I have previously discussed the curiosity of California’s Democratic leaders in Congress leading the fight for massive warrantless surveillance and attacks on privacy. California Senator Dianne Feinstein has long been viewed as hazard to civil liberties from her knowledge of the torture program to consistent support for the expansion of a security state system. Feinstein is now back in that ignoble role this week, fighting to limit the meaning of journalist to prevent bloggers and others from being able to claim protections from surveillance or compelled testimony. Illinois Senator Dick Durbin has joined Feinstein in seeking to define most people out of protections for media.
The irony is the Feinstein wants to add the limiting language to a Media Shield Law that has already been riddled with exceptions and holes by the Obama Administration. Feinstein is again serving as the agent for those who want to expand government powers — in this case under the guise of a bill purportedly limiting such powers.
Feinstein came out last week by insisting that bloggers and Internet writers are not “real reporters” despite the fact that most Americans now get their news from such sites. She wants to limit the term to people who are “a salaried agent” of a media company like the New York Times or ABC News. Thus, students in media graduate programs and bloggers would not qualify. She is concerned that the law could be used by whistleblowers and others to expose unlawful conduct and then claim protections from government investigations or attacks.
She does not of course define what constitutes a salary. Would this include freelancers? I am paid by USA Today per column. Is that a salary? Is a media professor salaried as a journalist when he is paid by his school but writes in a university publication?
This blog is ranked as one of the top most visited legal blogs in the world. We have a larger audience than columns associated with various newspapers, including the Legal Times. We produce five to seven new stores each weekday. We run new stories over the weekend. We reach millions of readers each year. Most local newspapers have circulations of less than 15,000. Does it not matter how large your readership is but rather whether you receive money for the work? If so, we would have to add advertising to generate revenue to qualify while a small town newspaper with a fraction of our readership would automatically qualify. There are legitimate questions about what constitutes a journalist for constitutional or statutory protections, but Feinstein is adopting a criteria clearly designed to exclude most writers today on politics and government.
As we have discussed, this effort is part of an overall effort to strip whistleblowers and journalists of status as the Administration seeks to prosecute them. Assange is the best example. He is not a journalist but rather just an Assange.
Feinstein’s limit would be added to litany of exceptions and holes in the bill. For example, the law would allow Justice Department officials to delay notice for a period of 45 days and then ask for an extension of an additional 45 days. That would mean almost 100 days of surveillance of reporters like the controversial cases of the Obama Administration.
Feinstein would add to these limits by excluding writers for outfits like Wikileaks or even recognized reporters who are writing for blogs without direct compensation. It is part of the continued effort to distract the public with measures meant to look like reforms but actually reaffirm the power of the government like President Obama’s highly criticized “reforms” announced last Friday. Rather than limit the government, it would now become a formal exclusion of the vast majority of people covering the government from protections. This is particularly a concern with the rising criticism of mainstream media in yielding to demands of the White House in covering stories like the Snowden affair or actively mocking critics of the government. We are often informed of these programs or developments by the foreign media or the bloggers that Feinstein wants to strip of protections. It is particularly ironic coming from the Senator representing the state with the largest number of bloggers in the country. Instead of their interests, Feinstein is representing the interests of the ever-expanding system of security state offices and officials.
The government is most concerned not with traditional media, but the power of sites like Wikileaks or bloggers cover every aspect of their work. This is one reason why mainstream media is losing market share to the blogs. Readers are increasingly seeking alternatives to the source of their information. That certainly comes with a risk. There are many unreliable Internet sites and there is a great deal of bias on such sites. However, if one is to define a journalist, it would seem obvious that you would base the define on what they are actually doing as opposed to the arbitrary criteria of whether anyone is paying them directly for the work.
The problem is that the mainstream media views this emerging new media as a threat and many may privately welcome the exclusion of the competition. That would leave no one to advocate for bloggers on the Hill or in the main press. For that you would have to go to Internet and the very blogs that Feinstein is targeting in this legislation.
The most effective shield under this law will be for the government in stripping claims of protection and allowing long periods of surveillance of reporters. These exceptions and Feinstein’s effort (with Durbin) make the shield law a Trojan horse bill. To paraphrase an ancient adage for civil libertarians today, beware of Democratic leaders bearing gifts.
nick spinelli 1, August 13, 2013 at 11:56 am
What is interesting to me is that blogging and alternative media has brought forth left, right, libertarian, etc. reporting and commentary. Not just the pablum of MSM. Maybe this is just a negotiating ploy. I could see this stooge of a Senator saying, “Well, we’ll settle for now on Greenwald and Assange being non journalists. Do we have a deal?”
*****
I don’t think so. Feinstein–and the others who support this effort–have to know there’s more than Greenwald and Assange who could uncover things the powers that be don’t want “the people” to know. There are tons of news/opinion blogs.
Unfortunately, one “real” journalist (Michael Hastings) was recently killed in a fiery car crash.
So according to the Senator F, only persons who receive salaries are to be afforded rights, responsibilities and powers. So are we going to just go and strip away those duties of reserve police officers, volunteer firefighters, volunteer rescue members, and sheriffs’ posse?
Attacking volunteers in general would have a great and bad effect in this country. I can’t imagine a world, especially in rural areas, where there are no volunteer firefighters. There would be almost no fire protection if they were eliminated. Volunteer journalists have similar benefit for journalism.
Not unexpected from our Dear Leaders.
JT hit the nail on the head with this one on all fronts. The compensation level is just an excuse to attack as many of those who exercise their free speech rights as possible.
One does not have to earn a salary to receive the right to express their first amendment rights. What’s next a minimum wage level? W-2 employee status? Minimum revenue source of the employer (such as 50 million in revenues).
Soon you might see if this disgrace was implemented a cat and mouse game between bloggers or volunteer journalists trying to stay one step ahead of the game by accepting $1 salaries per year to become salaried employees then the gov’t will force another level and the bloggers will try to make another work-arouned and on and on.
I read wikinews will issue press passes to those contributors who have demonstrated a certain level of contribution to its content.
https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Accreditation_policy
How is this any more or less legitimate than any other news agency?
What does one expect from Stalinist types like Queen Finestain?
I’ll never understand why the press followed Bush and Cheney into war. Cheerleading them. We’ll be greeted in the streets as liberators. HA!
What is interesting to me is that blogging and alternative media has brought forth left, right, libertarian, etc. reporting and commentary. Not just the pablum of MSM. Maybe this is just a negotiating ploy. I could see this stooge of a Senator saying, “Well, we’ll settle for now on Greenwald and Assange being non journalists. Do we have a deal?”
This Senator climbed over the dead body of Mayor Moscone onto the national scene. That was, and is, her credentials for being a legislator on the national stage. This is just one of many stupid and dangerous proposals coming from “The most esteemed gentlewoman and senior Senator from the great state of California.”
Gene,
The real fear is in the board rooms across America. Back in the mid 90’s when the old hacks refused to take the emerging power of the internet seriously and employ some innovative thinking to develop new business plans, they reminded me of a bunch of blacksmiths who refused to believe that the horseless-carriage was going to catch on.
Galtian Overlords: If you see something, say something. Unless it’s about us – then just shut up,
Elaine,
Yep … this was an inevitable move on the part of corporate America and their politician partners.
Blouise/Elaine,
I think the response of Feinstein and Durbin reeks of fear.
JT and GB’s,
If an invitation to the White House Correspondents Dinner arrives, run like he!! and don’t look back.
(I’m not kidding)
Blouise,
The bloggers are making members of the MSM look lazy, feckless, and beholden to the powers that be.
So, I need to be paid or on someone’s payroll to be a journo. That would certainly excluded free-lancers.
Tried to unsubscribe 8 times not success. Help
“Well everyone knows you can’t tell the truth without being on some corporate payroll . . . or taking their campaign contributions. Money is the ultimated arbiter of truth. We can’t have citizens reporting on governmental and corporate malfeasance and crimes! Why that might make people in Washington have to be accountable and end up with our corporate overlords in prison right next to us!
We’ll have none of that.” – Sen. Diane “Super Shill” Feinstein (F – CA)
Reblogged this on News You May Have Missed and commented:
Pruning The Fourth Estate: Feinstein Seeks To Limit Who Can Claim To Be A Journalist
Reblogged this on Brittius.com.
“The problem is that the mainstream media views this emerging new media as a threat and many may privately welcome the exclusion of the competition.” (JT)
And there you have it!
Hopefully she strokes out soon