KLAMATH FALLS, OR— Klamath Falls 2019 Blogs and Freedom of Speech
Most spaces on the internet are privately owned, and have no obligation to allow you to speak freely in their space. Whether it's Facebook removing content that violates its own terms of service, a blog owner deleting a comment they find offensive, or a big company deleting user posts from its Facebook page, your speech may be censored, but you have no first amendment right to free speech in those places. This includes our discussions on Tulelake New Times— and any Facebook page of mine and if you start a discussion and I find isn't up to my standards, I reserve my right to dismiss it.
Are Blogs Protected under the First Amendment?
Riding the wave of the new technology is "blogging." For the first time, almost anyone can instantly publish and reach a global readership with minimal resources. It's no longer necessary to publish paper-based media, or even manufacture discs, to reach a vast audience. Blogs, (short for "web logs) allow people to convey thoughts, opinions, histories, anecdotes, and political ideas to the world, unimpeded by time and distance.
Americans pride themselves on living in a country that boasts a free press and a right to criticize their government, both in speech and in writing. In a country where the First Amendment (freedom of speech) is so close to the heart of our democracy.
Some experts speculate that these recent waves of change in America indicate a movement toward only allowing professional writers to communicate information. Such a change is dangerously speech suppressive because most professionals work for some entity and so are subject to losing their jobs, meaning that their work will be subject to the influence and so will be less objective than a private individual's blog.
Today, it seems that bloggers will continue to post until Congress legislates otherwise. And if a day comes when Internet speech is indeed heavily regulated, how will these independent voices face a new world of heightened regulations? Why, bravely, of course.
For journalists, the First Amendment clearly spells out the “freedom of the press”. This has long been interpreted as protections for journalistic endeavors and writing, including newspapers, magazines, independent journalists, television news, photojournalism and other forms of media. However, the line between who is and isn’t a journalist has been fundamentally blurred in the Internet Age.
No bigger issue exists on this end than the proliferation of online bloggers and “new media” in general. Who could be considered a “journalist”, and what is and is not considered the “press” was easy to establish before the growth of the internet. If you could afford to print, and you avoided the nasty issues related to libel, your organization was generally considered legitimate press, and those who wrote for you, journalists.
Even then, there had to be a journalistic history behind your organization before you were considered legitimate. As the internet grew, individuals with their own websites or space on other websites increasingly gained notoriety, publishing journalistic content, but not aligned to any larger, traditional news organizations.
Were these new weblog, or “blog” writers, journalists? However, in 2014, the notorious Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that bloggers are indeed considered journalists when it comes to their First Amendment rights.
The Ninth Circuit’s decision effectively answered the looming question of whether a blogger should be considered a journalist with a precedent-setting “yes” decision and establishing that bloggers don’t need to prove it by having worked with or for established news organizations or traditional print or television media.
According to the precedent set by the Ninth Circuit, even bloggers producing fake news must receive the same free press protections as traditional, reputable journalists.
So what dangers exists for journalists when it comes to First Amendment rights online? Thankfully, those concerns have not really changed.
*Journalist must be concerned with reporting facts as accurately as possible
*Journalists must be dedicated to making corrections on stories when possible or retractions when necessary
*Journalists must avoid libel
*Journalists must avoid invasion of privacy
Accuracy in reporting
This tenet of journalism has remained true for a century. That said, there was a time when journalism was not as clean an industry. Yellow Journalism, the nasty, libelous and “fake news” type of journalism that was rampant in the late 1800s, was protected free speech even then, as it still is today. Journalists can indeed lie and fabricate news. However, credibility is a major concern, especially in an overly dense market.
The very nature of online activity raises far more questions than it answers. After all, the First Amendment and the Constitution were written at a time when something such as the Internet could not have even been conceived. In no small way, the First Amendment was written with physical borders in mind. Nevertheless, the Internet creates a borderless society, and the Supreme Court has already ruled on several cases that cement an individual’s free speech rights online and, in a more general sense, the right to access information from others both nationally and internationally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abi5io866lc"> 3:48 / 11:56 Five Court Cases That Defined the First Amendment
Send sources on local and national news:
Email: tulelakenews@yahoo.com
Cell # (530) 708-7852
James Garland Facebook Page ---> Here
James Charles Garlan@JamesCGarland Twitter ---> Here
TheRealRocks4me YouTube Channel ---> Here
Last Chance Hotel YouTube Channel ---> Here
Comments
Post a Comment