UK bloggers also granted journalism protections

June 7th, 2006 · No Comments

I think if you report on something newsworthy, even on a personal blog, then you’re a journalist and should have the same protections in law. If those protections are abused you’ll end up in court just like a journalist, but they should be granted.

In english law the right to protect an information source is granted to a person, not someone employed in brick and motar news distribution. Last time I looked bloggers were people so the law applies. In the eyes of the law journalists are not something special, in the sense that they are not excempt from the law or have special laws applied to them and them alone.

Apple Computer took a number of news website operators to court in the US to demand that they reveal the source of a product leak. Jason O’Grady of Apple Mac news site PowerPage and others claimed that they were protected by the California shield law, a provision of the California Constitution which prevents journalists being forced to reveal sources of information.

The initial case in the trial court ruled that the sources must be revealed, but the state appeal court overturned that decision. While hailed as a victory for bloggers in the US, the case highlighted the lack of any precedent in the UK on who, exactly, qualifies for journalistic protection.

The California shield law protects “publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, or by a press association or wire service” and a “radio or television news reporter or other person connected with or employed by a radio or television station.”

The equivalent protection for UK journalists is in the Contempt of Court Act of 1981. It states:

“No court may require a person to disclose, nor is any person guilty of contempt of court for refusing to disclose, the source of information contained in a publication for which he is responsible, unless it be established to the satisfaction of the court that disclosure is necessary in the interests of justice or national security or for the prevention of disorder or crime.”

Link