- Related Stories
-
Video bloggers ready to incite 'media revolution'
June 9, 2006
(continued from previous page)
Do you feel that all bloggers should be protected as independent journalists under California's shield law? If not, how do you decide which ones are protected?
Wolf: I feel that people should be protected when engaging upon journalistic activities. This was a video that was published and is clearly an example of video journalism. Therefore, it should be protected as an example of journalism and I should be protected, in this situation, as a journalist. If you're wanting to take a more restrictive approach, and think that people need requirements for journalism, I have an extensive history of journalism going back to publishing for the Santa Barbara Independent several years ago.
So it's less about someone's label as a blogger and more about their information-gathering methodology?
Wolf: Right, I think it was Jeff Jarvis who wondered if Tony Soprano started a blog, could he then not be compelled to testify about his associates. If he started a blog and was interviewing various people in his organization, then maybe that would be journalism, but we're already dealing with a fictional HBO show, so it's a bit of a cartoon analogy to begin with.
After all the dissatisfaction you've expressed with mainstream media, do you see some irony with the likes of the Society of Professional Journalists and the San Francisco Chronicle coming to your defense?
Wolf: To be honest, my critiques and concerns about mainstream media is mostly focused on television media with a special focus on cable news such as Fox affiliates and their position that they are "fair and balanced." I feel that the idea of being objective is something that's an impossible goal. And to that extent, I feel that trying to present yourself as objective is very deceitful. It's a little easier in the case of newspapers, which have a much stronger history of reporting all the facts. Even still there is an element of sensationalizing issues to the bias of the corporation. That is my critique of corporate media. It's not the journalists themselves, but the means that the corporation shapes what is and isn't published.
If Bill O'Reilly comes and makes a statement on my behalf, then it will be ironic.
Well on that note, Judith Miller did. How did that make you feel?
Wolf: I'm very thankful that I have an ally on the outside who has been through the same thing and can help publicize the situation that she found herself in, and I'm now finding myself in.
How long to you plan to hold out?
Wolf: At this point in time I'm waiting for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals first to rule whether or not I should be granted bail, then, to rule whether or not my appeal is granted. After that, I will continue to assess the situation as it progresses.
What do you think will be the legacy of your case?
I hope that the legacy of my case is that the protections afforded to journalists will increase, rather than to erode. I hope that people become more aware of the way the federal governments acts in these situations. And probably most importantly, I hope that people become aware of the federal grand jury system, which is a system that I feel should be unconstitutional. When you appear in front of a federal grand jury, you are not granted a lawyer. There is no judge. It's just you, the prosecutor and 12 jurors, which seems like a very, very unfair system, which beyond that, is secretive. It's almost akin to the military tribunals which have already generated so much controversy, except for instead of being enemy combatants, these are our very own citizens who are put in this position.
See more CNET content tagged:
blogger, jury, San Francisco, journalist, attempt
32 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
so one must possess a degree in journalism to be a reporter? i wonder what reporters did before the advent of the communications degree... blogging is the evolution of journalism. big time reporters for big time companies are tied to whatever the profit and political agenda is of their company. but a little kid with a video camera can stop a catastrophe. a little girl with a MacBook might just save the world. our journalists are more worried about advert pricing than reporting the news.
even if every blogger out there was crap - i have the right to decide to read it or not. or at least thats how the constitution used to read.
It might be more behind his case then reported in this article. I read in the text that he was a anarchist? You can't jail people because of what they believe but I had a guy in my school a few years ago, when I was still going in school, and he was anarchist. He had the most strange ideas you can magine and if we would live like the anarchist want us to do it would be like going back to the stone-age or something.
And who is really a journalist?
I don't think he is a journalist. It's too easy to be a journalist today. If I write a diary for my own at home, am I a journalist? No. If I publish it on the web on a blog, an I a journalist? Well, it's seems like I'm. You are not a journalist because you have your own blog or something, that's stupid.
As he mentioned in the interview, there is a difference between a criminal organization (the Mafia) conducting an "interview" or journalism and that of a non-criminal entity doing so. When we start to treat people whose ideology we disagree with as criminals, we have started to do a really stupid, dangerous, and sad thing.
Are you only a journalist if you write for one of the corporate owned media outlets ?
time feeling sorry for him or backing him on this one.
You can protest without breaking the law.
He has film of somebody igniting a police car. He needs to hand
it, or a copy of it, over.
Charles R. Whealton
Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com
A fundamental ideal of the right to free press is the dissemination of said press. To capture video and not allow 'free' access is in itself a violation for all involved. In particular, the footage captured seems to suggest itself as evidence to a crime...a federal crime at that. I for one don't think to be any sort of slippery slope, but a rational agenda being played in the open by blaspheming the very concept of 'free press'.
In one paragraph alone, this youngest admits how mistaken he was about the way the world actually works...a common sentiment to these 'anarchist' types...a group who, much like this person, will cowardly hide behind the VERY ideals they would abolish. How nice for him to live in the United States...where an individuals rights and freedoms are protected, even at the detestment of the individual. He has no idea how lucky he is to be here...
How low we have sunk... If this is an accurate reflection of the attitudes of most Americans, then the trasnformation of the United States into the tyrannical police state it is already becoming is guaranteed (because most people will not resist it), and much sooner than anyone might imagine.
The American experiment in "democracy" and "freedom" is coming to an end -- enjoy its last vestiges while they last!
Winston Churchill: "Democracy is the worst form of government, BUT IT'S BETTER THAN ALL THE OTHERS."
police shouldnt be forced to be jerks in order to pay their bills.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html</a>
[b][u]READ[/u][/b], [i]DIG[/i] some [u]more[/u] and [b][u]LEARN![/u][/b] ;)
~Mahatma Ghandi
This blogger as well as some in other places are in the [i]fight[/i] phase at present. ;)
That remark highlights his complete inability to grasp the issues
in his case. The grand jury is not meant to be a judgmental
body as Wolf thinks it is. It is an investigative body meant to
gather information. Everyone has a duty to cooperate in the
information gathering function.
There can be only two outcomes to this situation:
1) Wolf will comply with the order to turn over the video, or
2) Wolf will serve his current term for contempt, and, possibly,
more time if he continues to refuse to cooperate.
The entire legal system will not be reformulated to meet a
spoiled 20-something 'anarchist's' specifications.
That remark highlights his complete inability to grasp the issues
in his case. The grand jury is not meant to be a judgmental
body as Wolf thinks it is. It is an investigative body meant to
gather information. Everyone has a duty to cooperate in the
information gathering function.
There can be only two outcomes to this situation:
1) Wolf will comply with the order to turn over the video, or
2) Wolf will serve his current term for contempt, and, possibly,
more time if he continues to refuse to cooperate.
The entire legal system will not be reformulated to meet a
spoiled 20-something 'anarchist's' specifications.
american revolutionists of yore would probably be locked up today.. labled terrorists.. brainwashed.. etc..
Two major issues at play here, from my perspective at least...
1. Responsibility of journalism. This is truly a corrosive element, in that a society is supposed to readily accept freedom of the press without a clear definition of what that entails. Is this person a journalist? Ill grant protections and freedoms to the press when theyre warranted, but along with those items must come a responsibility OF the press.
Perhaps the Michael Moores and the Dan Rathers of the world have taught this generations would-be Murrows that its fine and dandy to scramble the facts, to pick and choose what constitutes real news. From my standpoint, the paramount responsibility of those entrusted with the title journalist have to be tied with a reality and to report that reality¬ to decide whats newsworthy. This particular person witnessed a CRIME, documented a CRIME (a federal one, at that), and has not only refused to adequately REPORT this crime, but refuses to turn over said record of CRIMINAL activity.
For me, this firmly places himself outside the realm of objective journalist and thats an entirely different issue.
2. Convictions -- what makes an anarchist? What would drive a persons desires for an end to organized government? Im sure these are fascinating questions, but certainly not ones to be bothered with by myself or this particular person& someone so convinced of their anarchist ways hes willing to hide behind the protections of that he so readily forsakes. Freedoms for the Press? Hows about FREEDOMS in general...
I guess the most ironic thing here would be this persons desire to martyr himself, hiding behind principles hes rallied against in the past (and will surely again once released), to grab whatever media attention possible&as his individual efforts in the past have done little. Gandhi he aint, but then I suppose he doesnt have to be. What makes this so hilariously scary is that, supposed the tables be turned and this was an act of violence BY the police (as opposed to AGAINST them) this video would be all over YouTube, on every Daily Show broadcast, CBS segment, and half the blogs out there. Being subjective must be a hoot&
Well posted teeter, well indeed.