[A CA Guy]

A local journalist has be be what?

[arderkrag]

How utterly idiotic. Freedom of speech and the press should mean exactly that, even beyond the limits of defamation and libel. You should not be able to sue someone just because they say naughty or untrue things about you. You have no right to your image.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

So much for equal protection under the law. Media and govt. officials can ruin people’s lives using rumor and heresay without having to be held responsible.

[sten]

so only ‘journalists’ have freedom speech and of the press?

since when

[no-to-illegals]

So the 1st has no weight for those without mainstream reporters credentials and news outlets credentials? Probably a series of a long line of similar decisions from our judiciary, where the 1st is not protected, if slander can be or is alleged. The writing is on the wall.

[icwhatudo]

Lets all have a "I'm Spartacus" moment.

Kevin Padrick is a thug and a thief while handling bankruptcy proceedings by him and Obsidian Finance Group LLC.

Kevin Padrick is a thug and a thief while handling bankruptcy proceedings by him and Obsidian Finance Group LLC.

[blackdog]

My favorite book of all time is from the late 70's which details documented cases of around fifty of the most corrupt federal and state judges in modern times.

The book was available for about three years and then "poof" it vanished from publication never to return.

[NonValueAdded]

This will be overturned.

[cport]

"My intensions are the highest and best," she said.

How ironic. In a story that the MSM AP, with their cadre of "professional" journalists, have been granted self importance over bloggers by this ruling, and they can't even be bothered to proofread or use spell check.

[VeniVidiVici]

Seems to me that this wouldn’t make it such a stretch any more to set qualifications for voting.

[arfingcat]

“A local journalist has to be what?”. Good point, but the later discussion is one-sided. Put yourself on the other side for a moment.

Is there a reason to distinguish between journalists and people who comment occasionally in public? I take it the courts say “yes” and make that distinction. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so. That seems to be what a lot of the later discussion is about.

Maybe a distinction is a bad idea, but if the distinction is accepted, then the question is whether the woman is a journalist. I haven’t read the case, but it seems to me that this is a factual question. Someone who knows might help by posting some info on how the judge reached the conclusion that the woman is not a journalist. That could be a subject of useful debate that’s absent in the threads so far.

I’m comfortable defending journalists in the abstract. Ordinarily, if someone accused me of being a journalist, I’d take it as a probable attack on my honesty and integrity.

[no-to-illegals]

Yes Virginia, the system is rigged. It has always been rigged and will always be rigged. Many talk show hosts these days are attorneys. The majority of D.C. representatives, of the people, are attorneys. How long has it been since the President or his wife did not hold law degrees and were attorneys? It is the system. The system works within the system for the system. A scratch my back and I scratch yours approach. The Joe, on the street, who pays their salary. Joe is a chump to the system. Wish it weren't so, but the system is the system and Joe, on the street, cannot fight the system unless Joe holds a law degree. The system makes fighting the system impossible without that degree.

[yarddog]

Why should mainstream reporters and news outlets have more protection that ordinary citizens?

It would seem to me that they should have the exact same protection or lack thereof as anyone else.

[Sherman Logan]

Hernandez said Cox was not a journalist because she offered no professional qualifications as a journalist or legitimate news outlet. She had no journalism education, credentials or affiliation with a recognized news outlet, proof of adhering to journalistic standards such as editing or checking her facts, evidence she produced an independent product or evidence she ever tried to get both sides of the story.

I can find nothing in the Constitution that requires such "credentials" to be a member of the press.

If I make photocopies of my stories and hand them out to people, I'm operating the exact equivalent of "the press" the 1st Amendment was intended to protect.

Same thing if those stories are distributed electronically rather than on paper.

For most of American history, very few members of the press would have met the judge' standards.

[CyberSpartacus]

Kevin Padrick is a thug and a thief while handling bankruptcy proceedings by him and Obsidian Finance Group LLC.

LMAO :)

[DBrow]

This whole myth that “journalists” get special constitutional privileges must end.

There is nothing in the constitution to suggest that a “journalist” with knowledge of a felony does not have to reveal his sources, for example. if you knew such information it would be illegal for you to conceal it.

[WKUHilltopper]

Since when do you need to be a “journalist” to express an opinion??