Blogger behind bars

Jailed video blogger and journalist Josh Wolf is interviewed by Cnet:

Q: 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. . . .

  • http://erasend.blogspot.com kingdom2000

    Is it me or are blogs (the mainstream ones read by many) don’t seem to be talking about this? You would think the huffingtonpost.com, koz, and so forth would be going to town on this since it could directly effect them at some point in the future.

  • Some Seppo

    The guy is trying to protect his lawbreaking anarchist buddies. He has no legal leg to stand on.

  • Andy Freeman

    > The guy is trying to protect his lawbreaking anarchist buddies. He has no legal leg to stand on.

    Fair enough.

    That does mean that the Stanford Daily should have turned over its notes and unpublished pictures of various acts of (60s) anti-war violence and the NYT should reveal leakers, right?

    What? Those folk should be protected? Why? Because they’re journalists or because those criminals should be protected?

    Journalists have consistently argued that they should be allowed to protect their lawbreaking buddies because otherwise said buddies wouldn’t tell journalists stuff (or would deal with them as potential witnesses).

    Why should this reporter and/or these lawbreakers be treated any differently?

  • Pingback: CaNN :: We started it.