… or so we can assume from the following Washington Internet Daily report on the new Senator Lugar ‘Shield Law’ today. (The WID is subscription only and normally I honor that, but I thought this was of particular interest to blog readers and writers.)
Blogging Business or ‘Media Entity’ Covered by Shield — Lugar Aide
Bloggers that “act more like businesses” or media entites will have “some sort of coverage” under Sen. Lugar’s (R-Ind.) media shield bill, a Lugar spokeswoman told us Wed. Lugar told the Inter American Press Assn. this week his Free Flow of Information Act (S-1419) would “probably not” apply to bloggers, Editor & Publisher reported.
The clarification of Lugar’s position adds confusion to earlier statements from sponsors of the House companion bill (HR-3323). Reps Pence (R-Ind.) and Boucher (D-Va) have said separately their bill wouldn’t apply to bloggers, because such a provision would “potentially open it up to everyone” (WID July 21 p3). Lugar’s spokeswoman said she wasn’t sure “if this a difference of interpretation” or just a semantic difference, but there “seems to be a gray area here.”
The key difference for bloggers covered by S-1419 is the regularity of their writing activity and feasibility of their blogs as businesses, Luugar’s spokeswoman said. The term “electronic” in the bills is loose enough to include online material, but the “periodical” requirement distinguishes between “something that is updated continuously” and “more random, nonsystematic” entries, she said. The latter is considered more typical of bloggers, “in the perjorative sense.” The Newspaper Assn. of America also said the distinction turns on whether a blog is considered a “periodical.” Blogs that include ad space could also be considered media entities, the spokeswoman said, but she declined to name specific blogs that would be covered, such as Gawker Media’s stable of blogs or D. C. journalist Josh Marshall’s TalkingPointsMemo.come, which provides his whole livelihood.”
Pajamas Media personnel are actively discussing our position on this potentially dangerous legislation. Although PJM will certainly be in a position to argue that we are a “blogging business,” the restrictive and technologically backward-looking nature of this proposal has disturbing implications for the “free flow” of ideas – the very words that are ballyhooed in the title of Senator Lugar’s bill.
UPDATE: Sorry about the comments difficulties. Dr. Johnson will repair soon.
I don’t get it…shield from what? I thought the only matter of concern is paying income taxes.
Remarks by Lugar:
“I think, very frankly, you can make a case that this is a special boon for reporters, and certainly for their role in freedom of the press,” he said. “At the end of the day what we will come out with says there is something privileged about being a reporter, and being able to report on something without being thrown into jail.”
So all the stuff in the Constitution about how “Congress shall make no law .. abridging the freedom of speech .. or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” is just to be ignored.
And the whole notion that every citizen of the US is entitled to equal protection under the law will also be jettisoned.
By an amazing coincidence, the Supreme Court, which is appointed by the political class, tends to agree with them on all these questions. Yes, their friends in the media are entitled to publicly air their views. No, nobody else is.
Once the state starts issuing official licenses to approved journalists, how long do you think it will be before those who report on the “wrong” news start seeing their licenses revoked?
Sen. Lugar plainly doesn’t get it. If he spent any time on the Internet at all he would understand how the distinction between ad revenue and accepting ads is blurred. How many Blogger ads does it take to amount to a livelihood? What about someone whose blog starts out small, gains traffic, and then generates a significant portion of one’s income? What about folks like Powerline, who clearly do not need to blog for a living? What about the next Thuycidides who just wants to set the record straight with no thoughts to his own remuneration?
Will each writer have to have a hearing in front of a judge before knowing whether he is part of a protected class or not? This proposal is problematically bad in so many ways before you even get to questions of constitutionality.
Sen. Lugar, I know you won’t be reading this, but hopefully one of your staffers will: The whole idea SUCKS!
This is very sneaky of them. It’s a backdoor to making bloggers party to campaign finance “reform” imo. You’re not a blogger. You’re not a regular person voicing your opinion on the net. You’re suddenly a media organization. It’s probably also designed to deter bloggers from organizing amongst themselves and from preventing the emergence of a large number of freelance investigative journalists who can fund their work via blog.
I have to agree with your assessment of the potential for nastiness to bloggers arising from Lugar’s legislation. I see little that would be of real benefit to the public interest, and to be honest, I think its worth noting that MSM is acting like the dying domestic steel industry when faced with devastating competition in seeking government-sanctioned “privileges” not shared by its competitors. What’s next? Government subsidies? A Kelo-style “buyout” of those irritating little blogs?
But back to the question at hand – would an ISBN registration be sufficient to make a blog qualify as a periodical publication under the proposed legislation?
Lugar parrots the MSM line: there is something privileged about being a reporter…
Let’s parse this. As a statement of fact about current legislation, there’s some truth to this. Reporters get privileged access to official press conferences. IIUC, reporters are entitled by the law to maintain privileged conversations with their sources. And there are probably all sorts of indirect tax breaks and subsidies to media organizations which benefit their reporter employees indirectly. So yes, Senator, there is indeed under existing legislation a privileged position carved out for those with press credentials.
That’s of course beside the point here. The question is how one defines the latter have of Lugar’s statement. What does it mean today to “be a reporter”?
With regard to bloggers, the for-profit distinction is utterly meaningless. Roger has reported stories about OFF. Charles has broken news– hell, Charles has made and reported news at the same time. Kos reports, albeit in his own delightful way. In fact, every blogger who affects the current debate on any topic, be it Miers or Katrina or Iraq or Iran, through his comments, snippets of info, and/or snark, can be said to have acted as a “reporter.” In fact, as we’re now seeing with Miers and the conservative bloggers, the political class is now treating bloggers in precisely the same way it treats journalists: they’re invited to press conferences, given exclusive interviews, included by the president’s advisers on conference calls of the sort that used to be restricted to newspaper editors and network TV producers.
Surely Lugar knows about Mehlman and Rove’s efforts with the conservative blogosphere? About the elevation of Marshall and Moulitsas to the status of MSM ally in the eyes of leading Democrats? Has the man not heard anything about Rathergate?
The only conclusion here is that Lugar is determined to give a financial and professional boost to certain beleaguered, financially floundering media organizations’ middle-of-the-road editors and producers — assuming such characters exist in suficiently large numbers to worry about preserving them.
First gerrymandering, now French-style press controls and privileges. A pox on both corrupt houses.