Am I "Press?" What is a Journalist?

Image via Wikipedia

Information VS My Opinion

The debate over what constitutes journalism is raging due to a judge's ruling in Oregon that a blogger was not entitled to invoke protection under shield laws. Shield laws seem to do two things: Protect a source of information and protect a person from libel and defamation. They also provide for timely correction or retraction. The ruling brings up the question then of when and by whom can those protections be invoked.

The New York Times, has four experts in law, social media and journalism opining on this issue in their "Room for Debate" section, online (updated December 11, 2011)

The questions center around:

• Whether the Shield laws are archaic and/or just plain poor jurisprudence;
• Who and what constitutes Journalism and Journalist;  Variables: training, standards, organization, methodology, size of organization, editorial control;
• Whether the shield laws were properly applied by the judge.

Stuart Benjamin, the Douglas B. Maggs Professor of Law at Duke University Law School tells us:

Beginning with New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964, the Supreme Court crafted First Amendment protections for false statements of fact on matters of public concern -- requiring “actual malice” if the statement is about a public figure and negligence for a private figure. The Supreme Court opinions laying out these standards do not limit these protections to journalists, or to media more generally.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/11/are-all-bloggers-journalists/should-we-rethink-shield-laws

He also tells us we are the only country that has these laws. And, Kyu Ho Yum, the Jonathan Marshall First Amendment Chair at the University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication seems to believe the judgment was correct under current law but that the laws themselves need to be changed. He points out that in discussing the subject of what social media forums constitute journalism, a scholar at California State-Fullerton, Jason Shepard: 

Suggested that 
1.) whether the blogger’s stated purpose centered on news-gathering and dissemination;
2.) whether news-gathering and editorial decision-making processes were regularly employed; and
3.) whether the end product of the blogger’s work was sufficiently important within the context of public interest.http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/11/are-all-bloggers-journalists/according-to-the-law

Kelli Slager, an attorney representing media, points out that the U.S. Supreme Court has already accepted internet publishing as a form of free speech and that retraction laws, which allows for timely correction of errata should apply as well. A California appeals court refused to rule on evaluating whether web publishers are legitimate journalists because that is too dangerous for any branch of the government to define.  (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/11/are-all-bloggers-journalists/the-problem-with-pre-internet-laws)

I agree with Slager when she points out that First Amendment protections apply whether the journalist is a sophisticated omnimedia corporation or a lonely  pamphleteer.  The pamphleteers of yore were the bloggers of their time; and those pamphlets, often written without editorial oversight were the basis upon which newspapers were born and revolutions fomented.

Ellyn Angelotti, who teaches social media, digital trends and media law at Florida's Poynter Institute, reminds us that we no longer need ink to be a publisher. She also says that, "Blogs compete with mainstream media everyday and in some cases are more trustworthy." The Oregon law does not recognize the blog a medium of communication worthy of protection. That definition of journalism is "archaic." She suggests that how rather than who is key.

The quality of the story and the integrity of the method of reporting should count. By that standard, some bloggers would qualify as journalists while some deadwood reporters at newspapers would fail.(http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/12/11/are-all-bloggers-journalists/we-need-a-broader-definition-of-journalist)

Should a blogger providing, as I intend,"news, reviews and commentary," be held to the same standards as a journalist to be considered one?  I think, that is probably the case.  Ben Franklin with his press was a form of journalism so why wouldn't a blogger be? But what standards should be used and by whom should they be upheld?

Newspapers, including the New York Times, have blogs. Are those blogs defined as journalistic media? If so, is it because they are attached to the newspaper or because people who are employed as journalists write them?

If a blogger cannot be called a journalist, what is to prevent a judge from saying self-published e-books are not books? Limiting any civil right through restrictive definition is a slippery slope. But is every blogger a journalist? A five year-old child can have a blog but does that make them a journalist?

Is Free Speech Carte Blanche? No. Freedoms also bear responsibility.  I have the right to bear arms, but if my action with those ordnance hurt someone then I must be held accountable.

I consider myself press and hold myself to standards of fair and accurate reporting. The federal government requires that I list when I have received something, like a book, to review. I must factually represent the contents of the book, or movie. But, I also comment and should be clear on what is fact and what is opinion. A blog can be the front page and the Op-Ed melded together  which is an old tradition of journalism, like the pamphlets of earlier times.

I hope I am a journalist. It makes conference attendance much more reasonable!