Should Bloggers Be Afforded The Same Rights Granted To Journalists?
from the lawsuits-galore... dept
Paul Alan Levy writes "Together with the ACLU of Virginia and the Thomas Jefferson Center for Freedom of Expression, we have intervened in a case pending in Buckingham County, Virginia in which a plaintiff in a defamation case retaliated against a blogger who covered his defamation suit in less than flattering terms by sending a highly invasive subpoena that demands production of the blogger's communications with his sources, IP numbers of all who posted on his web site or even READ the web site. There have been only a handful of cases in which courts have addressed whether bloggers should be treated as journalists for the purpose of considering the reporters' privilege. We are also arguing that, in addition to protecting the commenters on the blog for the reasons usually argued -- protecting their right of anonymous speech -- posters on a journalist's blog should be treated as "sources" whose disclosure violates the journalist's own rights."We've been seeing a lot of these types of cases lately. It would be good to get some more definitive rulings that establish both the rights of those who blog, as well as those who comment anonymously.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bloggers, journalists, lawsuits, sources
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
maybe
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bloggers, journalists and free speech
There are no distinctions in either Canada or the US that provide pejorative lesser rights to "bloggers". Free speech is what it is for all citizens. That being said, the law always has boundaries and libel is not covered. Bill Clinton wasted a ton of energy chasing the Drodge report which was a blog. Anyone can have their sources demanded. It takes lawyers and court time to prosecute and defend those claims. Except when you are running afoul of state secrets, most claims on your sources would be civil matters for the litigants to fight out themselves.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I think what you meant to say is: "A journalist may be a blogger, but it does not follow that all bloggers are journalists.", which is true.
The second phrase by itself, as Pinch noted, is inaccurate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't thing it's anyone's 'right' to demand "...production of the blogger's communications with his sources, IP numbers of all who posted on his web site or even READ the web site", whether it be a "journalist", a "blogger", or a "pornographer".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: maybe
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: maybe
You're wrong, by the way, but I see it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Very Bad Journalists
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What is a journalist and why is it different than a blogger
A blogger is, well, anyone that has an internet connection and wants to write about something or bring attention to something by linking to it. What do their posts consist of? More often than not, it is something that interests them, not necessarily the public good - that can mesh sometimes though.
So, I would describe the difference between a blogger and journalist not only in their content but in their intent. A blog post is a reflection of what the blogger finds interesting. A piece of journalism is a reflection of what the journalist feels is information that will benefit the public good.
To me, the tricky part is when the two interests overlap. Take Jim Foti's Roadguy blog, for example. He finds traffic stuff and happenings interesting but the content of his blog also benefits the public good. The kicker here, of course, is that Jim Foti is Minneapolis Star-Tribune journalist.
[ link to this | view in thread ]