DU this poll: Should bloggers have same rights as journalists?

[quaoar]

http://www.journalismjobs.com/

Should bloggers have the same legal rights as journalists?
Responses Percent

Yes 33.0%

No 57.3%

Not sure 9.8%

[bryant69]

1. As a blogger I don't think so

Because anybody can blog. Setting up a blog takes ten minutes, and then you have access to all the same rights as reporters?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[quaoar]

6. Why not?

I've been a reporter/editor for nearly 25 years at three different daily newspapers. It took me a lot longer than 10 minutes to get my degrees, but that doesn't confer any more gravitas on my insight and abilities than on yours.

[uberotto]

7. I guess it depends on your opinion of what is journalism...

Some believe that it depends on what you publish and others believe it depends on where you publish.

Is journalism a job or a type of writing?

Does Freedom of the Press apply to the person or the story?

For me, if it meets a strict set of standard criteria, regardless of where it is published, it should be considered journalism.

[quaoar]

8. So what's your definition of a journalist?

Do you consider yourself a journalist?

One of the best things about journalism in the United States is that you do not have to have a license to be a journalist. That's not the case in many countries.

It used to be easy to start your own newspaper. Major cities had dozens of them. Not any more. Today it's all corporate controlled. Family owned papers are disappearing at a rapid rate.

The blogosphere is changing that exactly because anyone can do it in 10 minutes. Journalism had gotten stale and corporate. Bloggers are shaking it up.

[NVMojo]

2. Should bloggers and journalists have freedom of speech?

Freedom to express thoughts and actions?

[tuvor]

3. I'm ignorant. What special rights do reporters have? n/t

[quaoar]

4. Varies from state to state

But in some states there are what are known as shield laws that protect reporters from having to reveal their sources.

[northzax]

10. I am willing to give them that

as long as they are held to the same libel standards as newspapers.

[quaoar]

11. Everyone is held to the same libel standards

Whether a journalist or not.

You could be sued for libel by your neighbor if you libel him in the neighborhood newsletter.

[northzax]

15. so what's the standard to 'blogger'

what if a friend gives me a hot stock tip from the pharmaceutical company he works for. Obviously, if I then sell all my stock to avoid the coming downturn, he is in trouble for providing insider information. So I write about it on my blog, and then sell my stock. voila, shield laws protect him from prosecution. seems off.

Or I pull the Judith Miller, and don't write about it. because I am a 'blogger' is everything people tell me protected? Why wouldn't everyone then start a blog?

[quaoar]

17. Well

Your friend who gave you the tip would not be protected from prosecution for insider trading by a shield law. The shield laws are meant to protect reporters from fishing expeditions by lazy law enforcement officials who don't want to do their own investigations -- easier to just subpoena the reporter.

But not every state has them. Sometimes you're on your own. At a previous job the chief of police threatened to take me before the grand jury unless I told him who leaked an internal affairs report on one of his psycho cops. There was no law to prevent him from doing that.

There are ways to set some standards -- frequency of publication, for instance. But it has always been a gray area. There has always been a debate about who qualifies as a "serious" journalist and who doesn't. Do gossip columnists qualify? How about someone who writes for a garden magazine or a teen music magazine?

Personally, I'd rather the definition of journalist be kept loose.

[northzax]

20. right, but the only possible evidence

of insider information is my testimony. After all, he told me while we were out drinking, as a personal favour.

in fact, he then confessed to me that he is a rapist. can I be compelled to testify against him?

what are the obligations to notify the police if you know a crime is being committed? or will be committed?

[quaoar]

22. Well

You would both be guilty of insider trading. Shield laws do not protect you from prosecution for other crimes, including failure to report a felony.

Even priests and therapists, who are shielded from revealing confidences shared by people, are obligated to report to the police a crime that might be committed.

Likewise, if you know a crime is about to be committed, you are obligated to report it.

[northzax]

23. sure, he'd be guilty

I probably wouldn't be unless I paid him for it in some way. Obviously, the New York Times believe shield laws protect you from the obligation to report a felony, judith Miller knows who outed Valerie Plame, that's a felony.

so who are you siding with, the prosecutors or the Times?

[quaoar]

26. It's hard to say in Judith Miller's case

because she never published anything about it, so we don't know what she knew. She may have dismissed the information as unreliable. Her source might have only had second-hand knowledge. Or maybe she declined to write the story because she knew it was just a partisan attack on Joe Wilson. Who knows? I don't, so it's hard to pass judgment on Miller.

But generally I have to side with the NY Times. Good reporters realize that there is a chance you might have to go to jail to protect a source. Sometimes you have to accept that -- if you believe the information you are reporting is vital to the public interest.

For instance, if you learned that an undercover CIA agent had also embezzled millions of dollars, you might report that and risk being jailed for blowing his cover.

It is a lot like what civil rights protesters in the South did in the 50s and 60s. They were willing to accept jail to defend what they believed was more important.

[northzax]

24. dupety dupity

dupe dupe dupe dupe

[DS1]

5. After watching this 'wrinkles' disaster, hell no

[beyurslf]

9. I am not sure I know what the "DU answer" is but I said No.

[quaoar]

13. LOL

Well, I thought DU supported blogger rights but I guess that's still up in the air to some extent.

[beyurslf]

14. Oh. So I guess the "correct" answer was Yes? I don't mind being wrong

on this one though. Anyone can start a blog. Doesn't mean that they should get journalist cred's and passes. Seems like there was a guy named Gannon recently....

[quaoar]

19. You could get credentials and press passes

if you were a new blogger and wanted to cover your small-town City Council. If you wanted a pass to cover the White House or the Super Bowl, that's another story. Anything with high demand for passes is going to be parsed out to the bigger media outlets.

As bloggers become bigger players in the media, you'll see more and more of them at such events.

[rucky]

12. How are the rights of journalists any different from anyone else's?

I can't think of any legal protections for journalists that don't apply to other people.

If anything, anybody who chooses to call themselves journalists should operate under less rights (higher scrutiny) and more obligations than the average joe with an opinion.

[Snivi Yllom]

16. I don't think jouranlists should have any special special rights

that the rest of us don't have.

[mmonk]

18. We have journalists?

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. Bad poll.

What it is referencing? Rights to freedom of speech? Of course. Right to protection of sources? That gets a little iffy. Rights to lie and slander? ???

So much depends on the rights being questioned, and the definition of journalist.

[donna_brasco]

25. "not sure"