successful, what about a nun?
One of my most popular blogs YourSmokiesNews does not have ads on it and I derive no revenue from it but use it to educate and inform the public, build my YourSmokies branding and produce traffic and bump my SE results for web sites where I derive my income.
So since I chase down news stories, interview people, do non profit work under the “branding” of this site and promote non profit entities for free on this blog I am not a journalist?
I get information and credibility as a result of the journalistic work I do. I am a journalist and am entitled to the rights of one.
I am a theatrical press agent. Back in the early ’90s, I closely studied the issue of what criteria an independent writer should meet in order to qualify for press courtesies at my clients’ theaters.
Here is a list of questions I adopted to ask myself. I never made them hard rules, but they helped me focus my thinking on a case-by-case basis. I think they are relevant to this debate. Of course, they are oriented toward people who represent themselves as theater writers.
1. Has the person been assigned by the publication or broadcast entity in question for a critique, feature or news story? Is the assignment verifiable? Will they commit to forwarding a hard copy of their writing to the theater?
2. Is the source of the critique (etc.), whether in publication or broadcast, a functioning business enterprise?
3. Is this source available on a particular, well-circulated network of significant and verifiable circulation?
4. Does the journalist and his/her employer have intellectual and artistic credibility?
5. Are opposing viewpoints expressed in the system, for example, letters to the editor?
6. Will the critiques expressed be useful to the artists? ( I meant, will they be useful criticisms?)
7. Will the critiques expressed by useful to the theater? (The theaters were my clients. It seemed sensible to ask that question.)
8. If the coverage is to be justified as news, does the source serve the public interest? Is it a news gathering organization? Does it carry public service announcements or legal notices?
These were developed when news organizations were really organizations, before the flowering of self-publishing that we know today as blogging.
I don’t know what criteria I would come up with today, because a blogger is similar to an artist in a key aspect: you become a journalist–and an artist– by declaring yourself.
Well they started with the second amendment and no one seemed to mind, now they are working on the first.
True to form for a socialist government.
President Obama needs to wake up and realize he would not be sitting in that office if it had not of been for the work of thousands of bloggers. (Oh I forgot, it benefitted them at the time).
I wouldn’t add a word to your post. (It might cost me jail time if the treasonous rascals in the Obama/Pelosi government get their way.)
Sounds unconstitutional both in terms of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. With so many newspapers shuttering, what venues are left for journalists? The government is attempting to pass laws to control something beyond their control. It makes sense… when information is not carefully managed through one of their corporate media mouthpieces, we all too often see their incompetence in action.
There is a lot of poor information on the internet, but hopefully (as the article yesterday suggested) branding will help readers vet out the quality stuff from the crap. Bloggers develop reps as reliable or unreliable.
How about earning a ‘substantial portion of your income’ from Adsense ads on our blogs?
Would that not be considered “a supervisor” or more precisely ‘an affiliate’?
Google’s Adsense program is by very definition, an “affiliate program”.
I like what Chris of http://yoursmokiesnews.com said:
“I get information and credibility as a result of the journalistic work I do. I am a journalist and am entitled to the rights of one.”
Why are they doing this NOW?
Why didn’t they do this back when Matt Drudge kicked off the whole *single man against the establishment using the Internet* thing?
Me thinks it’s because the congress fears SEO guys.
We can get Google to say what we WANT Google to say about ANYONE.
In “The Powers That Be” by David Halberstam (who was murdered btw) he wrote that Katherine Graham of the Washington Post wielded political power… not by what she ordered to be published, rather the Washington Post wielded power by what it THREATENED to publish.
Congress fears us, therefore they seek to limit our credibility.
Anyone who doesn’t understand that liberals are really Nazis is a fool. This is the start of a fascist state under the rule of Obama. This is his bill, don’t mistake that. Obama has also just proposed outlawing the rule that says any health care worker who wants to opt out of abortions can do so because of their religion, meaning that Catholic hospitals and others can and will soon be FORCED to participate in abortions. Look it up folks.
Glad you voted for that “liberal enlightenment” thing now? Huh?
The word blogger is not mentioned anywhere within this bill, therefore it specifically is NOT discounting them. And when bloggers act like responsible journalists–meaning they report the facts, not just conjecture and ill-based opinions, double check their sources (not pick it up from a gossip blog), and add some fact-checking like other journalists do, then they are protected.
We have all seen what the blogosphere has delivered: amazing voices of reason, providing another take on current events; and unbelievably high level of yellow journalism, masking as legitimate members of the press. As a writer and editor, we take what we do seriously, which is to present the facts and let the reader decide. And for the record, freelancers do have a boss, in fact they have several: the editors who hire them.
So please, stop with the scare tactics already, and do some research to find the correct interpretation of the facts. That is what will hold up in a court of law.
Yeah, right moron. Like CNN, MSNBC AND OH………..DAN RATHER CHECKED THEIR FACTS. You are a freaking moron and I BET you work for some sort of establishment and dying press. Go die like the dinosaur you are.
The real question is should traditional journalists be given the
rights of traditional journalists or have they forfeited those rights.
Focusing on the rights of bloggers is just a red herring to draw attention away from what is going on with traditional journalism…the HUGE sellout of integrity to ANYONE with a buck.
anonymous
Have you actually *watched* the news lately? None of the mainstream “real” journalists do any research, they wait for some one else to break a story then they jump on it to sensationalize and otherwise grab as many rating points as possible before the next big story hits. The number of actual respectable journalists in the main stream can be counted on one hand. I think I actually get more truthful news reporting from John Stewart than CNN.
The mainstream news media has become nothing more than an opinion factory and are essentially bloggers with more money.
Why the liberal label? Anyone who goes out of the way to serve their desire to dominate and/or convince themselves of their superiority, especially those who want to run in front of the group yelling “look at me” by claiming to serve the public, are willing to subject us all to that drive; and, if a little thing like making the rest of us be quiet and/or providing them with information about who has shown their true nature to even a small extent is required, liberality and/or conservatism must suffer, just like freedom and constitutional guarantees.
After all the darned thing is just an old piece of paper, isn’t it?
Live free, abolish government!
“Journalist” or not, your freedom of speech is sacred.
This is exactly the kind of tyrannical behavior that triggered a number of wars, including the American and French Revolutions. Our Congress men and women move forward with this at their own peril.
As the moniker on one of our early flags states:
Don’t tread on me.
It seems as if the first two amendments are in jeopardy because they are the most crucial in our constitution.
The First amendment is to inform the people of any wrong doing by our politicians. Whether or not the news is true it’s up to the listener/reader find out for themselves. Today we all know we have Conservative news and liberal bias news. We chose who we want to listen to we don’t need the Gov. telling us what we can or can’t listen to.
The second amendment is also in trouble. Once government takes away the first and second amendments it’s all down hill from there. For example: If they regulate who can report the news and what can be reported and take away our guns we are all vulnerable. If government controls the press all the other amendments can be broken because there wont be any body to report it. If goverment takes guns away there can’t be a civil uprising.
Thats why in my opinion the first two amendments are so important and the first two on the list.
No, because journalist are professional writers. It is a profession that takes time to learn. Blogging and bloggers is a form of writing and a style of presentation in my opinion. The problem if you place the lable journalist on bloggers now you have to seperate fiction and non-fiction. Just my two cents.
So are you saying that “truth” is only the preserve of someone being paid to write it? Or someone associated with a corporation? You’re saying that given the way “truth” is skewed based on political allegiances in the media.. Fox(truth)News anyone?
TRUTH: stand only in the eyes of be holder!
LIE: also stand in the eyes of be holder!
In the split of a second it can be either a lie or truth,
if you have blink of eye in proces of something was done,
generated, exploded, you have missed truth.
It is up to individual to decide if is truth or lie it is not
for our (crooked?) official to tell us hey that is lie
or that is truth. Only fro years of experience tell us
who to believe and it is not our government “SORRY”!
“The problem if you place the lable journalist on bloggers now you have to seperate fiction and non-fiction.”
So journalists are writers of non-fiction, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but. No prizes for guessing who bought the whole WMDs in Iraq fairytale first time around ……
Liberals (Progressives) like Communists must control free speech and access to information to make people think that what they are doing is helpful.
Liberals or Conservatives can not be grouped into one type. I am mainly Liberal and your statement says every liberal wants to have control of your right to speak or write. I for one fought for my country and that is one of the rights I fought for. So I believe everyone who writes anything has right to confidentiality and their sources.
You say that you fought for our Country- Thank you. I respect that. I think that there are many folks that see themselves as Liberals that respect your service as well. I think that these individuals are not as Liberal as they think.
It’s possible
We all know that the journalists who work for Mainstream Media, which is controlled by a very few mostly white men in suits, and owned by big media conglomerates which depend on OTHER corporations for their bottom line via advertising dollars, are more likely to be reined in by their editors if they go too far off the reservation. Big stories are, these days, usually broken in the blogs, then when they start to get attention the mainstream media has no choice but to jump on them. And guess who our congresspeople depend on for their campaign financing? Those same corporations! This little bit had to have been written by one (or more) of the K-Streeters.
If they get rid of us pesky bloggers they’ll be free to raid the US Treasury via bailouts and no-bid contracts . . . oh, wait . . .
Strange how people think, especially the ones who don’t blog. They have no clue and judge, brand and set rules based on what???
Freedom of speech and protection is not an option.. it’s a right!
I agree. Journalism started in this country with people who never came out of a degree program for it, and the constitution’s provisions for freedom of the press were written in by people who had only that precedent to work from. Anyway, last time I looked, there weren’t any special licenses that make one person a professional journalist, and someone else merely an amateur dabbling at it. As for another poster who talks about having them held to the same standards – this is a chance for bloggers to set some standards. Journalists in established print and broadcast media who pass opinion off as reporting, and who create news to damage someone based on non-existent documentation traced back to a nut case in Texas are not exhibiting professionalism or integrity and must believe that standards are currently at best an after thought.
It’s not about ‘money’, it’s about ‘accountability’ (use that word in the same way Governments of the world think about it). What better way to control the news and sources then by controlling newspeople.
Should we add all the chatter about the fairness doctrine? Same theme. How much more convincing do we need to see the real intentions of democrats. Our Obama government wants its officially approved press. What’s next in our rapid move to socialism? Do you think most people who voted for Obama knew the consequences of the changes coming?
Ummmmm, Excuse me but last time I checked this did not start with the Obama Aministration, it started with the Bush Administration. No one got up in arms with the conspiracies that Bush/Cheney carried out to line their own pockets at the expense of our freedome to privacy. All the lies and the Crimes committedin the name of Homeland Security.
Until we as American Citizens wake up and stop seeing the government as Republican and Democrat and start looking at it as American or Anti American we will continue down this road. The party is not what stipulates whether a person is a true American , his deeds and his heart are. I did not vote for Obama and am not defending him in anyway as he is a politician , like the rest of them. Stop taking sides and make a stand for goodness sake.
And for those packing their bags…… it is easier to run than face the situation at hand, that is why we are in this situation in the first place. No one speaks up ,no one wants to bother. What happens when no one does anything? Those that do something get to decide how things work. So if all you can do is pack your bags and run , or sit and blame the other guy for doing. Then take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and know that it happened becaue you chose to do nothing !!!
This BS is sickening!!!!
Of course not.
I think our controlled Congress should tread very carefully when they start singling out or segregating certain classes of people. It appears that they are trying to remove the rights of some, while protecting the rights of others.
Next thing we know, only the “paid and assigned” talking heads on commercial television will be protected by the First Amendment–while podcasters and video posters will make political commentary at their own risk.
I fear the proverbial soap box is being kicked out from under US citizens.
So what motives Obama/Pelosi to take this risky step?
What prize do they seek? Perhaps they just can’t stand the “chattering class” as one of their intrepid number recently called us.
If they control the flow of information, they can do whatever they want without being troubled by honest reporting. They can run an even wider voter fraud in the next congressional election. And after that, Obama can do what Chavez just did, and set himself up as President for Life.
And what about the “chattering class.” During the campaign Obama used the term “rehabilitated” in referring to his old acquaintance, Bill Ayers. Do you suppose he might be thinking of “Rehabilitation Camps” as a (final) solution for that pesky “chattering class”?
And how long will it be before the silencing begins? If their actions with our economy are any indication, we might want to lock the doors and pack the bags for Belize right now.
let’s promote the chattering class to expand enough so they cannot shut us up and I’d rather France than Belize…but escape is what most of the moneyed people seem to have already done check the real estate for sale in your area, I bet a large portion of homes between, 1m and 3m are sitting waiting….
I would probably prefer France, too. Not being among the wealthy, however, makes me think within the hemisphere.
Truth be told, we are not at all prepared to run. These creeps really do have us surrounded. We are unarmed, unorganized and unfunded. ACORN is organized, (now very) funded, and probably armed.
If Obama gets his stated wish for a new wing of military, dedicated to dealing with unrest at home, who might he recruit first? Perhaps some of the guys who believe in “restitution”? Or maybe some of the people we saw at the polling places who showed up in droves for last minute registration to vote, identifying themselves with anything from business cards to bubble gum wrappers? Or maybe the guys we saw on national news, who stood outside city polling places and intimidated white people from entering the doors?
This is the name of great documentary from the last century.
I urge everyone to see this classic. It shows the result of a similar power grab by another democratically elected western government.
There is no Constitutional protection of journalists. Whether what anybody prints is the truth or mot can be revealed with or without knowing of their sources. If protecting a source is a crime for one person it should be a crime for all.
The elected officials have been using the Constitution as a mere “doormat” entering their chambers.
Is it time to re-visit history and DEFINE why America was born in the first place?
To refresh your memory, our ancestors came here to “escape taxes in England..”
I believe it is time for a Permanent Nationwide Tea Party!
GOD HELP US ALL
Happy Holidays
New Jersey Treasury Department are you proud of yourself
This is how Sate of New Jersey works as long they get what they want it does not matter if is legal or not, they are bosses they can screw you as they like?
In my opinion bloggers and private citizens have and should retain this [right]. This topic will get a lot of coverage and will bring out the fanatics from both sides I think. I blog and I should have the same rights under the First Amendment as the reporter working for the Times. I have people who visit my site that write statements about others who could be forced to relinquish their rights if the laws are changed. This needs to be stopped!
The first amendment protects the right of a free press. Is blogging considered the press? Do bloggers have the same rights as an officially recognized media? They should, as long as they live up to the same responsibilities. Real media does not publish stories without some form of corroboration. If a Newspaper or a TV news station runs an unconfirmed story that turns out to be inaccurate, they print or provide a retraction. Do Bloggers? The official media is expected to live by a code of ethical standards of responsible journalism (this does not mean censorship, it means integrity). Are Bloggers held to the same standards?
Since any fool with an ISP can create a blog, and can do it anonymously, and irresponsibly, they should not be allowed to hide behind a constitutional amendment to protect them. If however, they are blogging to the same level of accountability and ethical standards traditional media are supposed to use, they should have the same protections.
of course they are! they write in a journal don’t they? that makes them a journal-ist. Of course I have never mastered the art of web-logging or blogging as it is now called. maybe that is a good thing. what I know about greedy bankers could not only fill a small dime novel, I would probably be shot in some ‘drive-by’ shooting and become just another casualty. actually, the arguement is badly framed. if a person was aware of something but did not know how or where to communicate what the person knew so as to prevent others from being hurt, that person, in exercising civic responsibility would find someone who was able to communicate to public at large. the trust that is implied in such a client professional relationship is sacrosanct. just as attorney/client, appraiser(I am one)/client or any other professional/client relationship, confidentiality is a trust that you are derelict in at your own peril. of course, it also stands to reason that the more liberal you or your agenda is, as you desire change, the more intolerant of others and their opinions you are apt to be. therefore, it comes as no surprise that the present government, which has adopted ‘change’ as its mantra, is making every effort to stifle dissent as it wants change its way and no one else’s.
Pastor Martin Niem
I could care less if I am considered a journalist. The only thing that I am worried about is losing my RIGHT to free speech. That is what makes this country great.
The People of this great nation need to wake up and start standing up for the rights of everyone in this country. We need to stop letting the Government push us around.
Just my thoughts…
It seems to me there is something a bit more sinister beneath this ploy than simply to amend the constitution. Could it be the next in a series of steps to curtail our rights as Amercan Citizens? One of many that have been seen ( let us not ponder too closely on the steps that have not been visible!) since the “Patriot Act”.
Yes, yes I know a measure necessary for our own protection from the terrorists, yadda ,yadda ,yadda. Fear was used as an incentive to allow this infringement on our privacy. Now this very sweet little addition to an amendment supposedly being passed to cement the very essence of the Amendment they will corrupt if the latter version is passed.
Think about it , no one other than those journalists employed by corporate america will be allowed the protection the constitution provides in the 1st Amendment. Everyone else will be under the jurisdiction of the courts. Which means anyone and everyone you speak to on any subject matter that they deem controversial or classified will be fair game. Giving them the right to jail anyone of these non journalists reporting the truth until such a time as they divulge their source. Two things will happen …….these non-journalists will have to either thumb their noses in the face of the legislature or they will have to go underground. In either case their sources will think twice before revealing any information that would call the attention of the government or any of the powerful special interest groups they protect.
Yeah , yeah I know …………..Oh hell another conspiracy theorist!! Well folks look around, they already want to instill a micro chip in your car to measure mileage to tax you , what is to keep them from using it for other means once installed? Here is an article on MSNBC about it.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29298315
Even though it was nixed by the administration. The gauntlet is now being picked up by individual States implementing pilot programs that will do just that.
Conspiracy Theory? I think not…..try a very possible reality very , very soon.
This is not surprising and only goes to prove that it is only a matter of time before we must call the government to task for their hidden agenda. As it stands soon all this legislation will make the very attitude and deeds our ForeFathers used to liberate us from England will be Criminal instead of Patriotic! Think about it folks and look around you at what is going on and the changes that are taking place.
Side Note**
If Web Pro News does not fall under the category of a legitimate Journalistic entity all our identities will be revealed when someone steps on some powerful toes. Think about it , just the expression of your opinion could be revealed to those who want to know who posted an anonymous response. Are you comfortble with that ?
I know, I’m not !!!
Thank God, I am not a journo! I don’t want ever to be labelled a blackmailer or mudslinging a*****e or still worse gutter happy yellow crap. I will continue to write per my own will and not to avenge or to write according to the whims and fancies of some beer-gulping lazy self-serving editor. Congressmen, stamp your solid feet on the bill and go ahead…..
Agree with Mahon. Bloggers write about what is relevant to them and their life. Tabloids write about what sells.