News & Politics

Rant

Blogging isn't Journalism Say's Federal Judge

Posted 5 months ago|10 comments|475 views
"Jim... I'm a Journalist not a blogger!"
VIDEOS
ADDITIONAL IMAGES
1
Written by
U.S. Court imposes $2.5 Million judgement on blogger Crystal Cox... saying Cox did not qualify for Oregon's media shield law because she was employed by an established mainstream media outlet. This sends a powerful message to developers of online media... bloggers cannot claim the protections afforded to journalists!

"A federal judge in Oregon has ruled that a Montana woman sued for defamation was not a journalist when she posted online that an Oregon lawyer acted criminally during a bankruptcy case, a decision with implications for bloggers around the country."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/j...

"Oregon's media shield law reads:
No person connected with, employed by or engaged in any medium of communication to the public shall be required by ... a judicial officer ... to disclose, by subpoena or otherwise ... [t]he source of any published or unpublished information obtained by the person in the course of gathering, receiving or processing information for any medium of communication to the public[.]"
http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweek...%29

What will that mean for RantRaver's and other blogger's?
Keep it positive? and throw away your whistles?
Or just follow in "Goose-Step?"

I think there needs to be some freedom in blog-zone where everything can be taken with a grain of salt or two... it is just someone's opinion and we should all have the right to express that. Where the problem comes in is when a particular blogger becomes big enough to be a "threat" and starts shining a light where it isn't welcome. Can we see the censorship of bloggers or the shutting down of this media all together?
Only time will tell...
UPDATE - 5 months ago
First paragraph should read...

U.S. Court imposes $2.5 Million judgement on blogger Crystal Cox... saying Cox did not qualify for Oregon's media shield law because she WASN'T employed by an established mainstream media outlet. This sends a powerful message to developers of online media... bloggers cannot claim the protections afforded to journalists!

...SO SUE ME !:]
UPDATE - 1 month ago
"Don't Waste Your Life" by John Piper
http://dwynrhh6bluza.cloudfront.net/reso...
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: And the legal notice at the bottom of the article. :-P
She should appeal. Except it appears she might have deliberately set out to do damage to the man's reputation. IN order to win a defamation or libel case, you generally have to prove that the accused knew that what he wrote was a lie.
5 months ago: That may be the case if she won't give up her sources... as a journalist she could be protected and the burden of proof would be his... however as a blogger she doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
5 months ago: Ah, I see your point. A "journalist" can pretty much say whatever they like, even non-journalists like Glenn Beck and Rachel Maddow, whose ties to Acceptable Media sources make them immune to defamation lawsuits.

Regular schmoes who voice their opinion are not validated by the established industry, who probably don't want the competition anyway.

And of course, Oregon, that shining citadel of Democracy, decided against free speech.


Over to you, Al.
sunny2
sunny2
Content Removed by RantRave
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
Content Removed by RantRave
Content Removed by RantRave
Content Removed by RantRave
5 months ago: I bet the RR legal team is working overtime producing the disclaimer that will be added to every page...it goes something like this...

The thoughts or non-thoughts, opinions or non-opinions, rantings or non-rantings, obsessions or non-obsessions, coherant or non-coherant, truth or non-truth and bullsh|t or non-bullsh|t expressed by writers on this site are not to be construded or represented as a product or supported by RR. In our opinion the person that makes a statement had best cover their own a$$.
5 months ago: !:]
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
5 months ago: It will make it a lot more interesting if people can't just make stuff up like they do on Fox and be protected from being held liable.

I think the bigger question would be if bloggers were allowed protections then they wouldn't be able to go after whistle blowers like Julian Assange and everyone at Wikileaks.
5 months ago: I don't know why bloggers cannot be treated as free-lance journalists... what makes hooking up with a major media group so special, it seems that would add a control and censorship to anything written...
5 months ago: Get your "FREE SPEECH" to day for only... $2.5 Million !:]
5 months ago: WTF did TCG do this time?
sunny2
sunny2
Content Removed by RantRave
Content Removed by RantRave
sunny2
sunny2
Content Removed by RantRave
Content Removed by RantRave
5 months ago: What does it mean for us? It means we just continue to use good sense with what we say. We say what we mean and we say it to communicate widely. Once in a while we might have only a little information and say things with large emotional content based on little actual information. But if we do so, we should keep in mind our reader. Our reader might not be forgiving. If we actually propagate slander, deceit and rumor, we should expect reaction on the scale of our readership.

Public postings have never been a place to put slander, deceit and rumor, not in Greek times or Roman times and not today, either. Rumors can be harmful and hurt people. We should expect law to stop people who do this because such laws protect us as surely as speed limit laws and stop signs protect citizens.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.