Senate Panel Oks Measure Defining a Journalist

Forums

Forum guidelines BT super discount

Updated posts

My threads
No new posts

My favorite threads

Other Resources

The Political Joe » Senate Panel Oks Measure Defining a Journalist

Rss Feed

Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller

DanielG

2013-09-13 10:55 AM

Subject: Senate Panel Oks Measure Defining a Journalist

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/senate-panel-oks-measure-d...

"A Senate panel on Thursday approved legislation designed to protect reporters and the news media from having to reveal their confidential sources after narrowing the definition of a journalist and establishing which formats — traditional and online — provide news to people worldwide."

So, Congress gets to decide what defines a journalist and by doing so also defines who is covered by source protection.

How convenient. So now Congress would be able to define who is putting out "authorized" news and be able to harass, intimidate and subpoena anyone it deems fit to do so to knowing they must surrender their sources or go to jail. So no one would ever again give a "non-authorized" news source anonymous information against the government.

I cannot see any way this could possibly be considered constitutional.

My Race Log

crowny2

2013-09-13 12:28 PM

in reply to: DanielG

Champion

15211

Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL

Subject: RE: Senate Panel Oks Measure Defining a Journalist

Originally posted by DanielG http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/senate-panel-oks-measure-d... "A Senate panel on Thursday approved legislation designed to protect reporters and the news media from having to reveal their confidential sources after narrowing the definition of a journalist and establishing which formats — traditional and online — provide news to people worldwide." So, Congress gets to decide what defines a journalist and by doing so also defines who is covered by source protection. How convenient. So now Congress would be able to define who is putting out "authorized" news and be able to harass, intimidate and subpoena anyone it deems fit to do so to knowing they must surrender their sources or go to jail. So no one would ever again give a "non-authorized" news source anonymous information against the government. I cannot see any way this could possibly be considered constitutional.

Yeah. I agree.

My Race Log

tuwood

2013-09-16 5:38 PM

in reply to: DanielG

Pro

9391

Omaha, NE

Subject: RE: Senate Panel Oks Measure Defining a Journalist

So I have mixed feelings, I agree with you guys that the definition of a journalist is pretty weak and narrow. The original definition that was struck would have been a lot better:

The original bill would have extended protections to a "covered person" who investigates events and obtains material to disseminate news and information to the public

However, currently there is no legislation that protects anyone at all, or defines anyone as a journalist so the Administration and the AG's office is going to town on everyone. Yes, they will still go to town on the people who don't fit this description, but they're already doing that.

So, like I said, I have mixed feelings because it's a step in the right direction but not enough. The really sad part is that the congress feels the need to write a law like this in the first place.

My Race Log

JoshR

2013-09-17 12:55 PM

in reply to: tuwood