Difference between revisions of "2009-09-29 shield-law amendment excludes unpaid bloggers"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(points to consider (3 of them)) |
(update -- the problematic definition of "journalist" has been fixed) |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
<p>So there's no doubt that independent bloggers are the target here. At once we're considered irrelevant and so dangerous they have to legislatively set up a slippery slope that can land us in the clink or left penniless just for trying to participate in citizen journalism. Wow. The real issue here, however, is less the shield law than placing a definition of what is a journalist on the books. That will alllow pols, news outlets, state governments, etc. to deny [[citizen journalist]]s press access because they are not "journalists" as defined by federal law.</p> | <p>So there's no doubt that independent bloggers are the target here. At once we're considered irrelevant and so dangerous they have to legislatively set up a slippery slope that can land us in the clink or left penniless just for trying to participate in citizen journalism. Wow. The real issue here, however, is less the shield law than placing a definition of what is a journalist on the books. That will alllow pols, news outlets, state governments, etc. to deny [[citizen journalist]]s press access because they are not "journalists" as defined by federal law.</p> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| − | '''Points to consider''': | + | '''Updates''': |
| + | * '''2009-10-30''' [http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/13848/senators-specter-and-schumer-revise-shield-law-to-include-citizen-journalistsbloggers Senators Specter and Schumer revise shield law to include citizen journalists/bloggers] "Well that language has just been changed, according to Specter's office, via this press release..."; the bill now "[removes] the requirement that the journalist be a salaried employee or independent contractor for a media organization. This should permit freelance authors to be covered, and it also provides the potential for journalists publishing on blogs to be covered as well." | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Points to consider''' (prior to update): | ||
* The [http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h985/text actual text] of the [http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h985/actions_votes bill] does not seem to contain the quoted text. (Was that clause taken out due to outcry from the blogosphere, or was it never really there?) | * The [http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h985/text actual text] of the [http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h985/actions_votes bill] does not seem to contain the quoted text. (Was that clause taken out due to outcry from the blogosphere, or was it never really there?) | ||
* The link given in the original source (a ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' blog) does not work -- due to the temporary nature of many links on [[THOMAS]] (why do I, amateur researcher, know about this and a pro WSJ blogger does not?), so it is not possible to verify where that text came from. | * The link given in the original source (a ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' blog) does not work -- due to the temporary nature of many links on [[THOMAS]] (why do I, amateur researcher, know about this and a pro WSJ blogger does not?), so it is not possible to verify where that text came from. | ||