This Texas Woman Was Jailed for Her Journalism. Is She the Future of Media?
Priscilla Villarreal, known as "Lagordiloca," is suing law enforcement for violating her First Amendment rights. She is appealing to the Supreme Court.
HD DownloadLAREDO, Texas—"They figured that this would shut me down," says Priscilla Villarreal. "But what they did was create a monster."
Villarreal is a journalist here in the Texas border town of Laredo. She is at the center of a major First Amendment battle that her attorneys hope to take to the Supreme Court. She has become an unlikely face in the fight for a free press.
Or is she not that unlikely at all?
Villarreal doesn't work for a newspaper or magazine. She doesn't have a perch at a TV station. Rather, she livestreams her reporting, infused with her signature profanity-laced commentary, on her Facebook page, Lagordiloca, which translates to: "the fat, crazy lady."
Her page currently boasts 217,000 followers—almost the population of Laredo itself, where it seems almost everyone knows Lagordiloca's name, whether you're in a coffee shop, an Uber, a bar, a restaurant, the grocery store. She is a celebrity here, famous for her irreverent, muckraking approach, which often sees her broadcasting directly from crime scenes and traffic accidents.
Not everyone finds her endearing. In 2017, law enforcement—who had often been the target of Villarreal's critical reporting—arrested her after she broke two relatively benign stories: one concerning a Border Patrol agent who had committed suicide, the other relating to a family involved in a fatal traffic accident.
"They were just looking for something to arrest me," Villarreal says. "Because I was exposing the corruption, I was exposing them being cruel to detainees….They were doing things they weren't supposed to."
Villarreal had confirmed her information with a confidential source within the Laredo Police Department. That same agency then arrested her for doing so, leveraging an obscure Texas law that criminalizes soliciting nonpublic details if the person requesting stands to "benefit" from it.
"In Laredo nobody had ever been arrested for that," says Joey Tellez, Villarreal's criminal defense lawyer. She was both the first and the last.
Put more simply, they arrested her for asking questions. The statute appears to have been written to fend off government corruption, like bribery. But law enforcement contorted it in such a way that allowed them to pursue a case against Villarreal for doing what journalists do every day: request information not yet published, a.k.a. a scoop, and benefit from it, usually in the form of a salary.
Villarreal, however, doesn't collect a salary. So her "benefit," the government alleged, was popularity on Facebook.
The case was eventually dismissed. But when Villarreal sued, arguing that law enforcement should know better than to arrest a journalist for her reporting, she found the federal judges evaluating the claim to be more sharply divided on the issue than one might assume. Her lawsuit has kicked off a national debate—not only about her arrest and whether or not it violated the First Amendment, but also over the nature of "citizen journalism," and if reporters who adhere to a nontraditional approach are entitled to a less robust set of rights.
"Villarreal and others portray her as a martyr for the sake of journalism. That is inappropriate," wrote Judge Edith Jones of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, which ruled 9–7 against Villarreal. "Mainstream, legitimate media outlets routinely withhold the identity of accident victims or those who committed suicide until public officials or family members release that information publicly." The officials she sued received qualified immunity, which prohibits victims of government abuse from pursuing federal civil rights suits if the misconduct alleged has not yet been "clearly established" as unconstitutional.
Though her approach may be polarizing, Villarreal has attracted support from an ideologically diverse set of groups, including the Christian-conservative Alliance Defending Freedom, the libertarian Cato Institute, and the left-leaning Constitutional Accountability Center. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press called the 5th Circuit's decision "a disastrous ruling for journalists' rights," and along with 21 media organizations, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to hear the case. Several current and former journalists, including Reason's Jacob Sullum, also submitted a brief in support of Villarreal.
"I bristle at the idea that judges can throw out distinctions that have any significant legal meaning between citizen journalists and journalists who work for bigger companies," says Greg Lukianoff, CEO and president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which is representing Villarreal in her appeal. He hopes the Court takes the case, he says, "to tell…the world that essentially just because an individual judge doesn't consider you a 'legitimate journalist' that you still have the same free speech and First Amendment rights as a New York Times journalist."
Lukianoff adds that "the rights of the many really do hang on the rights of the one."
Villarreal indeed considers herself a citizen journalist, and she says her competitors in traditional media are handicapped. "I don't have anyone to tell me, 'You can't put that out there,'" she says.
But traditional news organizations also sometimes protect reporters from their worst instincts. I went to New York City to sit down with James O'Keefe, another so-called citizen journalist, who founded the conservative advocacy group Project Veritas. (He was fired in 2023.) Though he and Villarreal arguably have very different politics, he filed a brief in support of her in 2022, calling her arrest an "outrageous abuse of power" that could threaten his own work.
Villarreal and O'Keefe are by no means the same person; in many ways they are night and day. But the two share some important things in common when it comes to this debate: an approach outside of the mainstream and a penchant for making enemies who would like them to stop talking.
O'Keefe's modus operandi is trying to expose people and organizations with hidden cameras. He first gained notoriety by secretly recording interactions with the left-wing advocacy group Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), which caused a national scandal and drove the organization into bankruptcy.
He has also drawn sharp criticism for his performance antics. Perhaps most emblematic of his approach was his alleged attempt to seduce CNN journalist Abbie Boudreau by luring her onto a boat deemed a "palace of pleasure," where porn, condoms, and fuzzy handcuffs would await her. O'Keefe would film the interaction. Boudreau was tipped off and the plan was thwarted.
"Is citizen journalism more about getting clicks and attention to monetize," I ask him, "or is it about pursuing the truth?"
"I think it's about pursuing the truth," he responds. "I think my track record speaks for itself."
"How do you respond to people who say [that] this departure from journalistic norms is not an improvement and not something we should be defending?" I ask Lukianoff.
"Legacy journalism has done a tremendous amount to shoot itself in the foot, and it's blaming everyone else for it not being taken very seriously anymore," he says. "We actually have just a ton more people innovating in the space of journalism, sure. There are going to be people who aren't very reliable. But I do think the entire public is waiting for people to raise their hands to say, 'No, I'm actually one of the people who's never going to lie to you. I'm going to be straight about it, even if you don't like what I'm saying.'"
Tellez says that general sentiment is an apt description of Villarreal. "We're 150 miles away from any other major town," he notes. "The traditional news media, print or television, don't really do investigative journalism on the goings-on of local politicians, and she does a good job of it."
It's pitch black outside, early in the morning, as I sit in the backseat of Villarreal's car while she searches for crime scenes. We eventually see police sirens. She drives toward them, and we arrive at a gas station, where she jumps out to stream an arrest. The man in handcuffs: her ex–brother in law. Then it's off to a convenience store. This time, a robbery, and another livestream. That's what the world sees.
But there's also a lot the world does not see. She lost three kids, all born prematurely. "When I lost my first child, she lived for five hours," she says. "The traumatizing part of it was watching her take her last breath." Nothing, she adds, can hurt her like that did.
Not police or prosecutors or sneering federal judges or haters online. If anything, it fuels her. "I want to go to the Supreme Court," she says. "But my story is already in the history books. My story's out there. You know, and I want people to know that we all have rights."
Photo Credits: Adani Samat; Midjourney
Music Credits: Artlist
- Video Editor: Qinling Li
- Video Editor: Phoebe McFarb
- Video Editor: Arthur Nazaryan
- Motion Graphics: Adani Samat
- Audio Production: Ian Keyser
- Cinematography: Qinling Li
- Cinematography: Arthur Nazaryan
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
'Journalist' isn't a title, it's a description of an activity. One doesn't receive special privileges when they get their 'official' press credentials.
My favorite one is "citizen journalist" which suggest the rest of corporate, establishment media are a kind of militarized government force.
That would make more sense if they were calling them "civilian journalist".
Then I guess I'm trying to figure out what the difference between Journalist and "citizen journalist" is.
Perhaps Reason could get with the times and use "Journalist" and "corporate" or "establishment" journalist.
I thought it was pretty clear that it means someone doing journalism who is not employed by a professional news outlet. Doesn't "citizen" get used colloquially in similar ways fairly often? As in an "ordinary citizen" who doesn't have any special credential or office?
I would stick to "independent journalist" then.
The issue is “amateur” carries too much connotation of “unskilled”, “unqualified”, “incapable”, or “low brow” and they need their “citizen” and “activist” journalists to appear virtuous and competent; enlightening the populace and upholding the public trust.
Otherwise, she would just be someone who identifies as a fat crazy lady who runs around taking photos of dead bodies and putting them up on Facebook for internet notoriety like an obvious psycho-/sociopath looking for a payday from a civil suit.
I had to schadenLOL at the ambulance chaser describing "Wait for sirens to go off, and then follow them." as 'investigative journalism'.
That and Reason's "One conservative group and a bunch of people, including a couple of us, who agree with us." = diverse set of groups.
"I had to schadenLOL at the ambulance chaser describing “Wait for sirens to go off, and then follow them.” as ‘investigative journalism’."
I'd say it is by comparison ... when the respectabiggle "journalists" ignore the sirens and then just slightly rewrite the government press release the net day ...
Have you read the MSM in the last decade? Militarized governmental force seems an apt description for them.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking, lol
What is the point you are trying to make?
Seriously?
My point is that it doesn't matter whether she is an 'actual' journalist, which the article spends much time debating, it's the activity that's protected. So what should really be discussed is whether her actions are covered by the 1st amendment or not.
I agree and disagree. The First Amendment does make reference to a freedom of the press, which I think protects activities of the press, which anyone can be a member of at anytime. But you're correct that her status should not matter in the slightest.
And it should be noted that journalism doesn’t appear anywhere in The Constitution or BOR. The term is free press and the singular focus specifically says “Congress shall make no law.”
To wit:
https://reason.com/search/Douglass%20Mackey/
Showing 9 of 9 results found for: Douglass Mackey – Of which Volokh counts for 6
https://reason.com/search/Priscilla%20Villarreal/
Showing 21 of 21 results found for: Priscilla Villarreal – Of which Volokh counts for 2
Would seem to represent a journalist class overtly betraying individual liberty in favor of enshrining their occupation as a protected class.
I, once again, point out that we have a male troll who was sentenced on tangential/fabricated charges, actually spent time in prison, and is the very embodiment of the trolling for which the internet needs protection… but a female troll who spent less time in jail than statutory holding period can’t win her civil suit and the Internet, Western Journalism, and Democracy as we know it are going to collapse.
Reason, your pet cause isn’t special. Fuck you, cut spending.
>>journalist class overtly betraying individual liberty in favor of enshrining their occupation as a protected class.
chicken dinner.
That Mackey thing is too local. This chick in Texas on the other hand...
So basically, you're ok with government trampling on rights because the person isn't important to you? OK, gotcha.
Look up non sequitur, dumbshit.
It was hard to tell, given the perjorative descriptors around what she was doing and the minimization of what was done to her.
This is projection. The point is the magazine picking and choosing, usually in a single direction, which one they care to elevate dumbass. They ignore plenty of bad acts against perceived Christian or conservative journalists.
Glad to see an update on this story. What about that student loan website glitch that Reason was obsessed with for awhile? Can we get an update on that one?
I'm guessing Emma got that sweet government handout so it's all good now.
She's both the future and the past - time was that in smaller communities the local rag would have been written entirely by the one journo and perhaps there'd be someone else running the actual press (though IIRC Franklin ran his own press).
I've actually worked in Laredo, and was shocked to see Ken and Barbie clones on the City council made everyone stand up and recite Bellamy's Pledge of Allegiance. American prohibitionism has for over a century molded border towns into kaleidoscopic labyrinths of skeptical contumely and pietistic hypocritical opportunism not seen since Tammany New York. I hope she wins and spawns a host of video-recording imitators--hopefully on platforms less noisome than Faecebook or Xitter.
Mastodon is calling her name...
Sarc, Jeff - Dad got loose again.
Hospice time for Hank. Turn that morphine drip up to 11.
“I’ve actually worked in Laredo, and was shocked to see Ken and Barbie clones on the City council made everyone stand up and recite Bellamy’s Pledge of Allegiance.”
Did you melt?
Has this chick Kamala'd either the staff or Daddy Koch?
Fuck I've not seen many sites with a raging hard-on for a person as Reason does for this chick.
Yet they aren’t covering Catherine Herridge. Just like Reason won’t cover the J6 prosecution abuses. Must not be any brown envelopes on it for them.
Or James OKeefe over a diary he gave to the FBI.
Or the diary itself. Wouldn't be strategic.
But possibly reluctant?
While ignoring many other examples that are just as glaring. One even involved Kamala as state AG. And a court finally forced the release of the videos Kamalas officr illegally seized and then tried jailing the citizen for.
She sounds more like someone desperate for attention to me. Why else bring up 3 premature babies if not for sympathy and self righteous moral superiority to forestall any criticism.
"But what they did was create a monster."
...
she livestreams her reporting, infused with her signature profanity-laced commentary, on her Facebook page, "Lagordiloca," which translates to: "the fat, crazy lady."
Out of curiosity, how many cats does the fat, crazy lady who insists that it was everyone else who turned her into a monster own?
""In Laredo nobody had ever been arrested for that," says Joey Tellez, Villarreal's criminal defense lawyer. She was both the first and the last."
Would worry more except Reason is OK with Trump being convicted on crimes that have literally never been charged. Or states completely changing long-standing policies as statute of limitations to allow somebody to go after an un-good person.
This is the world you're OK with, Reason. Sometimes, it's going to hit your sacred cows.
I'm just trying to imagine a Reason writer filing a brief in support of James O'Keefe or Andy Ngo.
Imagine that, RJ. Let's bring it up over refreshments at the next Reason Writers vs Commentariat Softball Game.
Oh wait. I don't think there has ever been one. I guess they be chickens.
I think they’re afraid of what might happen if they’re within ‘batting distance’ of us. Seriously though, can you imagine the heated verbal confrontations at a Reason convention in Vegas? Not a chance any of these writers would have the guts to be accountable for what they’ve published.
Binion mentions O'Keefe but seems reluctant to put him in the same class as the subject Binion is hero-worshipping.
The fact that she's never been banned from Facebook or Dorsey's twitter for transmitting 'hacked materials' is fascinating to me.
Once again, of all the actual Federal cases of all the persecuted journalists in all the world, Reason has to go and choose the one where the "protagonist", who looks like Uncle Fester, colluded with police, has actual victims whom she was doxxing, spent like 6 hours in jail, and is complaining that she didn't get her payday as the result of her civil suit to defend.
It's like they're *trying* to BLM the free speech movement.
Said better than I could.
The government's reply brief is due tomorrow. It should be on the Supreme Court's website tomorrow. Just search "Alaniz" on the docket search.
Too bad those who abused her are not spending a decade or two in prison.
There’s some USDA Prime whataboutism here.
The Laredo police harassed a citizen for the exercise of her constitutional rights and a 5th Circuit majority supported the cops.
That is an outrage, with no need to deflect onto other cases, instances, Reason policy, etc.
Unless of course your sympathies lie with the police – as they do with so many of the right-wingers here – or, as seems likely in a few cases, you’re suffering from what one might call allogynophobia.
All those other instances ignored here because the target was (D)ifferent should be ignored, right shrike?
Political use if the law is only bad one way right?
Still not shrike, you lying POS.
You'd prefer it if all Reason's articles attacked the Democrats or supported the police.
Of course, if the woman had been a white MAGA male and the cops under the orders of a Democrat, with all facts otherwise the same, you'd be bleating loudly in support of the journalist.
Democrats have no integrity or morality. How else do you think they tolerate rapists like Bill Clinton and Joe Biden? Or a valor thief like Walz (and no one in the Democrat media will investigate his or Biden’s disturbing and extensive ties to the ChiComs). Or a proven whore like Harris, where it a proven fact she fucked her way into politics. Not to mention the fact that Harris is a lying moron who can’t string together a few sentences.
And you say you’re not Shrike? Prove it.
You know how I can tell you just read from a set of talking points shrike? It doesn't matter how many time I tell you that you have that name as you have the exact same Soros talking points as him. You're an uneducated acolyte who doesn't give 2 shots about facts or independent thought. Like shrike.
Understand shrike?
I don’t think Shrike understands. Thats why Shrike is Shrike.
You're a lying POS as usual. How unsurprising. Once you'd stupidly decided that I was shrike you were too cretinous to realise you were wrong or perhaps too dishonest to admit it when you realised.
Now why don't you bugger off and go back to selling Protocols of the Elders of Zion to your white-hooded friends?
"Still not shrike, you lying POS..."
You're being complimented, asshole.
Sounds like just another "so called journalist"
https://reason.com/2023/03/10/twitter-files-hearing-weaponization-matt-taibbi-democrats-elon/
> O'Keefe's stock and trade is trying to expose people and organizations with hidden cameras.
Stock and trade? Isn't it stock-in-trade?
Every other reason writer is an "editor" yet no one does any copy editing.
When everyone is an editor then no one is.
There ain’t no fuckin’ CO here.
Awesome movie quote.
I was so hoping someone would get the reference.
Thank you.
Reminds me of the line from the Mikado - "when everybody is somebody then nobody is anybody".
Hey, at least Reason has a leftist bias, right Shrike? That works for people like you.
Her page currently boasts 217,000 followers—almost the population of Laredo itself,
Funny. When I Google "Villarreal" my top 50 hits are "Villarreal CF" a soccer club based in Villarreal, Spain with a population of 50K people.
So, despite Villarreal and Reason's own claims about her monstrous girth, it seems the assertion of her outsized virtual footprint is more of Reason still trying to make "fetch" happen.
Almost like all journalists lie all the time and no matter how much you hate them for it, it's not enough.
Funny. When I Google “Villarreal” my top 50 hits are “Villarreal CF” a soccer club based in Villarreal, Spain with a population of 50K people.
So, despite Villarreal and Reason’s own claims about her monstrous girth, it seems the assertion of her outsized virtual footprint is more of Reason still trying to make “fetch” happen.
What does that have to do with the number of FB followers she has?
The daily commenters on this site are literally retarded
So she doxxed a suicide and the victims of a traffic accident, so she was not really arrested for merely “asking questions”.
It does bring up an interesting question, if police are not to give out information in some circumstances by law in order to protect people's privacy, what should be done when someonevtries ro subvert that rule,
It is amusing that Binion accepts Villareal’s self description as “citizen journalist” without exception, but James O’Keefe is only “so-called”.
O’Keefe disputes The Narrative, and embarrasses Party members in good standing. That is not allowed.
We already know the answer to that question-Florida Star v. BJR.
“Legacy journalism has done a tremendous amount to shoot itself in the foot, and it’s blaming everyone else for it not being taken very seriously anymore,” he says.
There is a chicken or the egg question when it comes to the problems with news media. So-called legacy journalism once* had some kind of balance between what people needed to know and what they wanted to know. But it has morphed into just another form of entertainment, and it is emotion that drives entertainment value, not facts and analysis. The problem is that people want to be entertained. They want connections to their group. They want someone to ease their anxieties.
When it comes to political news, there is a great deal of irony in how media covers U.S. politics. U.S. politicians often ease the anxieties of voters by redirecting their anxiety to something else and telling them that they have simple solutions to those “simple” problems. Try and tell voters that there are no simple solutions to inflation, housing shortages, peace in the Middle East, or the federal government’s debt, and they won’t be happy about it. The politician that does an interview on cable news, attends a debate with their opponent, or goes to a rally of supporters, won’t win votes by trying to lay out their complex plans to deal with complex problems. They won’t win votes by telling voters that everyone is going to have to make sacrifices in the form of higher taxes, fewer government services, or both because of the massive debt accrued over the last couple of decades.
So, really, where does the fault lie? The media that won’t tell us the things we need to know and do so truthfully because they get better ratings covering the latest viral outrage? The politicians that won’t make viable plans to solve our problems because those plans wouldn’t poll well? Or is it our fault for not being more rational in our choices of news media and political candidates?
*News was "once" better. If I'm vague and non-specific about when "once" was, then I won't have to back up that claim because everyone can input their own idea of when news media was better. Kind of like how America was "once" a great country or that we "once" had politicians that valued democracy.
So, really, where does the fault lie? The media that won’t tell us the things we need to know and do so truthfully because they get better ratings covering the latest viral outrage? The politicians that won’t make viable plans to solve our problems because those plans wouldn’t poll well? Or is it our fault for not being more rational in our choices of news media and political candidates?
d) all of the above.
^ This slimy piece of shit supports murder as a preventative measure:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
FOAD, asshole.
Well, I've been around awhile and I've seen a few chickens and I've seen a few eggs and I remember when one big fat white TV anchor chicken laid an egg and out hatched one big fat black chicken named Al Sharpton and from there on all the big fat white virtue-signaling chickens in da coop made a big fuss over the big fat black chicken and without a second thought they had elevated big old Al Sharpton to be the go-to expert on all the race problems facing the country. Now this was after the Civil Rights legislation was passed and there were signs that things were improving here and there but you'd never have know'd it for all the squawkin' going on because all of the big fat white chickens in the news media were hatching virtue eggs left and right... oh... make that just left because none of the big fat white chickens wanted to be associated with anyone who questioned their proscriptions about fairness and equity and we got LBJ and all the democrats lined up in a row and before you knew it chickens and eggs was flying out all over the place and we ended up where we are now with everybody blamin' all the white chickens for all the ills of the world, except the big fat high falutin' virtue-signaling ones think they gettin' away with it.
Need I say more? Well, I also remember what happened during the Carter administration, when the big fat media chickens still knew enough not to put all they eggs in one basket and so they would report some of the stupid things Jimmy Carter was doing to the detriment of the country and the economy and all and before you knew it old Ronald Reagan tossed his ass out in a landslide. I believe that was when these old white chickens figured out they'd better put they eggs in one basket after all or else folks would be knowing both sides of the story and they might not get they buddies into they high places.
But of course all of this was preceded by a bunch of mockingbirds - that's right, motherfuckin' mockingbirds started playin' around with psyops and all that shit and they got in they heads that they could kinda control the whole population if they worked it a bit and they still at it don't ya know cause now they got this brown-ass chicken, stupid as a rock, but they figure they know how to foist this shit upon us now so there it is. I told you I know'd a thing or two about chickens and eggs.
And I thank God Almighty for the ability of folks to discern what's really goin' on because you see, a mockinbird might be able to imitate a chicken but the motherfucker can't lay no chicken egg no matter how hard they try.
News was better before Obama ran for president. At that point much of the media openly abandoned any pretense of objectivity and journalism in support of him. Virtue signaling became the priority. Much more of the media has followed suit since and has become ‘progressively’ more partisan in favor of you democrats.
Of you want to see the problem, you only need to look in a mirror. The problem is you, and all your fellow travelers.
"I warned you assholes shit like this would happen." - George Orwell
This looks like real journalism.
Newspaper Releases Full Copy of Nashville Trans Shooter’s ‘Manifesto’
https://headlineusa.com/newspaper-releases-full-copy-of-nashville-trans-shooters-manifesto/
“We legally obtained this handwritten journal – which we refer to as The Covenant Killer’s 2023 Journal to distinguish it from the many journals written by Hale prior to 2023 – in early June of 2024 from a source familiar with the MNPD investigation,” Leahy said.
“We have had a First Amendment right to publish these unredacted documents from the moment we legally obtained them.”
Leahy did say that he hesitated to publish the documents after he was threatened with contempt proceedings by NashvilleJudge I’Ashea Myles, who has ruled that the materials should be kept secret.
“This ‘Sword of Damocles’ has been held over my head by Judge Myles since June 17, 2024, and we have held off on publishing The Covenant Killer’s 2023 Journal, in part, until our legal defense financial resources have reached a sufficient level such that I can hire counsel to represent me in the event Judge Myles seeks to resurrect this false claim against me,” he said.
which often sees her broadcasting directly from crime scenes and traffic accidents.
That's more like paparazzi than it is journalist.
"I bristle at the idea that judges can throw out distinctions that have any significant legal meaning between citizen journalists and journalists who work for bigger companies
That's not the distinctive quality. A citizen journalist and a commercial journalist do the same thing: journalism. The question isn't "is journalist defined by who you work for" - it's "what is journalism, and are you doing it?"
Is Joe Rogan a journalist? He has a camera, a microphone, and says things while both are recording. Does that make him a journalist? Obviously not - so those aren't the defining characteristics. I have a keyboard, and a place where I can publish my thoughts for others to read. Does that make me a journalist? Obviously not - so those aren't the defining characteristics either. We both have audiences, one large one small - so that's not a defining characteristic either. A dictionary or an encyclopedia conveys facts and knowledge to others - does that make their writers/publishers journalists? Obviously not - so that's not the defining characteristic either. Is it asking questions? Whoa, did I just journalism there? And there? And there? *eyeroll*
The significant legal meaning between "journalist" and "not journalist" - IMCO - has to do primarily with how much emphasis the person is placing on fact gathering, accuracy in reporting, objectivity, and respecting the ethics of the practice. None of which are present with this person.
"The traditional news media, print or television, don't really do investigative journalism on the goings-on of local politicians, and she does a good job of it."
You contradict yourself. Quote: "Rather, she livestreams her reporting [described later as "broadcasting directly from crime scenes and traffic accidents"], infused with her signature profanity-laced commentary" with her singular approaching appearing to just randomly search for crime scenes and chasing sirens.
That's not "investigative journalism." That's not journalism at all.
That's having an axe to grind with a the cops, and trying to abuse 1A to justify ACAB.
(But thanks for illustrating how Legacy Media isn't "journalism" anymore either.)
dick tichler
monique hunt
sharon dix
gabe horn
Dildo Gaggins?
"Is Joe Rogan a journalist?"
He has never claimed to be. He calls himself a meathead comedian cage fight commentator. She on the other hand runs around doing not so nice things like doxing people and describes herself as a "monster". Ok, then. Someone that is in it for the clicks and attention no matter what it takes. I'll bet that instead of acting like a journo she has made such a nuisance of herself that everyone is good and tired of her act. Running into crime scenes, arguing with cops on the street, publishing private information, etc.