A
vision of a totalitarian future
Three
Roads to “Journalist” that All Go Nowhere
An
amendment to S.B. 987 that defines who is and is not a journalist
Feinstein’s
amendment effectively advances a traditional vision of journalism
through the three definitions of journalist that it provides, each of
which requires that a person be affiliated with a journalistic
“entity” or institution (including news websites and other
digital news services, and other periodicals distributed digitally).
Specifically,
the amendment requires that a journalist meet one of the following
definitions:
1)
working as a “salaried employee, independent contractor, or agent
of an entity that disseminates news or information;”
2)
either (a) meeting the prior definition “for any continuous
three-month period within the two years prior to the relevant date”
or (b) having “substantially contributed, as an author, editor,
photographer, or producer, to a significant number of articles,
stories, programs, or publications by an entity . . . within two
years prior to the relevant date;” or
3)
working as a student journalist “participating in a journalistic
publication at an institution of higher education.” (emphases
added)
There
are problems with each of these three definitions. First, as we
pointed out in our critique of the bill, requiring that an individual
is “salaried” is problematic because many people do
journalism but do not do it as their primary source of income.
Further, it is entirely unclear who or what an “agent” or
“entity” is.
Second,
for an individual to fall under the second, seemingly looser
criteria, that individual must have distributed the news “by means
of an entity.” (emphasis added) While this definition may cover freelancers, it is again unclear what
it means to have “substantially contributed” to a “significant”
amount of work of an “entity.”
What
does all this mean? Who knows? Compared to the language of the first
amendment, it's a bunch of gobbledegook, intentionally vague and
abstruse in the extreme. Compare: “Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of
grievances.”
What
is likely is not pretty to think about. You will get the information
the U.S. Government wants you to get, and no other.
-
The Legendary
No comments:
Post a Comment