First Amendment Protects Bloggers,too

With no legal codification of ‘journalism’, Federal Judge Marco Hernandez employed his own interpretation of what constitutes journalism in the recent libel trial of Obsidian Finance Group v. Cox.

This is a dangerously slippery slope for all bloggers and citizen journalists sharing news of events around them on their blogs.

Yes, this is as bad, if not worse than SOPA. An op-ed by Jason Stverak in the Washington Examiner gives a chilling look at the First Amendment implications:

Hernandez ruled that blogger Crystal Cox was not entitled to the same protection under media shield laws that other members of the press enjoy. This ruling made it easy for a jury to find her guilty of libel. That result threatens the First Amendment rights of all citizen-journalists.

With the Internet increasingly serving as the dominant source of information, a national debate has been taking place asking the question, who is a journalist? Legal scholars, journalism academics and First Amendment advocates all have their opinions and as expected, there is little agreement.

But why is this issue so complicated? Bloggers, like all citizens of the United States, have First Amendment rights. Has the definition of a journalist changed? Or has perception and therefore legal definition simply not adjusted to modern technology?

According to Professor Kyu Ho Youm of the University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication, Judge Hernandez “ruled correctly” in the Cox case. But he also acknowledges that the ruling was based on his “textual interpretation” and that “pre-Internet law needs updating.”

Others blogging on this subject:

Marathon Pundit

The Mental Recession