Patterico's Pontifications


Blogging Quote of the Day

Filed under: Blogging Matters — DRJ @ 4:32 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Nick Denton, founder and president of Gawker Media:

“Are bloggers journalists? I guess we’ll find out.”


9 Responses to “Blogging Quote of the Day”

  1. It’s unfortunate that this occurred behind the People’s Republic of the Bay Area’s iron curtain. One would think this area – in particular – would see some value in upholding the Constitution and freedom of speech and all for prohibitingillegal search and seizure, but one would be wrong.

    GeneralMalaise (c8f9a0)

  2. Are you kidding General? The Constitution extends rights to all people not just the right people, it is an absurd document. The Bay Area (except for some libertarians who haven’t sold out yet) is and always has been about who you know and what group you belong to, they believe in a nation of people over a nation of laws. Freedom of speech for the right people and the right viewpoints but not for the wrong ones, searches are only illegal when they happen to the right people while anything goes for the wrong people. Gizmo dissed Apple, and Apple is definitely the right people in the Bay Area.

    max (2f2a28)

  3. The problem is in the question. One of the main points of the first amendment was to bar the government from being able to determine by fiat who was entitled to be “the press.” Sadly, the Supreme Court upheld the “media exemption” in the McCain-Feingold campaign law, which suggests that the government gets to pick favored people and entities for special treatment.

    Karl (965396)

  4. Courts and government have a way of getting in the way of the Constitution, Karl. No?

    JD (37e9a1)

  5. “It is abundantly clear under the law that a search warrant to remove these items was invalid. The appropriate method of obtaining such materials would be the issuance of a subpoena,” Ms. Darbyshire continued.

    Wrong! All you need for a search warrant is probable cause and a judge to agree. A subpoena gives notice so that someone can destroy evidence. And besides, there is no pending case so a subpoena is not possible.

    What I would like to know is whether this so called journalist is a shill for the electronic media industry? Maybe not. But this whole thing looks like a publicity grab by Apple.

    Alta Bob (e8af2b)

  6. Alta Bob,

    Are you contending that the servers/computers were somehow used to steal the phone? Or were they were stolen and sold to Chen along with the phone?

    The California law on warrants specifically holds that no legitimate warrant can be issued to a journalist for information. If the law specifically prohibiting warrants issued to journalists is irrelevant, then you don’t even need a warrant, probable cause or a judge – police could just use a piece of paper with some crayon scribblings on it signed by a janitor.

    max (2f2a28)

  7. ““Under both state and federal law, a search warrant may not be validly issued to confiscate the property of a journalist,” she wrote in a letter to San Mateo County, Calif., authorities on Saturday. ”

    This is absurd. She is claiming a journalist suspected of murder may not be searched. Here, I have not seen the affidavit that led the judge to sign the search warrant. What did the affidavit say? Don’t know. Maybe receiving stolen goods. Maybe grand theft. Maybe a lot of things. Maybe the affidavit convinced the judge an unrelated felony had been committed. Journalists are not exempt from the statute prohibiting receiving stolen goods.


    jej (42fae0)

  8. Alta Bob is right. A search warrant is the Constitutional way. And a “journalist” has no more rights than any other person.

    nk (db4a41)

  9. Bloggers are journalists, commenters aren’t.

    ropelight (5b604f)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1098 secs.