Sunday, September 26, 2010

"Man is free at the instant he wants to be." Voltaire

The same can be said for being a member of the press.

A (wo)man becomes a member of the press at the instant
they regard them self to be.

At what point does one become a member of the press, and
therefore deserving of the First Amendment protection of
the human right to be "the press".

I would argue that any (wo)man who argues that they are the press, is.

At most, "publishing", by any means, even so little as one word to as few as one other person, guarantees the protection afforded by the First Amendment which reads in significant part;

Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom ... of the press ...
Yet there are those in government who claim the right to the most ignominious abridgment of the rights of members of a free press, to deny their existence. There are those, like Mayor Berry's Communications Director Chris Huffman-Ramirez who claim they have the authority to decide who and who is not, the press. Huffman-Ramirez avers that in order for him to extend his "credentials" to a member of the press, that person must demonstrate to his satisfaction, that they "own a printing press" or "a broadcast license"; never mind that broadcasting licenses have nothing to do with credentialing the press, nor does owning a printing press. Apparently, he is graciously willing to extend his prerogative to credential the press to those who can prove to his satisfaction that they work for someone who owns a printing press or broadcast license.

The outrage over credentialing reared its ugly head again today at the Temple Albert Gubernatorial Debate where campaigns were granted the authority to decide who and who was not, a member of the press. Those who did not receive their blessing, were denied entrance in their capacity as members of the press.

There was still room at the inn; empty seats, but not for anyone identifying themselves as a "blogger".

Now I know, and am braced for, the deluge of ad hominem attacks that this post will provoke; anonymous agreement that I am not entitled to recognition as a member of the press. Which brings us to another quote attributed to Voltaire, though possibly, not accurately;
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
and its logical extension;
"I disapprove of the manner in which you exercise your rights as a member of the press, but I will defend to the death your right to exercise them."
It is not up to the Chris Huffman-Ramirezs of the world to determine who and who is not the press. It is not even up to the Susana Martinezs and Diane Denishs of the world to decide. And it is especially not up to the ilk of James Hallinan, a Denish spokesperson who took it upon himself to block the doorway to anyone that he decided was not "the press".

It reflects badly on Denish, that she gave him that much authority to abuse. He does her no service with his abysmal ignorance of the First Amendment, or with his equally egregious arrogance in ignoring the protection it guarantees.

No comments: