Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University
Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University
Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Search for True North<br />
ethical standards and accountable to<br />
no one.<br />
Whether existing shield laws in the<br />
states will cover bloggers and other<br />
nonmainstream journalists remains an<br />
open question and very much depends<br />
on the particular statutory language<br />
and the courts’ interpretation of it.<br />
Although a California court ruled<br />
that the state shield law protected the<br />
identities of operators of a blog that revealed<br />
Apple Computer’s trade secrets<br />
on the ground that their publications<br />
constituted “news,” the Ninth Circuit<br />
U.S. Court of Appeals refused to recognize<br />
that blogger and self-described<br />
anarchist Josh Wolf was a journalist<br />
under the same law, because he was<br />
not “connected with or employed by”<br />
a news organization.<br />
Law enforcement officials at the<br />
Republican National Convention in<br />
September 2008 collectively threw up<br />
their hands and declined to make a distinction,<br />
detaining or arresting dozens<br />
of journalists, both “mainstream” and<br />
“citizen,” swept up while attempting to<br />
cover and report on the demonstrations<br />
and protests in Saint Paul. Of course,<br />
the Internet made possible “real-time”<br />
and worldwide distribution of reports<br />
of the protests. 1<br />
Digital technology has facilitated<br />
newsgathering in many ways. But<br />
A screen shot from a YouTube video of the arrest of<br />
“Democracy Now!” radio host Amy Goodman at the<br />
protest during the Republican National Convention.<br />
56 <strong>Nieman</strong> Reports | Winter 2008<br />
its impact has<br />
not been entirely<br />
positive. For example,<br />
in theory,<br />
the digitization<br />
of government<br />
records, coupled<br />
with the ability<br />
of anyone with<br />
a computer and<br />
a modem to gain<br />
easy access to<br />
them, should<br />
have been celebrated<br />
as a welcomeopportunity<br />
for meaningful<br />
citizen oversight.<br />
But judges and<br />
legislators, driven<br />
by fear that such<br />
access would facilitate<br />
illegal<br />
conduct ranging from identity theft<br />
to employment discrimination, have<br />
used the threat of it to justify curtailing<br />
access to these electronic files.<br />
It doesn’t stop there. Judges also<br />
cite their discomfort at the idea that<br />
someone logging on from a distant<br />
location, having no “legitimate interest”<br />
in the local community, will amuse<br />
himself by trawling through court<br />
or real estate records and publishing<br />
them online. They worry<br />
that citizen journalists<br />
with cell phone cameras<br />
will invade courtrooms and<br />
post trial footage online, a<br />
practice they consider both<br />
disruptive and undignified.<br />
Although they might support<br />
the concept of access<br />
to government records and<br />
proceedings in the abstract,<br />
once it becomes cheap and<br />
easy the gatekeepers began<br />
to question its wisdom.<br />
Information, it seems, is<br />
1 YouTube video about Amy Goodman’s arrest is at www.youtube.com/<br />
watch?v=sBjcqwQgF7Q&NR=1.<br />
AP photojournalist Matt Rourke was covering police arresting<br />
protesters at the Republican National Convention when he was arrested.<br />
One of the last images on his camera’s memory card before<br />
he was arrested shows a police officer pressing down with his knee<br />
on the neck of a protester whom he is handcuffing. Photo by Matt<br />
Rourke/The Associated Press.<br />
just too valuable—or too<br />
dangerous—to entrust to<br />
a blogger.<br />
None of these consider-<br />
ations should drive legal policy. Rights<br />
of access, or freedom of expression, are<br />
not, and should not be, conditioned<br />
on some government official’s idea of<br />
what constitutes “responsible” journalism.<br />
Judges and legislators should<br />
continue to follow the principles that<br />
have protected the press, and the<br />
public’s right to know, for more than<br />
200 years. But at the same time, those<br />
who publish in the new media and<br />
are always quick to invoke the First<br />
Amendment are challenging so many<br />
things held sacred.<br />
The question confronting all of<br />
us—given the tenor of our times and<br />
the judicial decision-making we are<br />
seeing—is whether the First Amendment<br />
will survive this challenge. �<br />
Jane Kirtley has been the Silha Professor<br />
of Media Ethics and Law at<br />
the School of Journalism and Mass<br />
Communication at the <strong>University</strong> of<br />
Minnesota since August 1999. Prior to<br />
that, she was executive director of The<br />
Reporters Committee for Freedom of<br />
the Press in Arlington, Virginia, for 14<br />
years.