[Politech] What's difference between blogger, Usenet poster, journalist? [fs]

From: Declan McCullagh (declan@private)
Date: Thu Jan 20 2005 - 10:22:42 PST

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Politech] Bloggers undercut reporters' 1A privilege 
defense [fs]
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:36:39 -0500
From: wes_morgan@private
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private>

> http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getmailfiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:
> ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/12/06&ID=Ar00600
> Bloggers Blur the Definition of Reporters? Privilege
> By JOSH GERSTEIN Staff Reporter of the Sun
>      The crux of the reporters? contention is that the public would be 
> less well informed if journalists could not promise their sources 
> confidentiality. However, the proliferation of blogs and bloggers could 
> represent the Achilles? heel in this approach. If Ms. Miller and Mr. 
> Cooper are entitled to claim special treatment in the courts, so too 
> could hundreds of thousands of Americans who use the Internet to post 
> comments about their views on current events.

The problem is far more complex than mere blogging would indicate, of
course; it's a real Pandora's Box for 1A thinkers.

What's the difference between a blog, a mailing list, a Usenet group, and
RSS feed and a run-of-the-mill website?  There are no real differences, in
terms distinctive to 1A analysis as I understand it; all are available
online, all can be (reaasonably) realtime feeds (even static-page
websites; several applications exist which track websites and notify the
user(s) of any changes), all save RSS can be bidirectional (via comments,
feedback, etc.), and all can reach hundreds of thousands of readers. We're
all Gutenberg, we're all Publius, and we're all Zenger; what are the
courts to do?

Of course, the traditional media shot itself in the foot, to some degree,
by citing bloggers, treating them as valid sources, and generally
presenting bloggers as equals to themselves.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Politech] Why Apple was right to sue web sites for leaking 
product info [fs]
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:30:01 -0500 (EST)
From: me@private
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private>
References: <41E6013E.6010400@private>

 > I want to voice my opinion in favor of Apple's defensive stance against
 > the bloggers and their informants.  What these bloggers did is
 > different from reporter confidentiality because of the type of
 > information.  Reporters can interview infamous, outlawed figures
 > without fearing legal repercussions of hiding their whereabouts because
 > they are reporting stories, viewpoints, and other non-protected insider
 > information.  However, the owners of these sites took information from
 > their sources *knowing that it was confidential, trade-secret
 > information*.  They willingly trafficked in illegal information. ...

Is it just me?  Am I the only one who suffered a small chill at encountering
the phrase 'illegal information' in a serious context?

Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 20 2005 - 11:02:18 PST