Durbin wonders: Does First Amendment apply to bloggers, Twitter?

posted at 3:01 pm on May 27, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Thanks to the Obama administration’s attacks on the Associated Press and its representation in federal court that Fox News’ James Rosen is a spy for asking questions, one has to wonder whether the First Amendment applies to anyone in the Age of Hope and Change.  Fox News host Chris Wallace asked Senator Dick Durbin whether Barack Obama’s promise to have Eric Holder look into cases of abuse that he personally approved represents a conflict of interest, but Durbin dodges that question and talks instead about the shield law proposed repeatedly over the last few years as the appropriate Congressional response to the scandal.  However, Durbin asks what exactly “freedom of the press” means in 2013, and wonders aloud whether it would include bloggers, Twitter users, and the rest of the Internet media:

Here’s what the First Amendment actually says: “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.”  Press at the time would certainly have meant newspapers, which were the high-tech information revolution of the day. It would also have included pamphleteers, perhaps even more than newspapers, as pamphleteers helped drive revolutionary sentiment.  Their modern-day analogs would arguable be bloggers and Twitter users, those who reported news and proclaimed opinions outside of the establishment press.

However, Durbin’s asking the wrong question.  The question isn’t who gets protected, but what.  Journalism is not an identity or a guild, but an action and a process — and anyone engaged in that activity must be treated equally before the law.  A shield law based on membership via employment in privileged workplaces or certified by guilds doesn’t protect journalism, it becomes rent-seeking behavior that ensures that only the large players get protected, as I wrote ten days ago.

Durbin’s question isn’t even the biggest non-sequitur in this argument.  The biggest non-sequitur is the shield law itself, which wouldn’t have even addressed the Rosen or AP situation.  And considering that the Obama administration ignored existing statutes in both cases, why should we believe they would obey a shield law when it got in their way?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Blogging is publishing. If you’re not publishing news you’re publishing gossip or opinion. If you want to blog news, learn to write news.

Here’s another thread wherein those who have always complained about journalism and journalists will chime in as if they agree all of sudden.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 3:20 PM

Please define “publishing news.”

Your premise is based on an oversimplification, and totally ignores the many valid news stories generated by bloggers with little or no formal training in “writing news”.

AFAIK, Matt Drudge has no formal news writing training. Does that mean Monica Lewinsky never existed, simply because he broke her story?

The guys at Power Line were trained as lawyers. And yet their reporting on Rathergate was instrumental in Dan Rather losing his job. Does that mean he never broadcast a Fake Story, and thus deserves his job back, because this news story wasn’t broken by a “real” news organization?

As for “learning to write news”, today’s Journalism Schools are a joke. I saw a post the other day in another forum from a former J-Student who said many of his classes were nothing more than Hate Faux News Seminars and nothing more.

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 4:10 PM

“Because my journalism professors showed me this”.

Nope. It took much longer than that. I was a fairly pompous kid.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:10 PM

My uncle made a ton of money in” journalism”. Baltimore Sun>USA Today> Burlington press.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Back to the subject at hand:

, Durbin asks what exactly “freedom of the press” means in 2013, and wonders aloud whether it would include bloggers, Twitter users, and the rest of the Internet media:

This is some scary stuff. At least they are being exposed…and I don’t care if they get exposed on HA or any other medium.

CW on May 27, 2013 at 4:12 PM

If I have forgotten to mention…

I HATE, HATE, HATE STUPID DICK DURBIN!

I HATE, HATE, HATE STUPID DICK DURBIN!

I HATE, HATE, HATE STUPID DICK DURBIN!

I HATE, HATE, HATE STUPID DICK DURBIN!

I HATE, HATE, HATE STUPID DICK DURBIN!

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Is this clown really suggesting that I first need to be trained before my written words become protected speech?

steebo77 on May 27, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Yes, you can even OJT it, as long as it is by fine institutions like HuffPo or Kos. Online seminars are also provided by NYT, LAtimes and WaPoop.

arnold ziffel on May 27, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Please define “publishing news.”

You research, observe or interview. You think. You write. You hit “publish” in WP or “upload” on your FTP client.

The difference between publishing news and writing news is important. I honestly believe that many conservatives are well suited for good news writing.

I don’t like you. But I think you’d make a great reporter.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM

I misspoke. Oh the horror. But my clarified point stands.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:01 PM

No, it doesn’t. You didn’t “misspeak” or mis-write and it had nothing to do with the speed at which you type. You started with an incorrect assumption – that some sort of training is necessary in order to be a journalist. That is silly, as I first told you.

I won’t even bother addressing you’re earlier silliness about the need for line editors and how they watch for facts … LOL. You really do seem to be a shill for the MSM.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on May 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM

You’re talking conspiracy and media bias, etc. Those are not facts.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 3:44 PM

Please prove that media bias is not a fact.

(Starts Sundial #597)

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Scratch a fascist, find a democrat.

jukin3 on May 27, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM

I repeat. I don’t like you but I think you’d make a great reporter.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:14 PM

. I was a fairly pompous kid.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Define was.

I will continue to defend the First Amendment. You will likely continue to rail against it, obliquely albeit. You will continue to read those sources about whom you complain.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Define Straw Man Fallacy.

CW on May 27, 2013 at 4:14 PM

When you look at the people Illinois elects (four of the past seven governors went to prison), it’s not hard to understand why the state is in the shape it is.

bw222 on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

I can only get real news here. what do you suggest? Alphabets?

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

‘You would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings.’

- Senator Dick Durbin about American soldiers

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

But my point was that the average person does not tell stories well. Ask a cop on scene at a collision. Ask your wife next time she wants to get the scoop on what you did the night before.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:01 PM

You aren’t really suggesting a conversation with your spouse to be akin to being debriefed by a cop after a collision are you?

Fact of the matter is that journalists are not super-smart interrogators or able to tell a story well. They have editors. Few people, are able to tell stories well contemporaneously. It is all about fact gathering and separating the wheat from the chaff in subsequent efforts. Hell, it took twelve versions of the attack at Benghazi for the rat-eared coward to take a generally true version of events and turn it into a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video with no mention of why spontaneous protests involve RPGs.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

I will continue to defend redefine the First Amendment.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:09 PM

FIFY

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

However, Durbin asks what exactly “freedom of the press” means in 2013, and wonders aloud whether it would include bloggers, Twitter users, and the rest of the Internet media:

In a word, Senator, yes, it does.

ted c on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

You started with an incorrect assumption – that some sort of training is necessary in order to be a journalist. That is silly, as I first told you.

I have no insults for you currently. Sorry.

Regarding your point, we simply disagree. You will never effectively report without some training.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 3:44 PM

thx to your post I actually listened to Durbin. Scarey guy…wouldn’t you agree? We have to ask 21st century questions about Who Deserves Constitutional protections? Are These People entitled to Constitutional Protections…?

i mean that was 200 Years Ago.

Really? is that what you believe? Seriously…do you believe that bloggers and pamphleteers are covered by the Constitution? I mean the 200 year old one?

Or not? Where do you stand?

r keller on May 27, 2013 at 4:17 PM

FIFY

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

horse-laugh

How does it feel to be so needy that you must act-out in order to be perceived as worthy? You’re nothing to this discussion. You’ve not impressed those you sought to impress.

Try again. Say something rude or maybe call me a libocrat or something.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Is this clown really suggesting that I first need to be trained before my written words become protected speech?

steebo77 on May 27, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Trained and certified. By the appropriate authorities of course. Think about it, do you think that a person graduating with a journalism degree from Hillsdale would be considered and certified as a “real” “certified” journalist under that sort of paradigm?

AZfederalist on May 27, 2013 at 4:18 PM

I HATE DICK DURBIN TOO!!

Not as much as Schumer though.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Here’s another thread wherein those who have always complained about journalism and journalists will chime in as if they agree all of sudden.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 3:20 PM

Here’s another thread wherein Capitalist Hog tries to pretend that he’s the smartest person in the room, yet profoundly fails.

It’s clear you think very highly of yourself, by the way – and also by the way, based on the evidence, you really shouldn’t.

Midas on May 27, 2013 at 4:20 PM

When I got to this thread, I wondered why it was littered with the twisted wreckage of a highway overpass.

Upon further reading, I see that Cap Hog has derailed another one.

CurtZHP on May 27, 2013 at 4:20 PM

How does it feel to be so needy that you must act-out in order to be perceived as worthy? You’re nothing to this discussion. You’ve not impressed those you sought to impress.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Projection.

Midas on May 27, 2013 at 4:21 PM

Is this clown really suggesting that I first need to be trained before my written words become protected speech?

steebo77 on May 27, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Drudge broke the “blue dress story.”

Bloggers debunked those National Guard memos that CBS was touting as real and legitimate.

Westboro Baptist’s offensive exploits shows just how broad free speech is protected as a civil right.

There is nothing in the Constitution about having to be certified by the state before your speech is protected.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 4:21 PM

Liberals hate the Internet. Any free-flow of information is bad for them. They can’t stand not being the gatekeepers.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 3:46 PM

Yes, and that’s what this is all about. It’s a lot easier controlling a handful of papers/networks than an army of citizen journalists who will give you the complete story and not the sanitized version.

The internet is the worst thing to ever happen to The Narrative and the goofy religion that pushes it. :-(

Is this clown really suggesting that I first need to be trained before my written words become protected speech?

steebo77 on May 27, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Yes, you need to be properly indoctrinated in J-School and kept on a short leash within Big Media before you can think and write. And being on a short leash will ensure you’re thinking and writing the correct story that fits in with The Narrative.

It’s for the children. :-)

Punchenko on May 27, 2013 at 4:21 PM

‘Toons of the Day: Thank You

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Good stuff!

Midas on May 27, 2013 at 4:22 PM

you shouldn’t be so qiuck to assume you impress more than others, libocrat.

Are you trained to do so?

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:23 PM

Or not? Where do you stand?

r keller on May 27, 2013 at 4:17 PM

Thanks for being sober.

The First Amendment is non-negotiable (all clauses). As close as we can get to there being ZERO restrictions on speech the better. The “crowded theater” analogy is dated. The Bill of Rights is not.

Medium does not determine or affect your rights…unless the medium is owned by someone who wants to shut you up and not public.

Say what you want to me because I have no problem speaking up. I wish I could demand respect but that would be abridging another persons’s right to rant.

Say what you want. I don’t even care if you say it nicely…just respect my right to be the a-hole I am.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:23 PM

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Too funny. Weren’t you hating on someone else yesterday? “Got hate in your heart, let it out.” by Clayton Bigsby aka Dave Chappelle,

arnold ziffel on May 27, 2013 at 4:24 PM

I HATE DICK DURBIN TOO!!

Not as much as Schumer though.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:18 PM

My post was not meant to be exclusive.

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 4:25 PM

I don’t like you because I can’t credibly refute your Facts. But I think you’d make a great reporter.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Edited for accuracy.

FYI, I was News Director at a radio station between 1970 and 1972, News Anchor at an NPR station in the early 1980s, and later worked as a newspaper reporter before leaving the business completely, so I do know a little bit of what I am babbling about here. And I do know for a fact that there has always been media bias, even back in those days, and none of it was coming from the Right.

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Too funny. Weren’t you hating on someone else yesterday? “Got hate in your heart, let it out.” by Clayton Bigsby aka Dave Chappelle,

arnold ziffel on May 27, 2013 at 4:24 PM

No hate in my heart…just in my head. lol

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 4:25 PM

How does it feel to be so needy that you must act-out in order to be perceived as worthy? You’re nothing to this discussion. You’ve not impressed those you sought to impress.

Try again. Say something rude or maybe call me a libocrat or something.

I haven’t tried to impress anyone. This is the Internet, I could care less what people here think about me, especially you. And yes, you don’t vigorously defend the first amendment as it’s written. You are redefining the first amendment to serve your own purposes. You’ve stated yourself that only ‘Journalists’ understand their rights and that anything that isn’t labeled or defined as ‘journalism’ isn’t protected speech. Your entire line of thinking is ridiculous and laughable and flies in the face of over 200 years of tradition and precedent in this nation.

Childish name calling? You must think that I’m angry at what some anonymous Liberal said on the Internet or something. You give yourself too much credit.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM

I can’t prove what I claim.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Edited for accuracy.

A+

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Say what you want to me because I have no problem speaking up. I wish I could demand respect but that would be abridging another persons’s right to rant.

Say what you want. I don’t even care if you say it nicely…just respect my right to be the a-hole I am.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:23 PM

Wow, you’re quite the martyr or perhaps, more accurately, drama queen.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 4:27 PM

I get it.

You dolts cannot distinguish between my assertion that journalists need training and the right of any citizen to say what they want on a blog presuming said words not to be criminal or libelous.

Follow the cookie crumbs clowns:

Journalists need training or they suck. Bloggers, many of whom would make better journalists than some working journalists, are full-protected by our Bill of Rights.

They do not need training to be enjoy the full-rights of citizenship. Citizens don’t require training for Constitutional protection.

You may be conflating journalists with immigrants, the other group you hate.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:28 PM

The “crowded theater” analogy is dated.

The ‘crowded theater’ statement ONLY applies to those that FALSELY yell ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater.

It is not dated. If you doubt me, falsely cry ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater and see what happens to you both criminally and civilly.

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 4:29 PM

You may be conflating journalists with immigrants, the other group you hate.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:28 PM

Maybe you need more of that “training”

tetriskid on May 27, 2013 at 4:29 PM

I respect your right to be an a-hole. But are you trained to be one?

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Regarding your point, we simply disagree. You will never effectively report without some training.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Define training. As a trained engineer with an advanced degree I would submit that my training in being able to report on what I have observed will be every bit as valid as someone who has attended journalism school. I would further submit that there are many other persons with various types of training — some degreed, some vocational that have the observational skills and writing capabilities to “report”.

I would submit, however, that it takes a trained journalist, using an AP style handbook or equivalent to turn a DUI accident into an attack on the manufacture and sale of large sport utility vehicles by reporting that, “An SUV crashed into the store-front of Georgina’s Beauty Salon on Wednesday”. It’s only 3 or 4 sentences later (often in the next paragraph) that we learn that the SUV actually had a driver and that the driver was arrested at the scene on suspicion of driving under the influence. … and that’s just a benign example of journalistic bias.

AZfederalist on May 27, 2013 at 4:31 PM

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 4:27 PM

It’s funny to hear a man use the word “queen” aggressively. Stay strong sweeite.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Nowhere do I see Journalist, or Journalism written in the amendment, simply “the Press”, which covers the act of publishing timely material. It includes (yes, I know from Freedictionary.com):

a. The collecting and publishing or broadcasting of news; journalism in general.
b. The entirety of media and agencies that collect, publish, transmit, or broadcast the news.
c. The people involved in the media, as news reporters, photographers, publishers, and broadcasters.
d. Commentary or coverage especially in print media

I would think that twitter, facebook, and any other social media sites, are covered under the: right of the people peaceably to assemble.

can_con on May 27, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Nowadays, they yell “I’m the joker” in a crowded theatre.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Yes, you need to be properly indoctrinated in J-School and kept on a short leash within Big Media before you can think and write. And being on a short leash will ensure you’re thinking and writing the correct story that fits in with The Narrative.

Punchenko on May 27, 2013 at 4:21 PM

And that is the precise reason why the MSM/J-school minions do not accept anything conservative bloggers write or publish. It is why they see whatever the conservative press publishes as illegitimate, because they are the only arbiters of what is True, or so they think. Never mind that their version of “truth” is not true, that it is shaded and molded with a certain agenda designed to not only placate the low-info types, but to give a not-very-bright politician like Dick Durbin something to say.

The internet is the worst thing to ever happen to The Narrative and the goofy religion that pushes it. :-(

We need to keep it that way.

PatriotGal2257 on May 27, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:28 PM

I think people should determine for themselves what they want to believe and to discern fact from fiction. I don’t think that an elite group should have a monopoly on ‘facts’ or opinions like you do. I understand the difference just fine.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 4:36 PM

FYI, I was News Director at a radio station between 1970 and 1972, News Anchor at an NPR station in the early 1980s, and later worked as a newspaper reporter before leaving the business completely, so I do know a little bit of what I am babbling about here. And I do know for a fact that there has always been media bias, even back in those days, and none of it was coming from the Right.

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 4:25 PM

I don’t have your background but I would suggest that there is a difference with the media in recent years. In decades past, there was always a liberal bias in media but there was also an emphasis on getting the story right. Woodward and Bernstein didn’t simply rush out parrot what Mark Felt told them. They built a case with investigative reporting before publishing. I’m not so sure that would be true now with 24/7 news channels. If some guy is disgruntled about not get the top job at the FBI is willing to disclose secrets it would be in the news within hours.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 4:37 PM

Define training.

Define training yourself, idiot. You’re so caught up in disagreeing with me that you lost control of common sense.

You can go to school. You can be a book about news writing. You can even just try it with no idea of what you’re doing. Indeed, the best training is to report.

But without a good template for different situations or a good sense developed through consistent news gathering your reporting will lack weight. Without a good editor your news writing will never improve.

Just buy a book and go annoy people with your questions. You’ll soon learn that you can actually get really good at getting info, the right info, from people.

Think like a kid teasing out a Xmas present’s location.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:37 PM

No, he’s right..

You are a drama queen. Of the highest order.

Sweetie. ;>)

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:37 PM

I think people should determine for themselves what they want to believe and to discern fact from fiction. I don’t think that an elite group should have a monopoly on ‘facts’ or opinions like you do. I understand the difference just fine.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 4:36 PM

That’s nice. Now why don’t you reply to something I said instead of regurgitating pablum you read on some other blog. You’re utterly unoriginal and worse, uninformed.

FAIL but nice try.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:39 PM

However, Durbin’s asking the wrong question. The question isn’t who gets protected, but what.

It all sorta comes together when you add the “from whom are they protected?” question.

Lost in Jersey on May 27, 2013 at 4:40 PM

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:37 PM

Does this mean I get to go all Ric Flair?

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:40 PM

Nowadays, they yell “I’m the joker” in a crowded theatre.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Snort.

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 4:41 PM

That’s nice. Now why don’t you reply to something I said instead of regurgitating pablum you read on some other blog. You’re utterly unoriginal and worse, uninformed.

FAIL but nice try.

Is this all that you have in response? I’ve noticed also that you’ve resorted to name-calling in other comments. I think you are past your expiration date in this thread. Run along, Skippy. You’re done here.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 4:41 PM

I think people should determine for themselves what they want to believe and to discern fact from fiction. I don’t think that an elite group should have a monopoly on ‘facts’ or opinions like you do. I understand the difference just fine.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 4:36 PM

That requires critical thinking. I think the average HA poster has that skill. But….. local talk radio this morning had responses from people to the absurd idea that Obama had pardoned the sequestration and allowed a return to Portugal. Some of it was predictable- knee jerk defense of the wise rat-eared coward. But one woman launched into a full rant about the justice of sending the sequestration back to Portugal.

These people have votes that are equal to yours.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 4:42 PM

I understand the difference just fine too, as do most here.

RWM doesn’t have a degree in Journalism(that I know about)

I’ll take her word for it over Dianne Sawyer.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:44 PM

When the government gets to define whose speech is protected and how much, the only speech that will be protected will be that which the government allows.

Scratch a leftist, expose a totalitarian. They do NOT believe in freedom for their political opponents or anyone with whose opinions they disagree. This has been going on since they shouted down Jeane Kirkpatrick at college speeches in the ’80s.

They make no secret of this. It is evident in their “speech codes,” in their cheering on of IRS investigations of conservative groups, in their hatred and fear of the Kochs, who don’t put 5% of the money rich leftists devote to promoting their political views.

Every leftist is a totalitarian. Every. Single. One. It is pointless to attempt a rational discussion with them, there is no common ground, no possible agreement that does not end with us in chains and them as masters.

Adjoran on May 27, 2013 at 4:45 PM

Just like the second applies to modern guns, not just muskets, the 1st protects pen and pencil and digital speech.

To even ponder this, shows his intellectual shortcoming.

TX-96 on May 27, 2013 at 4:48 PM

I respect your right to be an a-hole. But are you trained to be one?

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:29 PM

…I think we are seeing his work here…for his dissertation!

KOOLAID2 on May 27, 2013 at 4:48 PM

What’s your formal training?

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:48 PM

I respect your right to be an a-hole. But are you trained to be one?

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Yeah, hard to tell whether that’s the result of serious training, or just a natural talent.

Midas on May 27, 2013 at 4:49 PM

…But one woman launched into a full rant about the justice of sending the sequestration back to Portugal.

These people have votes that are equal to yours.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 4:42 PM

I think I saw this somewhere before. Was it Jimmy Kimmel? I don’t know. It’s hilarious and frightening at the same time. We can’t fix stupid, though. I would rather have free idiots over educated totalitarians any day, though.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 4:51 PM

I get it.

You dolts cannot distinguish between my assertion that journalists need training and the right of any citizen to say what they want on a blog presuming said words not to be criminal or libelous.

So, you are basically saying here that your original post had nothing to do with the topic of the thread — whether First Amendment rights extend to bloggers, twitter writers, etc. Which was the point of the thread topic, not whether some blogs or writers suck or not. So essentially in this first sentence you admit you were not addressing the topic but simply trying to derail the discussion. Of course the implication you left with your first post was that of course, First Amendment protections apply, if you are a “trained journalist”.

Follow the cookie crumbs clowns:

Let’s step into ad hominem for a second here. Because, obviously, if you disagree with me, you can’t be anything other than a moronic clown.

Journalists need training or they suck. Bloggers, many of whom would make better journalists than some working journalists, are full-protected by our Bill of Rights.

That was sure a round about way to get to the statement that, “Yes, bloggers should be fully protected by the First Amendment”. Whether the blogger sucks or not should be left to his/her readers or the lack thereof, not whether the blogger has been “trained” by the appropriately vetted journalism school.

They do not need training to be enjoy the full-rights of citizenship. Citizens don’t require training for Constitutional protection.

Finally! We get to the point that the original article was postulating. See, that could have been arrived at so much more quickly than all this nonsense about “training” and “bloggers don’t write news” and other nonsense. … and you even agree with us! Amazing that.

You may be conflating journalists with immigrants, the other group you hate.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:28 PM

… and I see that we have come to the bottom of the deck and the only card CH has left is, The Race Card! When that’s all ya got, I guess that’s the card ya gotta play.

AZfederalist on May 27, 2013 at 4:51 PM

“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.”

But what if no “law” is “made”, but the government infringes upon this right, and the “press” ignores it due to political ideology…?

A tea-party group targeted by Democrats gets attention from the IRS—and the FBI, OSHA, and the ATF.

What say you Durbin…?

Seven Percent Solution on May 27, 2013 at 4:52 PM

I HATE DICK DURBIN TOO!!

Not as much as Schumer though.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Not as much as Rubio though.

bw222 on May 27, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Nope. It took much longer than that. I was a fairly pompous kid.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:10 PM

It appears that nothing has changed. If you were a real journolist, you never would have written it that way, and left your self open.

Old Country Boy on May 27, 2013 at 4:53 PM

These people have votes that are equal to yours.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 4:42 PM

The ideas of universal suffrage and citizenship by birth have led to our destruction even WITHOUT taking into account the lunacy of total cultural equality.

Two of the major groups in America do absolutely nothing with their voting rights but fulfill Benjamin Franklin’s prophecy. And you can be a ‘citizen’ with full rights so long as your illiterate tribal mother managed to stagger across the border in time.

In. Freaking. Sane.

MelonCollie on May 27, 2013 at 4:54 PM

It’s funny to hear a man use the word “queen” aggressively. Stay strong sweeite.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Describes you to a tee though.

katy the mean old lady on May 27, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 3:20 PM

So publishing is not journalism.
And schooling is not training.

Does the training have to occur in a school? What if the schooling occurs in a training center? What if you are schooled by a trainer or trained by a schooler?

What if you write in a journal but don’t publish it? Are you a journalist then? What if you publish your journal but were schooled by a trainer? Are you a journalist then?

What if you publish your journal but were trained by a schooler? Are you a publisher then?

SparkPlug on May 27, 2013 at 4:57 PM

So essentially in this first sentence you admit you were not addressing the topic but simply trying to derail the discussion

ding, ding.

CW on May 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM

There is nothing in the Constitution about having to be certified by the state before your speech is protected.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013

Your speech, any speech, is, in fact, protected from the very moment you open your mouth, or put pen to paper, as codified in that very Constitution. So whether or not a person is a professional journalist, a blogger or just some guy on a street corner holding up a ‘will work for food’ sign, the speech is protected.

JonPrichard on May 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM

What if you publish your journal but we’re trained by a schooler in a journalist training center for non schooling?

SparkPlug on May 27, 2013 at 5:00 PM

I can’t lump Rubio in with Schumer.

No.

Schumer is his own special brand of evil.

Marco is just naive on a grand scale.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 5:00 PM

SparkPlug on May 27, 2013 at 4:57 PM

Yeah, he tied himself into a rhetorical pretzel, didn’t he? The mask came off for awhile. He showed his totalitarian tendencies and then he backtracked on it. What a tool.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Even if you accept the absurd notion that government has the authority to determine who is a member of the press, a blog tweet, comment, video, etc., is still speech and is protected by the First Amendment.

The internet has been the worst thing for the left and two-bit government tyrants like Durbin since the end of the Fairness Doctrine. They would love to find a way to limit online speech.

RadClown on May 27, 2013 at 5:05 PM

Yeah, he tied himself into a rhetorical pretzel, didn’t he?

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 5:00 PM

I was schooled in a training center for publishers by a trainer of journalists and the first thing they schooled me was:

“Never tie yourself into a rhetorical pretzel.”

SparkPlug on May 27, 2013 at 5:06 PM

So essentially in this first sentence you admit you were not addressing the topic but simply trying to derail the discussion

ding, ding.

CW on May 27, 2013 at 4:59 PM

Yeah, sorry for my part in leading on the troll. Kind of looked at it as the kind of argument you would have with Dick Turbin. I’ll bet you’d get nearly the same conversational thread. Because frankly, most of these liberals are wicked smart politically, but as far as anything that matters, for example the Constitution, they are absolute dunces.

AZfederalist on May 27, 2013 at 5:08 PM

Marco is just naive on a grand scale.

wolly4321 on May 27, 2013 at 5:00 PM

Naive or an opportunist who would destroy the country to be the first Hispanic President?

bw222 on May 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM

Not as much as Rubio though.

bw222 on May 27, 2013 at 4:52 PM

I don’t lump Rubio in with McCain, Schumer and Durbin. Rubio is gullible and naive. Senator John Insane, Chuck You Schumer and Little Dick Durbin are malicious and hateful. They are playing Rubio like a Stradivarius and he isn’t savvy enough to realise it, which is a disqualifying trait.

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 5:11 PM

They are playing Rubio like a Stradivarius and he isn’t savvy enough to realise it, which is a disqualifying trait.

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 5:11 PM

Is Rubio really that naive or is he just ambitious and sees his path to the top as faster with the establishment than the conservative side of the party? Because if the common folk see this for what it is, Rubio cannot be that naive. After being referred to by Schumer as “do our Republicans …” how can he be that unseeing?

AZfederalist on May 27, 2013 at 5:14 PM

AZfederalist on May 27, 2013 at 5:14 PM

I have found him to be very naive in other areas, too.

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 5:16 PM

If you publish a comic book that’s not journalism. But the comic book is protected under free speech, no?

SparkPlug on May 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM

Journalists need training or they suck.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:28 PM

This is evidenced by the dozens of “journalists” in the Democrat Media who are billed as such, yet have received absolutely no formal training in the field. See “Blitzer, Wolf”, who was a history major in college.

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM

Yeah, sorry for my part in leading on the troll…

AZfederalist on May 27, 2013 at 5:08 PM

I was right there with you.

CH is something else. Else defined as: Pompous, ahole, jerk, know-it-all.

CW on May 27, 2013 at 5:19 PM

It appears that nothing has changed. If you were a real journolist, you never would have written it that way, and left your self open.

Old Country Boy on May 27, 2013 at 4:53 PM

A real journalist? What do you do in life that you think being a journalist was some major accomplishment?

Reporting is not remotely glamorous. I’ve covered council meetings, elections, victory and defeat speeches. I’ve done weather and profile pieces. There are a thousand ways to have a more interesting career, seriously. Here’s a description of a bad day at work:

Calling a mother on the day of her son’s funeral because you have to get his vital information correct…in the story you’re running about his life of crime. That’s not fun. That’s not glamorous.

Or how about calling a mayor of a town to get a quote about a water-rights dispute? Ugh.

I think that people mistake the ease with which news stories garner publicity with being a celebrity. Certainly some newsers are all over TV and go on to great book deals. But there are easier ways to become famous and more fun.

The importance of journalism lies in the ability of one reporter to assert his rights on behalf of all other citizens.

Journalists may be biased. Journalism is not. Think Guns don’t kill people.

Life 2.0 3.0 4.0 has been great. I wouldn’t change my past. But I’m glad I changed my future.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 5:21 PM

But without a good template for different situations or a good sense developed through consistent news gathering your reporting will lack weight. Without a good editor your news writing will never improve.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:37 PM

What is your definition of “a good template”? Shouldn’t all good reporting lack a template?

After all, using that word presumes that all news should be reported through a particular prism, when in fact it should be reported objectively, with no template at all.

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 5:21 PM

To this bastard free speech is for those without a platgform. That is anyone outside the main streme media.
Fox, NO!
Bloggers, NO!
Posters to blogs, NO!
501 C4″s, NO
501 C3′s, NO!
Free speech??
But Durbin, who is in the ruling class, can Order the IRS to investigate anyone HE doesn’t agree with! That is perfectly OK
Well I say F Durbin and the people he works beside and those who voted for him.
We DO have freedom of speech and WE will FIGHT to KEEP IT!

Delsa on May 27, 2013 at 5:22 PM

You’re utterly unoriginal and worse, uninformed.

FAIL but nice try.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 4:39 PM

The first sign a Leftist is losing the debate is when they start to call those they are debating with nasty names. Alinsky 101.

A+

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 5:24 PM

The ideas of universal suffrage and citizenship by birth have led to our destruction even WITHOUT taking into account the lunacy of total cultural equality.

MelonCollie on May 27, 2013 at 4:54 PM

The problem, IMO, is this idea of cultural equity. We’ve arrived at the point where we assume that all voters are fully informed and that isn’t the case. Last November the number of idiots (my neighbors) who were clutching their Democrat mailed list of candidates to support was simply pathetic.

Happy Nomad on May 27, 2013 at 5:24 PM

I often find that Journalists are experts in nothing. Most aren’t Scientists, Doctors, Lawyers, Plumbers or even Shoe Salesmen. That’s not to say Journalism doesn’t have it’s role in society, but for someone to suggest that Journalists have a better grasp of facts and their responsibility to the public than others is hogwash.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Journalists may be biased. Journalism is not. Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 5:21 PM

In 2013 America that is a distinction without a difference.

What world do you live in anyway?

CW on May 27, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Journalists may be biased. Journalism is not.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 5:21 PM

Get out of your fishbowl sometime and you’ll understand why we’re all laughing at you.

Between 2000 and early 2009 (and in fact, even beyond that) the sole journalistic mission of the New York Times from the top on down was devoted to opposing George W. Bush. Since that time, the same newspaper’s sole journalistic mission has been to prop up Barack Milhouse O’bama.

That’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s Settled Science.

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 5:28 PM

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM

Do you know the difference between training and education? Come on guy. You’re way smarter than that. I’m not trying to patronize you. But I can’t tell if you’re being serious.

I already said that the best training is to report — get out there and try. All you need is an editor. If you want to talk to me about writing news without a dedicated editor, sorry. That’s how you put out pure garbage. WSJ is the best example of rock-solid editing. Call and find out how many editors are assigned to their front page.

When you’re on a news team there is supporting staff of all sorts. You can work in the newsroom and learn news without ever writing a story. Just listen to editors shout and reporter whine. Training for reporting comes in so many forms. Megyn Kelly is a great reporter; she’s an attorney.

But really…are you serious?

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 5:29 PM

Sparky! Guess what I found???

Pic of the Day: Axe and His Bucket?

[No one tell him that it was me. lol]

Resist We Much on May 27, 2013 at 5:31 PM

I often find that Journalists are experts in nothing. Most aren’t Scientists, Doctors, Lawyers, Plumbers or even Shoe Salesmen. That’s not to say Journalism doesn’t have it’s role in society, but for someone to suggest that Journalists have a better grasp of facts and their responsibility to the public than others is hogwash.

Corporal Tunnel on May 27, 2013 at 5:27 PM

I’ve thought before that all college journalism majors should have to have a required number of courses in economics, history and ethics.

That’s not to say that some of those courses wouldn’t be worthless, but they would probably at least get a few things into their heads.

INC on May 27, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Del Dolemonte on May 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM

snark aside

I posted this in another thread but think you would find it interesting.

Cryptome is an independent dox newser. Watch for him to be a news story himself in the next couple of years.

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Capitalist Hog on May 27, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4