3 ms·

> He said because they are media it may be ok but the average joe and company should not get any ideas of doing the same thing. That's not the first time I've

> He said because they are media it may be ok but the average joe and company should not get any ideas of doing the same thing. That's not the first time I've seen someone claim that a journalist claim is allowed to perform some kind of information processing that's off limits to regular people. These claims are specious and ridiculous. Journalists do not form a distinct class with special privileges, even if they claim to be one.

vvG94KbDUtRa 7y ago
They're nonsensical. There's no legal definition of journalist. You don't get a license from the government
- anticensor 7y ago
  No licence needed, true, but governments issue press cards for certain privileges peculiar to professional journalists.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  This is Switzerland, not the United States. In Europe at least in many countries journalists do indeed have special privileges and they do have recognised legal status and licenses, usually represented by private/public institutions that oversee ethical standards in the industry and so on. In Germany for example this would be the German Press council, in Sweden it is the Opinionsnämnd etc.. For the love of god can we please stop pretending that every country on the planet is the US.
  - Mirioron 7y ago
    I sure wish those journalists would have any more credibility than regular people though.
shkkmo 7y ago
We'll, there definitely are distinct classes of journalists that have special privileges. These classes are not defined by law but are implemented and supported by institutions (such as when special access is granted to events or killings generate international attention). There is no such thing as a "licensed journalist" because such licensing has been historically used to limit freedom of the press. However, there is an implicit understanding of what constitutes being a journalist that is similar and it is displayed when Judges choose whether or not to force a journalist to reveal their sources. The core idea is that intent matters. Building such an app to create public discourse by someone with a clear history of journalistic actions is likely to face different regulatory penalties than an individual with no such history who builds such an app for entertainment or profit. Edit: There is argument to be made that this "soft licensing" serves to extert control over journalists.
Someone 7y ago
“Journalist” isn’t clearly defined, but they do have some special privileges in many countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism#Legal_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism#Legal_status: ”Journalists in many nations have some privileges that members of the general public do not, including better access to public events, crime scenes and press conferences, and to extended interviews with public officials, celebrities and others in the public eye.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporter%27s_privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporter%27s_privilege: ”Reporter's privilege in the United States (also journalist's privilege, newsman's privilege, or press privilege), is a "reporter's protection under constitutional or statutory law, from being compelled to testify about confidential information or sources."” Also, in some (¿many, I would think, but I don’t know stats?) countries the justice system will weigh the right of the public to know against law infractions when deciding whether to prosecute journalists who performed crimes in order to gather information. For an example, see the pentagon papers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers). All concerned knew the information was top-secret and stolen, but in the end, nobody got convicted for publishing them.
pjc50 7y ago
GDPR has exemptions for the purposes of news reporting, not for specific people.

vvG94KbDUtRa 7y ago

They're nonsensical. There's no legal definition of journalist. You don't get a license from the government

anticensor 7y ago
No licence needed, true, but governments issue press cards for certain privileges peculiar to professional journalists.
Barrin92 7y ago
This is Switzerland, not the United States. In Europe at least in many countries journalists do indeed have special privileges and they do have recognised legal status and licenses, usually represented by private/public institutions that oversee ethical standards in the industry and so on. In Germany for example this would be the German Press council, in Sweden it is the Opinionsnämnd etc.. For the love of god can we please stop pretending that every country on the planet is the US.
- Mirioron 7y ago
  I sure wish those journalists would have any more credibility than regular people though.

shkkmo 7y ago

We'll, there definitely are distinct classes of journalists that have special privileges. These classes are not defined by law but are implemented and supported by institutions (such as when special access is granted to events or killings generate international attention). There is no such thing as a "licensed journalist" because such licensing has been historically used to limit freedom of the press. However, there is an implicit understanding of what constitutes being a journalist that is similar and it is displayed when Judges choose whether or not to force a journalist to reveal their sources. The core idea is that intent matters. Building such an app to create public discourse by someone with a clear history of journalistic actions is likely to face different regulatory penalties than an individual with no such history who builds such an app for entertainment or profit. Edit: There is argument to be made that this "soft licensing" serves to extert control over journalists.

Someone 7y ago

“Journalist” isn’t clearly defined, but they do have some special privileges in many countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism#Legal_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism#Legal_status: ”Journalists in many nations have some privileges that members of the general public do not, including better access to public events, crime scenes and press conferences, and to extended interviews with public officials, celebrities and others in the public eye.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporter%27s_privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporter%27s_privilege: ”Reporter's privilege in the United States (also journalist's privilege, newsman's privilege, or press privilege), is a "reporter's protection under constitutional or statutory law, from being compelled to testify about confidential information or sources."” Also, in some (¿many, I would think, but I don’t know stats?) countries the justice system will weigh the right of the public to know against law infractions when deciding whether to prosecute journalists who performed crimes in order to gather information. For an example, see the pentagon papers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers). All concerned knew the information was top-secret and stolen, but in the end, nobody got convicted for publishing them.

pjc50 7y ago

GDPR has exemptions for the purposes of news reporting, not for specific people.