Sen. Feinstein Pushes Restrictive "Journalist" Definition Under Shield Law
No First Amendment for you!
The most recent congressional threat to the free press in the United States comes from California Democrat U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
In a proposed amendment to a media shield law being considered by Congress, Feinstein writes that only paid journalists should be given protections from prosecution for what they say or write. The language in her proposal is raising concerns from First Amendment advocates because it seems to leave out bloggers and other nontraditional forms of journalism that have proliferated in recent years thanks to the Internet.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
It's surprising the Democrats haven't installed Feinstein as their head Nazi, yet.
her definition is absurd of course, but i also wouldn't go so far as to say, and i don't know if this proposal does, that journalistic immunity should be absolute. i prefer the standard that you first have to demonstrate that the information is essential, and cannot be obtained any other way before you ask them to fess up.
as for the definition, reason is correct that journalism is an act and not just a profession. also, feinstein should be examined for mental problems before she's allowed to write things anymore.
I could be wrong, but the line about congress making no law regarding freedom of the press is AFTER the bit about making no law regarding freedom of speech. Did that withered cunt ever read the constitution or is her association with Harvey Milk the only reason she is in office?
Not to brag, but I called it when this 'media shield law' first surfaced.
So what do you have to do to count as a paid journalist? Pair off and each pay the other $1 every year for a story?