Monday, January 20, 2014

Court upholds bloggers rights

The protections of the First Amendment do not turn on whether the defendant was a trained journalist, formally affiliated with traditional news entities, engaged in conflict-of-interest disclosure, went beyond just assembling others’ writings, or tried to get both sides of a story. As the Supreme Court has accurately warned, a First Amendment distinction between the institutional press and other speakers is unworkable: “With the advent of the Internet and the decline of print and broadcast media … the line between the media and others who wish to comment on political and social issues becomes far more blurred.” Citizens United, 558 U.S. at 352. In defamation cases, the public-figure status of a plaintiff and the public importance of the statement at issue — not the identity of the speaker — provide the First Amendment touchstones.

At least in the States it appears that bloggers rights are upheld irrespective of whether one is a trained journalist.

here is the text of his ruling

Not so here in New Zealand where 'decent journalists, trained and skilled' via the Judiciary have closed ranks on the online competition.

No comments: