|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by daswig
Are there statutorily defined definitions of who composes "the press" and who does not?
I've had articles published in various small newspapers (and no, they were not editorials or letters to the editors). Does that mean I'm a member of the press? How about if I'm working on an article? Is a freelance reporter a member of "the press"? Do you have to be published to be a member of "the press"? Is there some secret press ID card or handshake that you have to have or know?
All this story shows is how desperate some on the left are. And I can't express how ironic I find it that the left is up in arms about a guy who had a gay-oriented website being a member of "the press". Their behavior makes it seem like they think there's something WRONG with homosexuality or commerical porn websites. I guess it's kind of like Packwood...NOW loved him, even when he was serially abusing women.
|
A judge in Santa Clara, Ca will soon try to decide "who is a journalist"
Quote:
<a href="http://nytimes.com/2005/03/07/technology/07blog.htm">http://nytimes.com/2005/03/07/technology/07blog.htm</a>
At a Suit's Core: Are Bloggers Reporters, Too?
By JONATHAN GLATER
Published: March 7, 2005
In the physical world, being labeled a journalist may confer little prestige and may even evoke some contempt. But being a journalist can also confer certain privileges, like the right to keep sources confidential. And for that reason many bloggers, a scrappy legion of online commentators and pundits, would like to be considered reporters, too.
A lawsuit filed in California by Apple Computer is drawing the courts into that question: who should be considered a journalist?
The case, which involves company secrets that Apple says were disclosed on several Web sites, is being closely followed in the world of online commentators, but it could have broad implications for journalists working for traditional news organizations as well.
If the court, in Santa Clara County, rules that bloggers are journalists, the privilege of keeping news sources confidential will be applied to a large new group of people, perhaps to the point that it may be hard for courts in the future to countenance its extension to anyone. .........
.Apple has asked the court to compel the Web sites that displayed the product information to disclose their identity. Bloggers are fighting Apple's efforts, which it has focused on three Web sites - Thinksecret.com, Appleinsider.com and PowerPage.org.
The judge in the case, James Kleinberg, is required only to interpret a California statute that recognizes a privilege protecting reporters in keeping news sources confidential. A ruling could come as early as this week.
On its face, the lawsuit brought by Apple has to do with theft of trade secrets. But Susan Crawford, a law professor at Cardozo law school of Yeshiva University (and a blogger herself), says that the steps Apple has asked the court to take open a broader question.
"Under what circumstances should an online forum be forced to disclose a source behind information that they're posting?" Ms. Crawford said. "There is no principled distinction between a New York Times reporter and a blogger for these purposes. Both operate as news sources for wide swaths of the general public."
Blogs, she added, are already becoming more and more powerful, and some have readerships that exceed those of small-town newspapers. "We've seen it with Rather being brought down by bloggers," she said, referring to the CBS news anchor, who came under intense scrutiny by bloggers after a "60 Minutes Wednesday" segment on President Bush's National Guard service was broadcast .
Judge Kleinberg is likely to try to decide the case on the narrowest possible grounds, perhaps reading the text of the California law at issue to cover only people who work for traditional newspapers and magazines or television news programs, and to avoid deciding if bloggers are indeed journalists, Ms. Crawford said.
Whatever the judge's decision, it is all but certain to be appealed. But the question of who is a journalist is to many a matter of deeper concern.
|
And.....Daswig, you did not respond in your argument to the evidence that Gannon was "selling sex" as a male escort (prostitute), and that the White House and Sen. Thune may (should) have been aware of that.
The link to the White House press office application for a "day pass" displays the questions that Mr. Guckert was required to submit answers to. The man
produced ID that said his name was Guckert in order to pass through Secret Service check points and gain admission to the press room. Then Scott McLellan and the POTUS called on him by name during live TV broadcasts.
They both called on him by his "fake" name, "Jeff", and not his real name,
"James". I think that we deserve to know how and why this could happen.
Quote:
<a href="http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000828437">http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000828437</a>
Pot, Meet Kettle: Gannon Comments on First Blogger at WH Briefing
By E&P Staff
Published: March 07, 2005 12:25 PM ET
NEW YORK On his Web site today, he slams Mark Jurkowitz of The Boston Globe and hints that he knows Sen. Joe Biden. But former reporter and escort James Guckert -- a.k.a. Jeff Gannon -- also highlights news that a blogger, after several attempts last week, had finally been cleared to attend a White House press briefing today. The new blogger on the block is Garrett M. Graff, who writes FishBowlDC. (See separate story.)
Gannon writes: "The New York Times is hailing the first blogger to be issued a 'day pass' to a White House press briefing. It goes to great lengths to play up his genealogical background in journalism, but fails to mention that the Vermont native served as deputy national press secretary on Howard Dean's presidential campaign last year. Hmmm... no political ties there!
"According to the 'Gannon Standard,' I am expecting to see other bloggers' reports on his sexual and financial history as well as some conspiracy theories about who this guy is.
"Actually, I like the guy, we've talked on the phone several times. I wish him luck and am pleased that others will gain from what I pioneered. Now I'm looking for a conservative blogger to step up and get in there!"
<b>
Gannon fails to mention that, whatever his political background, Graff is not currently employed by a partisan political organization (as Gannon was during his two-year stint at the White House), nor does Gannon differentiate "sexual history" from "selling sex."</b>
|
|