Journalists and the law

[Ranb]

Most people are aware of the efforts by journalists to investigate issues or make statements to provoke a response on an issue that concerns them. Journalists sometimes even overstep the law to generate publicity or call attention to a story. David Gregory's obvious violation of DC law on television is an example. Another forum member here wrote that journalists should be given leeway to let them do their job even it is means breaking the law.

How far should journalists be allowed to go to report (or make) the news?

Ranb


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9074547#post9074547

 

[GeeMack]

Most people are aware of the efforts by journalists to investigate issues or make statements to provoke a response on an issue that concerns them. Journalists sometimes even overstep the law to generate publicity or call attention to a story. David Gregory's obvious violation of DC law on television is an example. Another forum member here wrote that journalists should be given leeway to let them do their job even it is means breaking the law.

How far should journalists be allowed to go to report (or make) the news?

Obviously if the purpose is to provide an example, and if the journalist gets caught or admits breaking the law, then the courts should follow through vigorously with the journalist's intent, and make an example by prosecuting them fully and to the maximum extent of the law.

 

[theprestige]

How far should journalists be allowed to go to report (or make) the news?

Ranb


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9074547#post9074547

Journalists are just citizens. Or, more accurately: All citizens are also journalists, and enjoy all the rights and privileges of journalists.

So another way of asking the question, that doesn't imagine a special elevated class of citizens called "journalists", is, "how far should citizenns be allowed to go to report information?"

And the answer is, obviously, "as far as the law allows."













My take is that every citizen should go as far as their conscience demands, but if they go beyond what the law allows they should certainly accept and pay the consequences for doing so.

 

[Carn]

How far should journalists be allowed to go to report (or make) the news?

Since "journalist" is an undefined term without any legal requirements, "journalists" should not be given the slightest leeway in any way.

Otherwise anyone could claim to be a journalist just prepairing his first journalistic work, which required braking some law and he would get away, if it was one of the minor laws journalist are free to break, because no one can prove he isnt a journalist.

 

[Nessie]

I think that there is an overall benefit and good in giving journalists leeway. In the same way that the police are given leeway over certain laws from speed limits to smoking dope whilst under cover.

Here is an example of where journalists breaking the law has been justified

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8687537.stm

"South African journalists say they have smuggled dangerous items onto domestic flights in hand luggage ahead of next month's football World Cup.

The journalist behind the report told the BBC the items included knives, syringes, screwdrivers and razors. Mandy Weiner said security was "porous", as banned items had got onto more than half the flights targeted."

If any of the journalists had been caught and they could show they were working as a journalist on that specific story as arranged with permission by the editorial team of the publication then I say it would be wrong to prosecute. Otherwise you make investigative journalism weaker.

 

[Giz]

If any of the journalists had been caught and they could show they were working as a journalist on that specific story as arranged with permission by the editorial team of the publication then I say it would be wrong to prosecute. Otherwise you make investigative journalism weaker.

Wouldn't that just make it a criminal conspiracy?

(And what if terrorists used the excuse "oh, this knife? I was just trying to smuggle it onboard for an article for my paper; Jihadist-weekly")

And who decides what investigative journalism is in the public interest? Anything that the Journalist says? (Such as phone hacking Milly Dowler?)

Treat them all like any other citizen is what I say.

 

[theprestige]

I think that there is an overall benefit and good in giving journalists leeway.

What's the difference between a journalist and a regular citizen who is gathering and publishing information?

 

[Ranb]

I think that there is an overall benefit and good in giving journalists leeway. In the same way that the police are given leeway over certain laws from speed limits to smoking dope whilst under cover.

In the USA the police are exempt by law from certain rules so that they can perform their duties. I see nothing like this for journalists.

Here is an example of where journalists breaking the law has been justified

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8687537.stm

"South African journalists say they have smuggled dangerous items onto domestic flights in hand luggage ahead of next month's football World Cup.

How do you tell the difference between a person who broke the law by smuggling prohibited items on an airliner and a person who merely claims to have done so because they have an ax to grind?

So who justified the criminal activity? The proper authorities or the smugglers?

If any of the journalists had been caught and they could show they were working as a journalist on that specific story as arranged with permission by the editorial team of the publication then I say it would be wrong to prosecute. Otherwise you make investigative journalism weaker.

Sounds like this is just a good way to bring your editor down with you to prison.

Ranb

 

[Ranb]

I can call myself a journalist of sorts. What if decided to make firearms without the required registration and sell them to call attention to the lax controls? Bold move right? I have not harmed anyone, it's just tax evasion right? Unfortunately evading the tax on some firearms means 10 years/$10k which would make it a very stupid move on my part.

Would I have the likes of Feinstein and Waxman cheering me on or would they be calling for me to be jailed?

Ranb

 

[triforcharity]

Journalists, nor anyone else, should be exempt from obeying the law.

If a journalist wants to do an investigative report that would require them breaking the law, get the blessing and support of a local law enforcement agency, or the FAA/TSA, or whatever government authority has jourisdiction.

Really simple.

The journalists who break the law to make a point, should be arrested and charged, so that law enforcement can make a point.

STOP BREAKING THE LAW *******!! (Jim Carey in Liar Liar)

 

[Nessie]

Wouldn't that just make it a criminal conspiracy?

(And what if terrorists used the excuse "oh, this knife? I was just trying to smuggle it onboard for an article for my paper; Jihadist-weekly")

And who decides what investigative journalism is in the public interest? Anything that the Journalist says? (Such as phone hacking Milly Dowler?)

Treat them all like any other citizen is what I say.

What's the difference between a journalist and a regular citizen who is gathering and publishing information?

If the journalist was working for a publication that is regulated by the PCC, was in the NUJ and was acting with the authority of the editorial team, I would say they should be regarded as covered. A regular citizen who finds something worth investigating can go to the press and they get protection with whistle blower laws.

I accept that is no guarantee of propriety as the hacking scandal has shown. But overall the good that investigative journalism has done in exposing wrongdoing means I think it needs to be given some leeway.

If you want say no leeway and go to court, then how to you square that with the freedom of speech and the vital work the press do?

 

[Nessie]

In the USA the police are exempt by law from certain rules so that they can perform their duties. I see nothing like this for journalists.

I don't think that there is a written law in the UK either. It is a judgement call.

How do you tell the difference between a person who broke the law by smuggling prohibited items on an airliner and a person who merely claims to have done so because they have an ax to grind?

One is working as a journalist and the other is not.

So who justified the criminal activity? The proper authorities or the smugglers?

The journalists editorial team.

Sounds like this is just a good way to bring your editor down with you to prison.

Ranb

It is a fine line.

 

[Nessie]

Journalists, nor anyone else, should be exempt from obeying the law.

If a journalist wants to do an investigative report that would require them breaking the law, get the blessing and support of a local law enforcement agency, or the FAA/TSA, or whatever government authority has jourisdiction.

Really simple.

The journalists who break the law to make a point, should be arrested and charged, so that law enforcement can make a point.

STOP BREAKING THE LAW ASS ****!! (Jim Carey in Liar Liar)

What if the investigation is about the authority? I am not saying routine breaking of the law. I am talking about instances such as breaching airport security to show is weak or buying a gun illegally to show how easy it is or taking a bribe from a corrupt official to show that they are doing such a thing.

 

[Ranb]

One is working as a journalist and the other is not.

But how do you tell if the journalist's has any integrity? There was no evidence of any integrity (or lack thereof) in the article you linked to. Unless you can show that journalists as a whole are to be trusted (there is evidence that many cannot) or that the ones in your link are especially trustworthy, then the whole thing is a sham.

The journalists editorial team.

No thanks. I would rather trust the police than some journalists. They can suck it up like the rest of us and tell it to the judge at the arraignment. If they can't take it then they should not dish it out.

Ranb

ETA: What's the PCC and NUJ?

 

[triforcharity]

What if the investigation is about the authority? I am not saying routine breaking of the law. I am talking about instances such as breaching airport security to show is weak or buying a gun illegally to show how easy it is or taking a bribe from a corrupt official to show that they are doing such a thing.

Are they breaking the law?

Yes?

Ok then, charge them.

 

[WildCat]

I can call myself a journalist of sorts.

This forum has more readers than many newspapers.

 

[Nessie]

But how do you tell if the journalist's has any integrity? There was no evidence of any integrity (or lack thereof) in the article you linked to. Unless you can show that journalists as a whole are to be trusted (there is evidence that many cannot) or that the ones in your link are especially trustworthy, then the whole thing is a sham.


No thanks. I would rather trust the police than some journalists. They can suck it up like the rest of us and tell it to the judge at the arraignment. If they can't take it then they should not dish it out.

Ranb

ETA: What's the PCC and NUJ?

Press Complaints Commission and the National Union of Journalists.

Do you have any investigative journalism in the USA? Instances where journalists go under cover?

 

[Nessie]

Are they breaking the law?

Yes?

Ok then, charge them.

So you would convict a journalist who shows airport security is weak, or proves an official is corrupt? There is no criminal intent in the journalists actions.

 

[Ranb]

Do you have any investigative journalism in the USA? Instances where journalists go under cover?

Yes we do. But I am not aware of any jurisdictions that would encourage or allow an actual journalist to break the law in pursuit of a story.

Ranb

 

[triforcharity]

So you would convict a journalist who shows airport security is weak, or proves an official is corrupt? There is no criminal intent in the journalists actions.

If they do it within the law, sure, or with the FAA/TSA's support, sure.

However, I do not support journalists who work OUTSIDE of the law. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Do it within the law.