Item from Fox
News on May 28 by reporter Jana
Winter: A Michigan lawmaker wants to register reporters to ensure
they�re credible and have �good moral character.�
CONSTITUTION OF MICHIGAN OF 1963
� 5 Freedom of speech and of press.
Sec. 5.
Every person may freely speak, write, express and publish his views on all
subjects, being responsible for the abuse of such right; and no law shall be
enacted to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.
What part of the above does alleged constitution lawyer,
Sen. Bruce Patterson, not understand? There are legitimate libel and slander
laws, as well as the court of public opinion, to check press abuses. The explosive
growth of media outlets does not excuse the people from exercising their
responsibility of discernment, or give the government permission to exercise it
for them.
As someone who has covered controversial topics, especially
9/11, I know that "credibility" is often in the eye of the beholder.
Someone who finds Fox News to be credible might not think the same of OpEd
News, Online Journal or Indymedia and vice-versa. The beauty of the free press
is that diverse outlets exist and people make their own choices among them.
One of the things that reporters would have to show in order
to be registered with the State of Michigan under the Patterson bill would be a
journalism degree or its equivalent. What is the equivalent? A degree in
English, creative writing, quantum physics? A two-year degree, a four-year
degree, a certificate from a correspondence school?
I am a community journalist with no journalism degree; my
degrees are in economics and law, so maybe I have the equivalent. But the way
we write in those fields could never be confused with journalism, so maybe not.
I disagree with the implication of this bill that a journalism degree confers
credibility. This makes the classist assumption that only people with higher
education have the ability to think and write clearly, or report ethically.
Some great reporting has been done by students and by non-degreed individuals
who took an interest in what was going on in their community. And I still
remember the 1976 Democratic National Convention, where �The Children's
Express� scooped all the mainstream media on Jimmy Carter's selection of Walter
Mondale as his running mate. Most reporting is NOT rocket science.
Another requirement for registration would be three years of
experience. Why would having three years of experience confer credibility that
someone did not have at two years and 11 months? You should be taught the
ethics either through some sort of schooling, on-the-job training or even
self-study, before you go out on your first story. Also, I know that to many
people the only experience that counts is paid experience. So this bill is
basically implying that only people who have the job title of reporter in a
corporate outlet count as journalists.
Patterson's concern for ethical standards doesn't wash
because such standards can be just as flimsy on the government side, such as
when the government tries to force a journalist to reveal a confidential
source, embeds reporters with the military in a theater of war or tries to
interfere with the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship.
Some people might view this bill as a simple and logical
extension of press credentialing. Perhaps it is, but we should be questioning
the legitimacy of press credentialing rather than seeking to further extend the
concept. Here in California, press credentials are processed by the California
Highway Patrol -- at least, they were several years ago, when I needed them
last. A government agency, especially a law enforcement agency, determining who
would and who wouldn't be recognized as press, and keeping records of who is
credentialed, should be anathema to a society that constitutionally guarantees
free press. It should not be business as usual.
They used to say that freedom of the press was for those who
can afford one. With the Internet and personal computers, a large portion of
the population can now afford it -- a problem for those of us trying to make a
living in journalism and stuck competing with "free" news. But the
"Information Age" also means that now that so many people are in the
field, the politicians can't hide so easily, can't have "gentlemen's
agreements" with a limited press corps to keep certain scandals under
wraps. This scares the pols who depend on journalistic cover during their
misdeeds the way cockroaches depend on darkness during a raid on your pantry.
I can see the thinking -- and I use that word loosely -- behind
this bill as the beginning steps down the slippery slope to the day when the
government will require all computers to be registered and licensed, as in the
days typewriters were registered and licensed in communist Romania, to be
confiscated if the writer offended the government.
This Michigan bill probably won't fly . . . yet, or survive
a court challenge if it did. But assuming that someday, such a law were to pass
somewhere in the states, it might have the opposite effect than what the
government intended: No one will believe the registered journalists as anything
other than the paid stenographers of the corporatocracy.
At least, I hope so.
CC 2010, K�llia Ramares, By, NC, SA