Old Weird Ward
Unless otherwise noted, that which is posted here is opinion, which is protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. If you don't like my opinions, go somewhere else. Nobody is forcing you to actually read this drivel.
The presumption exists that you can read at all.
That may be a large assumption.
Blog Roll
|
Saturday, April 02, 2005
- - - - - Bloggers And The First Amendment - - - - -
Dan Gillmor reports (HERE) that an opinion piece by David Shaw of the LA Times (HERE) about journalist's protection for bloggers. Shaw writes:
| Given the explosive growth of the blogosphere, some judge is bound to rule on the question one day soon, and when he does, I hope he says the nation's estimated 8 million bloggers are not entitled to the same constitutional protection as traditional journalists — essentially newspaper, magazine, radio and television reporters and editors. |
Here's the text of the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
|
Now then, due to the rapidly changing methods of delivering "news", the definition of "reporter" and "press" is changing. Shaw is resisting that change. He believes that the traditional "press" deserves special protections that should not be extended to "bloggers" - even if the bloggers are reporting on fact. By extension, it's quite evident to me that he would also prefer that "opinion" be restricted to the traditional "press" - and so would certain members of Congress and the various regulatory bureaucrats.
See the First Amendment above, Mr. Shaw. The People ARE protected under the "free speech" clause of the First Amendment, at least as far as "opinion" is concerned. And, in my opinion, "bloggers" who are reporting fact are, by their actions, acting as "reporters", and are therefore members of the "press", and therefore ARE "entitled to the same constitutional protection as traditional journalists — essentially newspaper, magazine, radio and television reporters and editors."
|
|
