Earlier this month, an independent blogger from Montana, Crystal Cox, was sued for defamation after she accused the founder of an investment group of illegal action. Under Oregon state shield laws, journalists making a similar accusation would have some protection from divulging their sources, but the judge ruled that Cox, who is not affiliated with any professional news organization, was not a journalist. Because of this, Cox did not have the same right to protect the identities of her sources as journalists do under Oregon laws.
Some, including The New York Times columnist David Carr, have argued that because the validity of Cox’s claims is in question, she should not have been protected by shield laws. Obviously, slander should never be protected speech. But the larger question should not be whether Cox personally misused her blog to spread false information, but whether her chosen method of news dissemination — blogging — is journalism and should be protected as such. Before this ruling, the answer to this question was vague. The Oregon law protected all journalism, including but not limited to traditional news sources. Blogging could have easily fit into this category of protected speech, but in explicitly declaring blogging to not be journalism, the Oregon judge has set a precedent for a narrow definition that is dangerously limiting in our rapidly evolving media world. This new standard affects bloggers nationwide, but it also affects bloggers here at Princeton.
On campus, we have established newspapers and magazines that report and comment on campus issues. But, reflecting a nationwide trend toward citizen journalism, Princeton also has a contingent of campus bloggers. Written by students and faculty, these blogs also discuss news and level opinions about campus life. Some examples include Dan Kang ’14’s blog, “Dan’s Blog” and assistant professor Chika Okeke-Agulu’s blog. When these bloggers operate with the same honesty and integrity as affiliated journalists, they aren’t so different. As it becomes easier for articles on the ‘Prince’ website to be uploaded, edited and publicly discussed all within minutes, our campus continues to move in the same direction as journalism on a national scale — toward the dominance of online versions of established newspapers. Many Princeton students read their news online; there’s a good chance you’re reading this article online right now. In form, journalism and blogs are more similar than ever before.
The Oregon ruling won’t reverse the current trend toward citizen journalism, but it will disadvantage anyone trying to practice this new form of journalism, including Princeton bloggers. When a ‘Prince’ reporter uses anonymous sources, he or she has some protection under New Jersey state shield laws. But in light of the Oregon ruling, an unaffiliated Princeton blogger who reports with the same thoroughness and integrity as is expected from a professional reporter and also includes anonymous sources in an article, might now face challenges in receiving the same protection.
New Jersey shield laws are similar to those in Oregon in that they protect all people associated with the “news media,” which includes mainstream, professional media, but also “similar printed, photographic, mechanical or electronic means of disseminating news to the general public.” Oregon has set a precedent: Blogging does not count as a legitimate alternative journalism source, the likes of which is protected under shield laws. Now that blogging has been denied protection in Oregon, it is more likely that it could be denied protection in New Jersey.
The problem with this is that it simply ignores the way journalism is changing in this country and around the world. Just as in the greater world, tactics for news dissemination on Princeton’s campus are changing. If the courts refuse to acknowledge or protect new forms of media, we risk losing an important alternative to established news sources. While student and professor bloggers may not be professional journalists, it is possible for them to have access to enough information to write pieces in an informed manner. And everyone who can make an informed and productive contribution to campus discourse should have the right to make his or her voice heard.
Sarah Schwartz is a freshman from Silver Spring, Md. She can be reached at seschwar@princeton.edu.
Read More
Calls for VP Calhoun's resignation mislead on free expression
Bill Hewitt“In joining a letter so firmly based on a questionable factual narrative, some 10 percent of Princeton faculty have rushed to condemn Vice President Calhoun for a “lie” and to demand her ouster.”
“In joining a letter so firmly based on a questionable factual narrative, some 10 percent of Princeton faculty have rushed to condemn Vice President Calhoun for a “lie” and to demand her ouster.”
Deciding disciplinary matters by popular vote of the faculty sets a harmful precedent
Jonathan Mummolo"In short, fairness demands that all members of the Princeton community be subject to a common set of rules and procedures. We are all meant to be granted equal protection under these rules. Our established procedures for disciplinary matters do not call for a full faculty vote."
"In short, fairness demands that all members of the Princeton community be subject to a common set of rules and procedures. We are all meant to be granted equal protection under these rules. Our established procedures for disciplinary matters do not call for a full faculty vote."
Princeton, practice what you preach: SPIA graduate students on protest and dialogue
Guest Contributors"As policy students, we are appalled by the blatant hypocrisy of the University administration, which has relied on fear-mongering and false narratives to discredit student protestors. We are increasingly disillusioned with the dissonance of what we are taught in our classrooms and the University’s actions."
"As policy students, we are appalled by the blatant hypocrisy of the University administration, which has relied on fear-mongering and false narratives to discredit student protestors. We are increasingly disillusioned with the dissonance of what we are taught in our classrooms and the University’s actions."
