2896

Applause!

2897

Bravo.

2898

Thanks! If I had a million hours, I’d try the Canadian rap.

2899

Awesome. You win the forum for today.

2900
2901

Yeah, I don’t love this precedent. I don’t want Donald Trump to decide that MSNBC “is not engaged in journalism with any traditional or accepted definition of the word” and go raid Rachel Maddow’s house.

Besides, I would actually describe Project Veritas as journalists anyway. They’re terrible people, and have clearly broken laws, but they should be prosecuted for that as any journalists would be.

2902

Is every person therefore afforded the protections afforded to journalists? I’m not saying that would be a bad outcome, but it would be a surprising one. The government decides people aren’t journalists all the time; every time a judge signs a search warrant, for example.

2903

I don’t know - since everyone is carrying a pretty advanced journalism tool in their pockets (a camera), maybe? If someone is filming something happening in the world, and either livestreaming it or planning to make content for the public with it, then I would say they are a journalist.

I don’t know how else to define “journalist” if it’s not that.

2904

I think it’s possible the government is wrong about Project Veritas, but that doesn’t mean the government can’t and doesn’t distinguish between who is and isn’t a journalist all the time. Saying that it isn’t their call to make seems wrong to me; in practice, they have to make that call every time.

2905

That’s a fair point. Personally I just think they should always err on the side of being more inclusive rather than less. So if you can plausibly consider someone or an org a journalist, then the federal government should do so.

The DOJ thinks PV doesn’t hit that mark, but I hope they are overruled in the court system, as much as I hate PV.

2906

Really everyone is a journalist. We’re just not used to it because historically that was the domain of monied groups.

But if you printed a newsletter out of your basement, you were a journalist.
Just don’t expect many people or organizations to talk to you about anything.

Edit: Government approved journalism, isn’t really journalism. Think of cops beating people, but then they beat someone from the local paper and suddenly it’s bad because they have a badge from City Hall?

2907

I’d be willing to bet that since freedom of the press is a Constitutional principle there is a long judicial history of rulings on what “the press” means. I don’t have time for a rabbit hole today, but I suspect if I did it would be surprising and informative.

2908

I don’t think that the government is the one who we can allow decide who is a real journalist.

2909

I’m guessing if I apply for a press pass to a White House briefing, I’m not going to get one.

2910

You’re right, but that can’t be the criteria the government uses to decide who is a journalist. There are like 30 seats in that room.

2912

While I agree with your statement, what judgement should weigh in on who or what press protection should apply to? IANAL so the scope of my thoughts on the subject are towards the mundane rather than any kind of legal theory and for that I apologize. However;

  • In this age of Twitter feeds, are we all journalists? (not joking or being snide - I can see the argument)
  • If journalism is solely the act, how does one establish that’s what is happening prior to publication of the information in order for that particular set of freedoms to apply? How about after; does it require a certain threshold of viewership or editorial review?
  • If we err on the side of caution in regards to freedom, could this effectively erase or curtail the limitations placed on freedom of speech by applying a “Some people say” tag to whatever?
2913

Good questions, but I’ll tackle this one. Yes. There are plenty of people who you would definitely classify as journalists who primarily or even solely write via Twitter. So what’s the difference between them and anyone else?

2914

Some journalists are on twitter does not mean all tweeters are journalists.

I think whether you’re a journalist is about the protocols that you follow—whether you’re part of a news organization is less important. But am I a journalist just because I want to babble some stuff, without any journalistic protocols? No.

2915

Now write that into a law for the federal government to use when deciding who gets protections and who doesn’t. And this will apply to everyone at all times, so you don’t want unintended consequences. And keep in mind that many people you consider to be journalists now probably don’t follow all or even any protocols.

I guess the core of what I’m saying is that if you’re going to let the government decide who is and isn’t a journalist, for that to be used against the people you like only takes patience.

2916

Editorial oversight? Vetting? Fact-checking? Ethical standards?

I know in this day and age of the 24-hour news cycle, we get precious little of the above, but I’d like to think there’s more to “journalism” than the ability to post a tweet.