> I just don't see how a "free and independent press" doesn't include people > who get a bug up their rear and publishing something, with no regard for > their livelihood or personal financial gain. What about journalism > students, who often take chances on writing provocative stuff -because- they > have no need to earn a paycheck? To me, this was designed to apply only to > the corporate press who have a vested interest in being the only > organizations allowed to call employees and freelancers "journalists." > As David points out, it only matters how this applies in the courts. A law > doesn't mean much without legal precedent to give it nuance.
agreed. what issue are they traying to solve? why not just say "anyone can say whatever they want without having to prove it." To me, it sounds like Congress is trying to make sure the person has a history of telling stories which makes them more trustworthy. Lets talk about some use cases. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Video: http://ryanishungry.com Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
