Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
E-mail this blog's author, Scott Rosenberg:  |
|
More on the Apple v. Does decision:
Denise Howell dissects the decision. Dave Winer takes Apple to task: "It's unwise and hypocritical of Apple Computer, to profit from the expansion of the online community -- the latest Mac comes with promotional material touting its ability to write blogs and create podcasts -- and at the same time trying to control it to suit its corporate purposes."
This court has now declared that anyone "doing journalism" on the Net is entitled to the protections the law provides journalists. That's a great decision. But don't expect the old-school journalism establishment to cheer in unison (despite the participation of some of its members as amici curiae on behalf of the online journalists). The next phase of this discussion will inevitably include the sound of hand-wringing: Where do we draw the line? If anyone publishing on the Net -- and that means almost everyone these days -- can be protected by a shield law, won't the shield laws erode?
Extending a basic privilege -- the right to ask questions and publish answers -- to the broad public doesn't come without cost to someone. In this case, a lot of traditional journalists are going to fret about the erosion of their own existing privileges. Don't be surprised if there are more absurd proposals for things like "journalism certifications" and Official Journalist Membership Cards.
|
|
|
