By J.D. Longstreet ——Bio and Archives--September 17, 2013
American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
"On its face, the proposed shield law doesn’t affect the First Amendment, which at any rate doesn’t guarantee anybody’s right to publish whatever they want. The bill simply adds extra protections against being forced to testify about sources for established reporters and freelancers with a “considerable” amount of publishing experience. It also allows a judge to make a declaration as to who’s a journalist and who’s not in an attempt to build the shield as wide as possible."Here in North Carolina we already have a press shield law, thank you very much. North Carolina's "reporter's privilege" or "shield law" is codified at N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8-53.11. Under NC law a journalist is defined as:
(1) Journalist. - Any person, company, or entity, or the employees, independent contractors, or agents of that person, company, or entity, engaged in the business of gathering, compiling, writing, editing, photographing, recording, or processing information for dissemination via any news medium."The shield law became effective October 1, 1999, and applies only to information or documents prepared while acting as a journalist on or after that date. In summary, the shield law grants journalists a broad but qualified privilege against disclosure of newsgathering information. The protection extends to virtually everyone connected with the publication or distribution of news information, including, but not limited to, reporters, photographers, stringers, and freelance reporters. All newsgathering activity is protected, so long as the activity is related to the business of publication or distribution of news via print, broadcast, or other electronic means. In addition, the statute protects all newsgathering information, regardless of whether the information is confidential or non-confidential. Finally, the protection extends to all legal proceedings, including criminal, civil, grand jury and quasi-judicial (i.e., administrative) proceedings." So what's wrong with having a federally codified definition of who, exactly, is a journalist? (I mean, of course, other than the troubling fact that once there is a federal definition of journalist, most states with shield laws will move to change their individual state laws to align with the federal code.) Think about it for a moment. The first amendment says the government cannot abridge the freedom of the press. BUT -- if the government defines who IS a journalist -- and who ISN'T -- then they have just abridged that freedom. In an article entitled: "Don’t let the government define who’s a journalist," Mark B. Evans, writing for tucsoncitizen.com says the following: "The First Amendment says the Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press. But if the government defines who’s a journalist, all those outside that definition are having their free press rights abridged." See the problem? Mr. Evans goes on to say: "Democracy requires a free press. A bill – no matter how valuable to news gathering – that opens the door to the government defining who gets to be a journalist is a bill that appears to protect a free press but in fact endangers it." In his excellent article Mr. Evans explains: " ... If journalists give in to government definition of journalist in order get the federal shield law they’ve long sought, they may soon get government regulation of the press they never thought possible." And what of Bloggers? Want to bet which side of the definition of "journalist" bloggers will be assigned by a new federal shield law? Pardon my paranoia, but this shield law business doesn't pass the smell test. I am convinced it is contrived (as so much is these days) by the government as a means to by-pass the 1st Amendment and effectively gag conservative bloggers who have proven to be thorns in the side of big Marxist government in the US. I expect such a law will pass the democrat controlled US Senate. It has a much less chance of survival in the US House of Representatives where the people still have SOME say in their government. I will, however, be contacting my Representative and insisting that he vote against any such bill should it reach the House floor for a vote. © J. D. Longstreet
View Comments
(Editor’s note: J.D. Longstreet passed away in 2014. He will be greatly missed.)
Longstreet is a conservative Southern American (A native sandlapper and an adopted Tar Heel) with a deep passion for the history, heritage, and culture of the southern states of America. At the same time he is a deeply loyal American believing strongly in “America First”.
He is a thirty-year veteran of the broadcasting business, as an “in the field” and “on-air” news reporter (contributing to radio, TV, and newspapers) and a conservative broadcast commentator.
Longstreet is a veteran of the US Army and US Army Reserve. He is a member of the American Legion and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. A lifelong Christian, Longstreet subscribes to “old Lutheranism” to express and exercise his faith.