OUR VIEW: Feds forgetting bloggers with bill

Opinion

October 22, 2007

Anonymous The Tonawanda News Mon Oct 22, 2007, 01:00 PM EDT

The House on Tuesday, in a 389-21 vote, supported a cause that would protect the confidential sources of reporters in most federal cases. The White House, of course, is threatening a veto, citing national security and terrorism concerns.

The shield bill is one that should be supported by all journalists, but more importantly by those who consume the work of diligent journalists digging to uncover reports like those on the conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

But there is a problem with the bill that at least one journalism expert has outlined. Amy Gahran, an editor with The Poynter Institute, reported recently that the bill in May read: “a person engaged in journalism and includes a supervisor, employer, parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of such covered person.” What the House passed Tuesday read: “A person who, for financial gain or livelihood, is engaged in journalism and includes a supervisor, employer, parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of such covered person.”

So what’s the problem you ask? You don’t have to be paid to be a journalist.

We live in a world where blogging is a form of reporting, citizens are now journalists and freelancers sometimes actually have to work, well, for free.

What the bill says is that any unpaid journalist could be subject to federal questioning if a story broke and the feds wanted access to those who tipped the journalist.

That’s just not fair to the independent journalist. Sure, they may not have the backing of a major news organization, but what they could have is an eye-opening scoop.

The bill that most journalists are supporting has a glitch that has been enough for others to hope a veto comes from the White House.

Until the bill covers all journalists, a veto may be the best way to go.

Text Only

Opinion

Search Results

OUR VIEW: Feds forgetting bloggers with bill

Site Map

Contact Us