The question that keeps coming up is whether being a journalist means you get special privileges. It's hilarious that David Gregory suggests Glen Greenwald be c

The question that keeps coming up is whether being a journalist means you get special privileges. It's hilarious that David Gregory suggests Glen Greenwald be charged with a crime, seeing as Gregory, it will be further recalled, illustrated an anti-gun law by violating it on the air. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3Hb6c2tWl0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3Hb6c2tWl0 So if you go along with the idea that a journalist gets special privileges, what defines a journalist? Is Ariana Huffington one? Howard Stern? How about Rush Limbaugh? How about a famous blogger? How about a not-so-famous blogger? An anchor for Fox News? Hmm. For many, these are uncomfortable questions. After all, what happens when journalists fail to do their job, because they either can't get the info or won't report on it? Julian Assange is proof of that issue. Is he a journalist? Once upon a time you just needed to be bureaucrat. Today the thing to be is a bureaucrat with a badge. Bruce Schneier calls this phenomenon "privilege escalation". He cites the example of transit cops whose main ambition was to drop the "transit" part of their job description. Fascinating commentary here: http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2013/06/24/do-you-know-who-i-am/ http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2013/06/24/do-you-know-w... It becomes a matter of "who you are" instead of equal application of the law to everybody. Frankly I despise the idea that journalists should have a different set of rules from the rest of us. Equally-applied laws make should be beyond question ... I can't believe people are even arguing whether laws should be applied to everyone equally. Especially defenders of the 1st amendment.