zlacker

For the purposes of the shield law at issue here:

> possessed by a person reasonably believed to have a purpose to disseminate to the public a newspaper, book, broadcast, or other similar form of public communication, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce;

"Journalist" is merely an informal summary of what the law actually states.

>>wtalli+(OP)
Looks like one needs to be twitter troll to qualify. Too much work...

>>wtalli+(OP)
Thanks, Yes- I want to state that my purpose is to distribute a similar form of public communication across state lines. Forgive me if I got it wrong at first, I'm not a lawyer, I'm a journalist.

>>wtalli+(OP)
The problem is what does any of that mean? Am I a journalist right now because I'm disseminating my writings to the public using a means of interstate commerce, e.g. the Internet? I'm guessing probably not, but the law should give me all the protections and recognize all the rights that a journalist has. It shouldn't be the government's place to decide who is or isn't a journalist; everybody is a journalist and should be protected accordingly.

If everybody is a journalist, then there's no ambiguity. But if the law says that some people are journalists and some people aren't, now there are two classes of citizen and it isn't even clear which is which.