I went looking for legal decisions recognizing bloggers as the pamphleteers of this day and deserving of the Constitutional protection written for the pamphleteers of that day.
It looks like members of a free press are having to prove they are "journalists" in order to prove they are enjoy the Constitutional protection of their human right to be "a free press". Why?
Did the founding fathers really intend to protect only a subset of the entire free press who qualify as "journalists"? whatever that means. Did they intend to let politicians and public servants control access to the public record?
Or is it just an "establishment" effort to repress that part of a free press, they cannot control?
Monday, January 09, 2012
free press and journalists wrongly conflated
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment