Slashdot Mirror
Blogger Wins 1.5 Year Legal Battle
FixYourThinking writes "After nearly one and a half years of harassment from a relentless attorney, it seems that quietly a blogger in South Carolina has won a monumental ruling in favor of bloggers. In a summary judgement requested by the Defendant, Philip Smith was able to obtain a special sanction after the Plaintiff attorney put a 'notice of lien' (called lis pendens) on Smith's residence. The judge also reprimanded the Plaintiff attorney for abusive deposition and court procedure. The case set forth the following; 'It's not the format; it's the content and intention that make text journalism / reporting.'"
FYI, You're confusing the word 'right' with the word 'priviledge'.
Half sarcasm and half serious: Give me one good reason that someone with a press pass deserves rights that you don't have without it.
If a blogger can be given the same rights as a journalist because of the content of his message, does that mean that media outlets - TV shows, newspapers, etc., can have it taken away if it is found that their content isn't really news?
Uh, nope. A right cannot be taken away. It is a right, you have it, period. Freedom of the press is just that. Doesn't matter what form that press is. And the ruling does no such thing regarding blogging not being journalism. And, a press pass is something given by and entity (event runner, sponsor, etc.) to members of the media (whatever media that happens to be). A "press pass" is not a governmental issued thing, period. It would be unconstitutional for the government to issue any such thing and only allow people with the "press pass" to engage in *press*. Read your Constitution, make sure you understand the big words, starting with "Constitution".
Okay, go to a local newsstand. Pick up a paper, pay the $.50, and open up to the editorial page.
What's the difference between that editorial page and a blog? The format. So saying that "blogging is commentary ... but not reporting in the journalism sense" is bullshit.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
It is also available on PACER, which may be more complete, but there is a per-page access fee involved.
Go to the bottom for the Order Granting Summary Judgment.
Herlong is an excellent judge, I'm had a few cases in front of him. Good for the blogger. I hate other attorneys who treat opposing parties like this. It gives us all an even worse name.
There is no word "priviledge". Perhaps you were referring to the outhouse on the cliff?
Check out Daily Kos (http://dailykos.com) yesterday. Some idiot 'with a press card' was basically making the same point, and specifically named Markos ('kos') as an example.
Oops. As Markos points out, the critic didn't even bother to click the 'About' button where he would learn that he has an undergraduate degree in journalism, has actually worked as a paid journalist, and oh yeah also has a law degree. He isn't some guy ranting from his mother's basement.
I've seen this pattern countless times. Someone says a "blogger" isn't qualified, yet even a casual examination shows that the blogger is not only highly qualified, they're often more qualified than their would-be critic.
Does this mean that this is true of all bloggers? Of course not. But at this point I think we've clearly crossed the "better to let 20 murderers walk than hang one innocent man" threshold and bloggers should be treated with respect and as bona fide journalists unless they demonstrate otherwise.
Unrelated note: you do realize, don't you, that Fox News has successfully argued in court that it should not be held accountable for factual errors in its reports because it presents 'opinion and commentary', not 'news', programming? Why are they entitled to 'journalist' protection while people with appropriate experience and/or advanced degrees are held up for ridicule?
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken