Chuck Schumer to Bloggers: “Fuck You”

[kpete]

Senate Cuts Citizen Bloggers From Federal Shield Bill
Posted September 28th, 2009 by Arthur Bright

For citizen journalists, the federal shield law front was looking good for a while. Although the House of Representatives version of the bill, passed in April, only offered a shield to professional bloggers, the Senate version didn't differentiate between the pros and the amateurs. So there was hope that amateur journalists might actually, eventually, get its protection.

No longer though.

Sadly, the Senate Judiciary Committee has followed the path of the House and opted to specify that only a "salaried employee . . . or independent contractor" will be able to invoke the shield, reports the Wall Street Journal's Digits blog. The amendment, offered by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D) of New York, limits the definition of a journalist to one who:

(iii) obtains the information sought while working as a salaried employee of, or independent contractor for, an entity—

(I) that disseminates information by print, broadcast, cable, satellite, mechanical, photographic, electronic, or other means; and

(II) that—

(aa) publishes a newspaper, book, magazine, or other periodical;

(bb) operates a radio or television broadcast station, network, cable system, or satellite carrier, or a channel or programming service for any such station, network, system, or carrier;

(cc) operates a programming service; or

(dd) operates a news agency or wire service . . .

This language is in fact more restrictive than its House counterpart, which only limits the shield to those who gather or disseminate news "for a substantial portion of their livelihood or for substantial financial gain." The Judiciary Committee's "salaried employee . . . or independent contractor" language on its own would be sufficient to deprive most non-traditional journalists of protection. But the requirement that the hosting entity both disseminate information by electronic means and operate a publishing, broadcasting, or news service of some kind ices it. It's hard to imagine that many amateur bloggers (even those eking out enough money to pass the employee hurdle) would qualify as "a news agency." Perhaps a blog dedicated to news and adhering to journalistic standards could be read to be "a news agency," but I wouldn't want to rely on a judge making such a reading.

more:
http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2009/senate-cuts-citizen-bloggers-from-federal-shield-bill
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/09/28/chuck-schumer-to-bloggers-fuck-you/

[Missy Vixen]

1. Thanks, Chuck

So, you and your colleagues just don't like the fact that bloggers can highlight things that fall through the cracks of traditional media, huh?

This would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

:eyes:

[timeforpeace]

6. If he's a vote for the public option, then he's OK.

[kenny blankenship]

2. Big Media gets its Bailout Measure too

[mmonk]

3. So would public radio or public TV sights have no protection?

[ddeclue]

4. Apparently he missed the "Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of the press" part of the

Constitution...

:eyes:

This will fail a Constitutional challenge because it directly does something the Constitution forbids: it abridges freedom of the Press by assuming the government has a right to define the definition of "Press" narrowly and in a less than organic way.

[mmonk]

5. That's how I see it. But the Constitution seems to play less and less

a role in our government as the corporate interests seem to play a bigger one.