PDA

View Full Version : Online news and our rights as journalists


MichaelPS
Jan 31st 2007, 11:58 AM
I never realized how many aspects of my life as a journalist with corporate backing went unquestioned until that shield was no longer there. With that preface, I'd love to get some feedback from the rest of you out there on this situation.

While I was a reporter for about fifteen years, today I pay the mortgage from a production company I started, but, like many of us, you never really leave the newsroom. Not entirely. I've been saying for years that the future of news is not the fully staffed newsroom that we all know and love (ahem), but something much, much smaller. I've posited that sooner or later, a well known or semi well known anchor or reporter will leave the business, start their own operation on a sponsor or ad-supported basis, with distribution to be based on everything to video podcast subscriptions to mobile wireless technology. as the price and weight of gear both go down, this will become easier, and with the small screen sizes (320x240) helping to mask the image quality issues, "narrowcasting" will become more popular, affordable, and profitable,

Well, after mouthing off about this for this long, I finally decided to stop waiting for that to happen and am starting this kind of thing myself. Simply put, I have too many ideas too often to not try to get them out there.

The easy part has actually been getting backing. It's a tight operation, but it's fun, the money is there, everyone is happy nd ready to go.

NOW....

Did you ever stop to think about how many things you do as a journalist that you would never do as an individual? I find myself with a question. Assuming you have permission to be there in the first place, What are the rights you have to shoot things like interviews and cover, including faces in crowds, if you're in a private place, like a home or a business. As long as you're calling it "news" do you automatically have the right to shoot and distribute whatever you want?

In short, how much does the method of distribution affect one's ability to assert the rights of a journalist, and more importantly, have those rights stand up in a court of law?

This is a new world we're living in, and I'm enjoying experimenting in it, but I'd sure like to know if I can work within the same guidelines I would have in the world I left.

Clever Login Name
Jan 31st 2007, 12:32 PM
Although it doesn't directly pertain to what you're doing, this might answer some of your questions ... from a site called allheadlinenews.com. A lot of this is unplowed ground, so you'd do well to research things first.

Landmark Court Ruling Orders Apple To Pay $700,000 For Blogger's Legal Fees

January 30, 2007 4:55 p.m. EST

Julie Farby - All Headline News Staff Writer
Santa Clara, CA (AHN)-In a landmark ruling in favor of bloggers and cyber journalists, a Santa Clara County Court defended the First Amendment rights of online journalists to protect their confidential sources, effectively giving web journalists the same protections afforded to traditional print journalists.

Apple Inc., had issued subpoenas to online tech journalists, including the publisher of AppleInsider.com and PowerPage.org, over reports the company claimed "violated California state trade secret law" which divulged so-called confidential information about not-yet released Apple products. Apple claimed the journalists were not entitled to First Amendment protections similar to those afforded to their print counterparts.

However, a California court disagreed, ruling against Apple and in favor of the defendants, who were represented by legal counsel from The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). Apple was ordered to pay all legal costs associated with the defense, including a 2.2 times multiplier of the actual fees, bringing the total to about $700,000.

The ruling was hailed by web journalists and EFF staff members as a legal victory in the battle to defend and protect the rights of online journalists.

Kasper Jade, publisher of AppleInsider.com, one of the defendants in the case, said, "The court's ruling is a victory for journalists of all mediums and a tremendous blow to those firms that believe their stature affords them the right to silence the media. Hopefully, Apple will think twice the next time it considers a campaign to bully the little guy into submission."

News Is Broken
Jan 31st 2007, 12:33 PM
Here's the key factor: The truth is any John Q with a website can call themselves a "journalist" - but not anyone has the money to pay for the lawyer to represent them when they get arrested or sued. Therefore, act accordingly - ask yourself "Can I afford to get sued? Could this get me arrested?" That will determine how hard you push it and with whom.

foxravens
Jan 31st 2007, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by News Is Broken:
Here's the key factor: The truth is any John Q with a website can call themselves a "journalist" - but not anyone has the money to pay for the lawyer to represent them when they get arrested or sued. Therefore, act accordingly - ask yourself "Can I afford to get sued? Could this get me arrested?" That will determine how hard you push it and with whom.I hope Fearmonger sees this.