« The Daily Chaos -- Er, Kos | Main | CapitolLink: Reaction To Vote On Internet Speech »

Justice To Bloggers: No Shield For You

The Justice Department opposes the call for a federal shield law to protect journalistic sources, and one reason for its opposition is a fear that the legislation pending before Congress could be extended to blogs.

U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg voiced that concern last month in his written testimony for a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. He listed five objections to the bill, S. 1419, including the definition of "covered person."

That definition "invites criminals to cloak their activities under the guise of a 'covered person' so as to avoid investigation by the federal government," Rosenberg said, and one way they could cloak their activities is by creating blogs.

"The overbroad definition ... could be read to include any person or corporate entity whose employees or corporate subsidiaries publish a book, newspaper, or magazine; operate a radio or television broadcast station; or operate a news or wire service," he wrote. "Additionally, the definition arguably could include any person who sets up an Internet 'blog' or any other activity to 'disseminate information by print, broadcast, cable satellite'" or other means.

Rosenberg did not elaborate on that point in verbal testimony, according to a draft committee transcript obtained by Beltway Blogroll. He also declined to elaborate in a phone call to his office in Texas. According to spokesman John Yembrick, the prosecutor "said that the written statement and oral testimony should suffice, and he has nothing to add beyond that."

Steven Clymer, a law professor at Cornell University, shared Rosenberg's concerns, according to the draft transcript. Clymer warned that a federal shield law "would signal that illegal disclosures of classified or otherwise sensitive information ... are immune from criminal prosecution as long as they are made to a recipient who could qualify as a reporter under the privilege." And he added that the pending bill is so broad that it could apply to "a disclosure of sensitive or classified information to an Internet blogger."

When quizzed by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, about the bill's application to blogs, Clymer said courts ultimately would have to decide the issue if the current language becomes law. "They may decide that you cannot favor one group of media over another group of media," Clymer said. "And so if you are going to give the privilege to The New York Times, you necessarily have to give it to the Internet blogger as well."

Cornyn, whose prepared statement said the issue of whether any shield law should apply to bloggers merits "serious discussion," responded to Clymer's comment by noting differences between blogs and mainstream media outlets. "Internet bloggers, and perhaps others, don't observe the same professional ethics and have the same review by editors and others that are trying to make sure that they are performing their job in a responsible and accurate sort of way," he said.

Posted by | 09:32 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://amcblog.nationaljournal.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/320

Comments

Journalism's professional ethics ... like "fake but accurate?"

I'm not sure bloggers would want those kind of "ethics" in the first place.

Fake But Accurate | 11.04.05 07:12 PM

Post a Comment