Bloggers have "democratized' journalism, and a coalition of bloggers has demanded the same wholesale exemption from the federal campaign finance laws that is currently provided to so-called mainstream media.
That exemption allows traditional journalists to fully communicate and coordinate with candidates, online or offline, and then spend, through their corporate employers, unlimited amounts of money publishing whatever news or commentary they please, favorable or unfavorable, fair or unfair, in any distribution channel: TV, radio, newspapers, magazines or the Internet.
The bloggers are correct about the broad scope of this exemption: the news media can interview candidates, get leaked stories from them about their opponents, hold editorial board meetings with them, endorse them and even follow them around all day long if they are so inclined, none of which is subject to regulation by the FEC, regardless of how much money they spend.
On its face, the bloggers' request for rights equal to those of mainstream media seems reasonable. . . .
Some bloggers want it both ways, however. They want to preserve their rights as political activists, donors and even fundraisers -- activities regulated by campaign finance laws -- yet at the same time enjoy the broad exemption from the campaign finance laws afforded to traditional journalists.
. . .
The ramifications of the bloggers' demand are enormous. The issue before the FEC goes to the heart of the fundamental questions that define a democracy's relationship to a free press: Who should be treated as a journalist, and what special privileges, if any, should they receive?
The question is urgent and the implications are profound. . . . If the statute is to survive, two principles must emerge. First, the class of bloggers entitled to be treated as "news media" -- and thus exempt from most campaign finance laws -- must be limited. Secondly, the FEC must make clear that bloggers cannot wear two hats simultaneously: that of journalist and that of partisan activist. Just as previous generations of offline activists at various stages in their careers assumed different roles -- those of activist, journalist, even officeholder -- bloggers must realize that they cannot avail themselves to the rights and privileges of journalists in any election in which they choose to participate as a partisan activist. . . .
[If] the FEC believes it has the will and the authority to parse the difficult distinctions between bloggers who are journalists and those who are not, it should establish clear guidelines, so very few individual bloggers will have to incur the expense of having to file a request for an advisory opinion. At a minimum, the FEC must insist that anyone who avails him or herself of the media exception should not operate as a political activist (including raising money) in the same election.
I trust you see the problem. She's drawing a line between "journalist" and "activist" which does not exist in reality.
Look up either individual members of the media, or by media entity.
Find me every journalist or pundit or editor you can who contributes to federal campaigns already. It took me a minute to find Paul Begala, Bill Press, and ABC President Lloyd Braun.
Post what you find here. Thanks.
Permalink | 64 comments