New Jersey court says blogger is not a journalist
by Matt on Apr 26, 2010 in Legal Issues
Here’s one to bookmark for the legal files: A New Jersey court has ruled that a blogger who was sued for defamation is not a journalist and not protected by the state’s “shield law.” Here’s the crux of the story from the Newark Star-Ledger:
In a decision that attempts to better define who is protected by New Jersey’s shield law, the court said Shellee Hale’s writings about Too Much Media LLC, which supplies software to online pornography websites, amounted to nothing more than a letter-to-the-editor in a newspaper.
Hale, a former Microsoft employee and a mother of five from Washington state, contended she was acting as a journalist when she posted comments to a message board about a security breach at TMM and allegations that its owners had threatened her. She argued the postings were part of her research into a larger story about the online pornography industry.
The wording of that is actually a bit confusing; but later in the article there’s some clarity. The defendant first posted comments on a message board to research and get information that she planned to later post on her own site. The article paraphrases the judge’s decision this way:
Locascio ruled Hale, who said she intended to publish her findings on her own website, was not a member of the news media because she was not affiliated with a media organization and had not performed roles of a journalist, such as fact-checking.
That first part is quite troublesome: You’re not a journalist if you’re not affiliated with a media organization? Someone needs to define “media organization” and fast, I’d say.
You might also like:
Comments
4 Responses to “New Jersey court says blogger is not a journalist”
Leave a Reply (please use your real name; company names & other keyword-based names will be deleted)
-
-
Featured Video
The Star-Ledger article was poorly written, but I think the issue here was the woman’s comments on a message board. If they were unsubstantiated claims, then I wouldn’t consider her a journalist, either.
Yeah, it’s hard to get an overall picture of what’s going on from the article and without seeing the exact words of the judge/court. But I find it somewhat alarming that a court would define “journalist” as someone “affiliated with a media organization.” Regardless of what happened in this case, that would impact a lot of hyperlocal bloggers if it becomes the standard.
[...] is something of a postscript to yesterday’s piece, New Jersey court says blogger is not a journalist … something I remembered reading and finally re-discovered online that adds a bit to the [...]
In the early days of the republic, pamphleteers — those who printed up short leaflets and the like, and perhaps distributed those themselves — were indeed considered “journalists,” in the freedom-of-the-press sense of the constitution. Even if the content of those leaflets was basically their own opinions.
Judge Locascio apparently have a different view, since internet bloggers are the current analogue of those pamphleteers.
Certainly a blogger who wished protection even he would grant could print (on paper) a dozen or so copies of his or her blog and then pass those out at a nearby mall. What would the good judge say then?
He are sure to be overruled. And properly so.
Every citizen deserves the same protection as those who are employed by big companies, when it comes to the law.