Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Drudge hates new shield bill, but is defining 'journalist' really 'fascist'?
Christian Science Monitor ^ | September 14, 2013 | Patrik Jonsson,

Posted on 09/15/2013 7:53:03 AM PDT by yoe

A media shield law approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee defines a “real reporter” deserving of extra protection. Bloggers, "citizen journalists," and others cry "foul!"

[snip]The first version of a media shield law that handily made it through the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday defined for the first time what constitutes a “real reporter” deserving of extra protection versus what Sen. Dianne Feinstein called a “17-year-old blogger” who doesn’t deserve a legal shield.

[snip] That Congress is attempting to define “journalist” at all in order to expand protections after a number of high-profile leak cases and ensuing Justice Department prosecutions caused blog impresario Matt Drudge to call Ms. Feinstein a “fascist” on Twitter, suggesting that the law would subvert a free press by giving institutional advantage to government-approved media outlets.

(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: censorship; freepress; ivorytower; pajamapress; specialrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last
On its face, the bill doesn't seem to threaten our First Amendment Rights....or does it?

Senator Feinstein's state (CA) just passed a bill that would allow illegal immigrants to practice law in that state...now on its way to Governor Brown's desk...Feinstein going along with this?

1 posted on 09/15/2013 7:53:03 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: yoe
It should rightly be called The Propaganda Protection Act.
2 posted on 09/15/2013 7:55:41 AM PDT by Old Sarge (Opinions are like orgasms: only mine count, and I couldn't care less if you have one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

simple answer YES


3 posted on 09/15/2013 8:01:44 AM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Does the Constitution give any authority for the federal government to be involved in any way in the media? I think not.

/johnny

4 posted on 09/15/2013 8:03:14 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

Amen.


5 posted on 09/15/2013 8:05:51 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: yoe

If not Fascist what else could it be called, Communist, Marxist, Socialist, maybe Islamist even.


6 posted on 09/15/2013 8:09:16 AM PDT by PoloSec ( Believe the Gospel: how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Feinstein's bill is contrary to the essence of the First Amendment. The idea of the First Amendment is to permit media of whatever technology to uncover and make known the activities of government. To suggest that a new technology is not part of the press protected by the First Amendment is Luddite thinking. Logic would compel Feinstein to say that the telegraph could not have been protected, nor radio nor television. The point is not the technology but the freedom to spread the word whether the word is pressed on a page of paper with little inked-over objects by Benjamin Franklin or sent through the ether in digital form by Drudge.

To argue that Drudge somehow was not a proper journalist is to send the entire impeachment of Bill Clinton down the memory hole.

Diane Feinstein is not even proceeding in orderly fashion. First she assaults the Second Amendment and then she goes back to attack the first.


7 posted on 09/15/2013 8:10:18 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Dear Fellow Undocumented Journalist

Drudge nailed it. TRUE Facism




8 posted on 09/15/2013 8:11:27 AM PDT by MeshugeMikey ( Un-Documented Journalist / Block Captain..Tyranny Response Team)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

When any government sets to define what makes a ‘journalist’, which also includes historic discussions whether or not that ‘journalist’ attended an actual college and acquired a ‘journalist’ pedigree, that goernmewnt can then, decide which ‘journalists’ to LICENSE, and which ‘journalists’, to ARREST, THEREBY, CREATING AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL PUBLISHING HOUSE, CALLED GOVERNMENT, AND SHUTTING DOWN FREE SPEECH.


9 posted on 09/15/2013 8:13:28 AM PDT by Terry L Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Seems to fit right in for the USSA.


10 posted on 09/15/2013 8:13:44 AM PDT by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it, and the Constitution and law mean what WE say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


11 posted on 09/15/2013 8:15:50 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Well, I sure flunked the quiz in the article - got 3 of 11 “correct”. So much for CSM quizzies.


12 posted on 09/15/2013 8:18:44 AM PDT by shove_it (long ago Orwell and Rand warned us of 0bama's America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

“Senator Feinstein’s state (CA) just passed a bill that would allow illegal immigrants to practice law in that state...now on its way to Governor Brown’s desk...Feinstein going along with this?”

Did you pass the background check, obtain you permit, and observe the 15 day waiting period before writing this?


13 posted on 09/15/2013 8:18:45 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

I wrote Harry Reid’s only biography exposing deep corruption. http://www.futurnamics.com/reid.php
The MSM won’t touch it, it has been blackballed, even though much of it is sourced FROM THE MSM!
Therefore I would not be considered a legitimate journalist by Feinstein, though I’d argue I’m one of the few doing actual journalism regarding Reid.


14 posted on 09/15/2013 8:23:13 AM PDT by DaxtonBrown (http://www.futurnamics.com/reid.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

“It should rightly be called The Propaganda Protection Act.”

Ditto that.


15 posted on 09/15/2013 8:23:23 AM PDT by shove_it (long ago Orwell and Rand warned us of 0bama's America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
The point is not the technology but the freedom to spread the word whether the word is pressed on a page of paper with little inked-over objects by Benjamin Franklin or sent through the ether in digital form by Drudge.

I agree! I don't see the word "journalist" in the Constitution, just as I don't see the word "musket".

16 posted on 09/15/2013 8:24:44 AM PDT by stayathomemom (Beware of kittens modifying your posts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: yoe

It’s not fascist - it’s Soviet.


17 posted on 09/15/2013 8:26:07 AM PDT by Jim Noble (When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
"the law would subvert a free press by giving institutional advantage to government-approved media outlets"

That's it in a nutshell

18 posted on 09/15/2013 8:28:49 AM PDT by Mr. K (Lies, Damned Lies, Statistics, and then Democrat Talking Points.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Liberals make it so they can define who a journalist is, then they say the first amendments speech and press only apply to journalists.


19 posted on 09/15/2013 8:29:07 AM PDT by Domandred (Fdisk, format, and reinstall the entire .gov system.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stayathomemom
We ought to remember that Benjamin Franklin was not an accredited establishment journalist at the beginning of his career but rather a runaway apprentice printer who published anonymously.He made his reputation and his wealth through innovation. He was the Drudge of his day in many respects.

Can you imagine if the crown succeeded in its efforts to control the colonial press by defining terms?

You're right about the musket.


20 posted on 09/15/2013 8:31:56 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
Diane Feinstein is not even proceeding in orderly fashion. First she assaults the Second Amendment and then she goes back to attack the first.

Sorry, nathanbedford, but as happens once in a great while, I've got to disagree with you.

As far as Marxists are concerned, any assault against the old constitutional America is a good and worthy assault, and the greater the number of seemingly unrelated assaults, the better.

Oh, by the way, the First Amendment doesn't apply to journalists, but all of us. How hard is that to figure out?

21 posted on 09/15/2013 8:34:48 AM PDT by Standing Wolf (No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Maybe it is time the Senate define for Feinsein what a ‘REAL’ SENATOR is suppose to be according to our Constitution.


22 posted on 09/15/2013 8:36:08 AM PDT by Maudeen (Proverbs 3:5-6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shove_it

I scored perfectly. . .all I did (seriously) was identify the right answer and THEN choose the left-wing misinformation/statement and that choice was the “correct” one.

Much like when in college, write/answer that the prof wants to hear regardless of the facts.


23 posted on 09/15/2013 8:38:49 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Relax. This is all done for our own good. We will be protected from irresponsible 17-year-old gossip mongerers. If all journalists are certified by the Ministry of Truth there will be much less disinformation on the net.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This sounds like a “quaint notion of men who died 200 years ago,” to quote Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) who swore to uphold this “ancient screed.”


24 posted on 09/15/2013 8:40:46 AM PDT by Vehmgericht
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Relax. This is all done for our own good. We will be protected from irresponsible 17-year-old gossip mongerers. If all journalists are certified by the Ministry of Truth there will be much less disinformation on the net.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This sounds like a “quaint notion of men who died 200 years ago,” to quote Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) who swore to uphold this “ancient screed.”


25 posted on 09/15/2013 8:40:46 AM PDT by Vehmgericht
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hulka

That’s what I was trying to do but I got tricked on three of ‘em.


26 posted on 09/15/2013 8:43:43 AM PDT by shove_it (long ago Orwell and Rand warned us of 0bama's America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Standing Wolf
Well said.

Freedom of the press does extend to all of us.

Of course the game here is to play off the Supreme Court decision which limits the liability of journalists for the release of classified information by defining journalist to someone other than Drudge who reaches millions of people every day but including in the definition some establishment figure who writes for an audience of a fraction of the size inside the Beltway.


27 posted on 09/15/2013 8:44:09 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: yoe

the freedom of expression is a G-d given right for all people, not some govt designated group of high priests

if govt can designate which people have first amendment rights... then they can designate who has second amendment rights as well.

and last I checked, the Creator didn’t appoint congress to oversee our rights


28 posted on 09/15/2013 8:47:36 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

The arrogant, condescending, egotistical Judiciary have nothing more than their vast clique of lawyers who prey upon people, to maintain the semblance of “settled law” that the judges-and-lawyers are “experts with ‘expertise’” in their field ...

which, by the way, is how academics get “tenure” - which is a mutual admiration society grant by the judges vis-a-vis “well back your arrogance, if you’ll back ours”

... allowing by raw fiat that is LOST IN EXTRA-CONSTITUTIONAL SPACE, such claims and grants ...

that are not “settled” at all.

They forget, that our Constitution is a peace treaty.


29 posted on 09/15/2013 8:48:34 AM PDT by First_Salute (May God save our democratic-republican government, from a government by judiciary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
Yes, when the government starts deciding who's a journalist and who isn't, then we're not far off from Pravda/Izvestia territory.

At any rate, does anyone actually want Dianne Feinstein deciding this question?

30 posted on 09/15/2013 8:49:12 AM PDT by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Perhaps it is time that an official series is done on the biographies of all of our elected officials. It would be depressing I am sure as well as maddening. Especially for those that have been in office forever. . .like Feinstein.


31 posted on 09/15/2013 8:51:51 AM PDT by Maudeen (Proverbs 3:5-6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

There has been so much degreed journalist fraud and collusion with the DNC in recent years, that their efforts to protect “The Guild” should be responded to with a loud and resounding “HELL NO!”


32 posted on 09/15/2013 8:57:26 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: yoe

The essence of this is that there can be two people doing the same thing. One goes to prison and the other doesn’t.


33 posted on 09/15/2013 9:19:34 AM PDT by Founding Nephew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

Pamphleteers were the scourge of governments when the Constitution was written. As you said, Franklin was, among other things, one of these as was Thomas Paine. The classic examples include Paine, abolitionist literature, union pamphlets, and the political postings on the walls of Beijing. In America, they have most often been tools of the left and those wishing to overthrow our governing system.

Now, the pamphlet is the web site. The printing press is obsolete. Whoever controls the Internet controls the dialogue. Since the left is in control of the government, they must control the dialogue.


34 posted on 09/15/2013 9:21:53 AM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Right, Di! damn alternatives....can’t get a darn thing done with them snooping around...

She wouldn’t have liked any of the pamphleteers, like Thos. Paine, or even, B. Franklin, either.


35 posted on 09/15/2013 9:24:41 AM PDT by 13Sisters76 ("It is amazing how many people mistake a certain hip snideness for sophistication. " Thos. Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nifster

Giving the government the power to define anything is to give the government the power to control everything with very often disastrous results.

A quick walk through the history of the 20th Century provides many examples of this in Europe, Asia, Latin America and the US. Europe from the mid 1920’s through the end of World War II some 20 years later provides a well documented example. The use of psychiatric hospitals in Russia for 40 years is another. The population purges in Cambodia and Communist China are yet another. And don’t forget the unconstitutional imprisonment of Americans with Japanese bloodlines in the early 1940smuch less the decades of the Jim Crow laws through out the Republic.

Unfortunately the list gets even larger as you walk back through the 19th, 18th, and 17th Centuries.

The Founding Fathers knew their history and that is why the Constitution was developed the way it was. Any attempt to by-pass or rewrite it to make it more contemporary ignores the history of mankind for the last 400 years.

BTW can anyone name any improvements breed into the human animal in the last 400 years?


36 posted on 09/15/2013 9:29:44 AM PDT by Nip (BOHEICA and TANSTAAFL - both seem very appropriate today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yoe

There is no reason why “journalists” need “extra protection.”


37 posted on 09/15/2013 9:48:39 AM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown

Nice work.


38 posted on 09/15/2013 9:56:17 AM PDT by carriage_hill (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history, when everybody stands around reloading.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Yes.


39 posted on 09/15/2013 9:56:45 AM PDT by autumnraine (America how long will you be so deaf and dumb to thoe tumbril wheels carrying you to the guillotine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

In the earliest days of the Republic, anyone who would afford a printing press was a journalist.


40 posted on 09/15/2013 9:59:00 AM PDT by RobbyS (quotes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MeshugeMikey

Dear Fellow Undocumented Journalist :

I will spread that phrase far and wide.


41 posted on 09/15/2013 10:35:57 AM PDT by Old Sarge (Opinions are like orgasms: only mine count, and I couldn't care less if you have one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

“A pamphleteer is a historical term for someone who creates or distributes pamphlets. Pamphlets were used to broadcast the writer’s opinions on an issue, for example, in order to get people to vote for their favorite politician or to articulate a particular political ideology.

A famous pamphleteer of the American Revolutionary War was Thomas Paine. Another famous pamphleteer was Witte the With, with perhaps the most prestigious use of the title going to John Milton. Today a pamphleteer might communicate his missives by way of weblog, but before the advent of telecommunications, those with access to a printing press and a supply of paper used the pamphlet as a means of mass communications outside of newspapers or full-fledged books.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pamphleteer

Hey Sen. Feinstein, Drudge, “17 year old bloggers” et.al. are just “environmentally conscious” pamphleteers who print electronically, to save the trees, don’t you know.


42 posted on 09/15/2013 10:40:29 AM PDT by BwanaNdege ("Life is short. It's even shorter if you suggest going out for pizza on your anniversary" Peter Egan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

John Milton’s contribution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Areopagitica

Another famous pamphleteer, perhaps the most important in all of human history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther

His work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ninety-Five_Theses


43 posted on 09/15/2013 10:48:10 AM PDT by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Terry L Smith
that goernmewnt can then, decide which ‘journalists’ to LICENSE, and which ‘journalists’, to ARREST...

Well said. This is the proverbial camel's nose under the tent flap. When the toe of government encroaches into free speech, it is a matter of time before that 800 pound gorilla gets in.

44 posted on 09/15/2013 10:49:18 AM PDT by VRW Conspirator (Producing Talk Show Prep since 1998.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Argentina:
“As a result of the ongoing authoritarian crackdown on not only individual liberties, but economic data, it has gotten to the point that the government is criminally prosecuting anyone who dares to publish independent inflation data.

Because when the truth conflicts with propaganda, either the “truth” is made up, as the BLS showed last week, or it becomes a crime to report the truth.”

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-14/dare-question-argentinas-inflation-data-prepare-go-jail


45 posted on 09/15/2013 10:51:50 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Ms. Feinstein’s definition of a “real reporter” is any one who agrees with her!!!


46 posted on 09/15/2013 10:53:20 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Yes. It is fascist. The First Amendment doesn’t say a darn thing about “journalists” just about freedom of the press.
If there is going to be “shield law” it should be for everybody, or there should be no shield law.


47 posted on 09/15/2013 10:54:04 AM PDT by Little Ray (How did I end up in this hand-basket, and why is it getting so hot?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Why do journalists even special privileges in the first place? That’s fascism in itself.


48 posted on 09/15/2013 10:54:11 AM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
All of the comments in opposition to this idiotic bill are right on target, but keep in mind that a lot of these "shield laws" are already in place at the state level. In some states -- New Jersey being one of them, which is ironic considering how thoroughly left-wing the political and legal landscape is here -- there have already been landmark court decisions which are so broad that they basically say that anyone who maintains a blog or posts regularly on the internet is a journalist under the law.

What makes California a focal point of this issue is that there was a high-profile criminal case in the news (the Barry Bonds BALCO case) in which a reporter who was "shielded" under California law was prosecuted in Federal court because the BALCO investigation was a Federal case, not a state case.

Just some food for thought. In addition to opposing this Federal bill, it's high time we start gutting the various individual state "shield laws" as well.

49 posted on 09/15/2013 11:00:09 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

EXCELLENT!


50 posted on 09/15/2013 1:04:11 PM PDT by BwanaNdege ("Life is short. It's even shorter if you suggest going out for pizza on your anniversary" Peter Egan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson