Tuesday, September 28, 2010

First Amendment doesn't recognize "journalists"

Blogger Monahan made mention this morning of "bloggers who call themselves journalists" and in so doing, joins those who would create or enjoy special exceptions for "journalists" (I assume he includes himself) at the expense of "non-journalists" including "bloggers".

The First Amendment reads pretty straightforwardly;
Congress shall make no law ... abridging (the rights of) ... the press ... Not "journalists", "the press".

Congress (read; Mayor Richard Berry, DA Susana Martinez, and Lt Gov Diane Denish) shall make no policy, rule or regulation abridging the rights of the press. (forget for the purposes of this discussion "candidate" Martinez is not "the government").

Yet each of them has denied equal access to members of "the press" based on an indefensible distinction they are drawing between "the press" and "journalists".

The term "journalist" has become a tool of naked discrimination. Folks who can justify calling themselves "journalists" by whatever means, think they deserve more respect than other legitimate members of "the press" who don't meet their standards for being called a" journalist".

Berry's standard, according to his spokesman, Chris Huffman-Ramirez, is; one is not "a journalist" and therefore not "the press", and entitled to equal access under the law, unless they "own a printing press or a broadcasting license".

What utter nonsense!

Berry's position is philosophically indefensible. Yet, might makes right. And with the aid and abet a bunch of snobs with "credentials", he, and the other politicians with the need and desire to hide from "the press, will have their way; they will abridge the rights of the free press, and suffer no consequences at all.

And those who play by their "rules" remain in line for the high paying government jobs spinning the truth rather than telling it, that were the subject of Monahan's post.

No comments: