Why Julian Assange is a Journalist

[tekisui]

Source: Salon

Julian Assange may not be Time's Man of the Year, but he almost certainly is a journalist -- at least as far as the First Amendment is concerned.

The Constitution’s First Amendment forbids Congress from making any law abridging either freedom of speech or freedom of the press. Some commentators and government officials have confidently asserted that Assange is not a journalist -- perhaps intending to imply that he does not enjoy the protections afforded by the First Amendment. But they are almost certainly incorrect.

Let us first dispense with the idea that Assange may not enjoy the safeguards of the First Amendment because he is not a United States citizen. The language of the First Amendment does not limit its protections to citizens, and the courts have never interpreted it that way.

Let us next dispense with the canard that Assange does not enjoy First Amendment protection because he is not objective, has a point of view, or is seeking to achieve a particular political outcome. As a historical matter, it is clear that objectivity has never been an indispensable characteristic of journalism. The ideology of journalistic objectivity emerged at the end of the 19th century as part of a broader cultural and intellectual movement. But for at least half of the history of American journalism, newspapers freely acknowledged that their judgments about news were influenced by partisan considerations. And today many established news organizations no longer even pretend to be neutral about the issues of the day. Others cling to a veneer of objectivity by presenting "both sides" of an issue while nevertheless presenting a clear point of view. More important than this history, however, is that grafting an "objectivity" requirement onto the First Amendment would subject freedom of expression to the subjective judgments of prosecutors and judges about whether a given journalist is sufficiently objective, thereby threatening to cripple press liberty.

more: http://www.salon.com/news/wikileaks/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/12/20/wikileaks_gant_journalism

[stray cat]

1. So is a blogger or an individual who is not a journalist right?

just like the tea partier down the street. Rush Limabaugh. All are entitled to freedom of speech.

[tekisui]

7. I see no contradiction with that being the case. Do you have a point?

[bluerum]

2. ... and why most of the MSM are copy readers - not journalists. eom

[mmonk]

5. +1

[PBS Poll-435]

3. I don't understand why Assange is afforded American 1st Amendment protections

When he is not an American, not a Visa-holding resident, does not claim residency, etc.


:shrug:

[PDJane]

4. He's not an American, true........

Doesn't reside in the US, doesn't want residency, hasn't claimed protections under the law........so why is the US trying to prosecute a foreign journalist under the Espionage Act...the act that was designed to stiffle dissent.

There's a double standard in there. Maybe we'll just call it hypocrisy.

[tekisui]

6. Are you serious?

The 1st Amendment, the Constitution, is a restriction on government actions.

[leftstreet]

9. +1

We need a facepalm smiley

[PBS Poll-435]

12. On Americans or people on America's soil nt

[girl gone mad]

10. If Assange were to be extradited to the US..

Constitutional rights would apply.

[HEyHEY]

11. Guess what else? He is not in the USA, didn't commit and (non) crimes in the USA either.

So, the USA should keep their mitts off him.

[HEyHEY]

8. My gathering is that the first amendment is meant to protect the ACT Of journalism

Not a special group of people who are considered journalists by an organization or something.