http://news.com.com/2010-1025_3-5907336.html Perspective: So who should you call a journalist? By Declan McCullagh October 24, 2005, 4:00 AM PDT A renewed effort in the U.S. Congress to create a federal shield law for news organizations is raising a sticky question: Who is a journalist? A generation ago, the answer usually was clear. Not anymore. Online scribes and video publishers are experimenting with novel forms of journalism, and even the most stodgy news organizations are embracing blogs. That leaves politicians--hardly the most clued in about all things tech--in something of a quandary. They're being lobbied by professional news organizations and the American Bar Association to approve some kind of journalist's shield law while being urged by prosecutors to leave out bloggers. The justification for a shield law is a perfectly reasonable one. After a federal appeals court enforced grand jury subpoenas against The New York Times and Time magazine, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take the case, news organizations decided to fix the law. The Justice Department took a swipe at the leading shield proposal (H.R.3323/S.1419) during a Senate hearing last week, arguing that it would let criminals pose as bloggers. [...remainder snipped...] http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1637&wit_id=4704 STATEMENT OF CHUCK ROSENBERG UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ... Such an expansive definition of “covered person” could unintentionally offer a safe haven for criminals. As drafted, the definition invites criminals to cloak their activities under the guise of a “covered person,” so as to avoid investigation by the Federal government. The overbroad definition of a “covered person” could be read to include any person or corporate entity whose employees or corporate subsidiaries publish a book, newspaper, or magazine; operate a radio or television broadcast station; or operate a news or wire service. Additionally, the definition arguably could include any person who sets up an Internet “blog” or any other activity to “disseminate information by print, broadcast, cable satellite[, etc.],” as set forth in the bill. More generally, the Department does not believe that legislation is necessary because there is no evidence that the subpoena power is being abused by the Department in this context. The Department prides itself on its record of objectivity in reviewing press subpoenas, and any legislation that would impair the discretion of the Attorney General to issue press subpoenas – or to exercise any other investigative options in the exercise of the President’s constitutional powers – is unwarranted. For the last 33 years, the Department of Justice has authorized subpoenas to the news media only in a small number of cases involving serious allegations of criminal conduct. Since 1991, 3.7% of the media subpoena requests processed by the Criminal Division for Attorney General approval were for confidential source material. ... _______________________________________________ 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 : Tue Nov 01 2005 - 11:46:01 PST