Bloggers are Journalists

Happy Friday!


So recently I was in a conversation with a few employees from Google about the ruling from the U.S courts that bloggers are in fact journalists and are completely covered with the first amendment right which you should know is freedom of speech. The past year and a half the judges in the Burlington County Courts have gagged ordered me. Now if I had the time to dedicate to this I could take those judges to court for knowingly violating my first amendment rights as a journalist. Because I own my domain I cannot be gagged ordered for any reason whatsoever. I followed the court order because I'm too pretty for jail and didn't want to fight the man. This ruling for bloggers came in 2011 and was very controversial because as bloggers you may not be writing for the free press, but for the american people. If I have a source that's given me information and I write about it on my blog, I'm legally covered in the court to not reveal that source. Now on my blog I may write about pedophiles and/or someone who is currently on trial for pedophilia. I may cite my source as Montour County PA public records, as an investigative blogger I don't technically have to reveal my source. In some cases I may have inside information and don't want to reveal my source if it's a person because it may jeopardize their employment. In this case with the pedophile it's open public records you can access online. Now if someone wanted to try and sue me for defamation I'm covered under my first amendment right as a journalist. To sue me for defamation would mean you would have to prove malice. Now malice in this case of the pedophile would mean I KNOWINGLY wrote about false information. Because I have proof from the state website showing that my statements were not only true but also written about in true form. This was not posted with malice or blatant disregard for the truth. It was posted truthful and it unfortunately just pissed a lot of people off. Which tends to happen when you're in the spotlight and something I've just had to deal with especially with my upcoming book publishing. Posting false information about private figures must have been posted negligently in order to prove defamation. If I'm posting about a known, convicted pedophile for the good of the people then it's not negligence, it's actually providing safety for the people. The Gertz rule has been used to protect bloggers and journalists for a long time now. In Gertz V Robert Welch the Supreme court ordered that First Amendment protection will protect private citizens from defamation lawsuits. Now obviously that doesn't mean you can go out there and call someones job numerous times and tell them that person is a felon when it can be proven that they are not in fact a felon. Nor have they ever been arrested, charged and convicted of anything. THAT is malice and THAT you can absolutely be sued for. As a journalist I can post on my blog daily about factual evidence, I can call someone a pedophile and be protected under the first amendment. I thought in recent events of actual malice and harassment this would be an interesting blog post for all of you followers out there watching what you say on social media. There's a fine line there and as a journalist it's less of a blurry space for me. But if you're posting just make sure you follow the rules ;) I hope this helps with all of your questions and enjoy your Friday!

Kristen