Just because I call myself a Journo doesn't mean I are one

This morning blogger John Aravosis, over at AMERICAblog, wrote about blogging vs. journalism after finding an article from AP about a ruling against an Oregon blogger who claimed protections as a journalist while fighting a defamation suit brought by a lawyer she called "a thug and a thief".

According to the AP article, a federal judge ruled that Crystal Cox ( from her website:  Investigative Blogger, Reputation Manager, Real Estate Broker Owner, Good Life International )  "was not a journalist and cannot claim the protections afforded to mainstream reporters and news outlets."

From AP: 

"The judge ruled that Cox was not protected by Oregon's shield law from having to produce sources, saying even though Cox defines herself as media, she was not affiliated with any mainstream outlet. He added that the shield law does not apply to civil actions for defamation.

Hernandez said Cox was not a journalist because she offered no professional qualifications as a journalist or legitimate news outlet. She had no journalism education, credentials or affiliation with a recognized news outlet, proof of adhering to journalistic standards such as editing or checking her facts, evidence she produced an independent product or evidence she ever tried to get both sides of the story.

Cox said she considered herself a journalist, producing more than 400 blogs over the past five years, with a proprietary technique to get her postings on the top of search engines where they get the most notice.

'What could be more mainstream than the Internet and the top of the search engine?' she said."

I predict that before this is over, every blogger who writes about politicians and public people will weigh in on this one. (At BlogHer, blogger LisaWasHere fills in some of the blanks, including the judgment: a whopping 2.5 million dollars!)   So here's my take, for what it's worth.

Some bloggers are journalists.  Some journalists are bloggers.  If a blogger wants to call herself a journalist, it's a free country and the blogosphere is about as free-wheeling as it gets.  But if you go so far as to call a public figure a thug and a thief, you might want to remember your journalistic standards:  You had better have some proof to back that up.

When I was writing columns and features for newspapers and articles for magazines, I had to submit bios.  If, in any of my clever little biographies, I called myself a journalist, you can chalk it up to my being new and full of myself and foolish enough to think that just using the word made me one.  (I would say I never did, but knowing that early me, there's probably at least one silly bio out there just waiting to prove me a liar.)

There are dozens of sources for journalism ethics, if any "investigative blogger" wants to make use of them.  The Society of Professional Journalists makes theirs public, and it's a pretty good one.  There are others out there for the taking, and they're not hard to find.  It's not about popularity, it's about digging out and telling a compelling truth.

I don't know what's going to happen to Crystal Cox now, and I really don't doubt that she has done some good work as a conscientious blogger, but I have to question whether high rankings in search engines actually adds to her creds as a journalist.  I mean--really.  That nutty assertion may have just lost the case for her.

Going by that line of logic, one might consider Andy Borowitz and websites like The Onion prime examples of true journalistic wonderfulness.  They both try to shine light on rotten politicians and public figures, they're good at it, and their rankings on Google are right up there.  (By the way, Crystal Cox's page rank is 2 points below mine at Ramona's Voices.  So much for that argument.)

(I loved this book. I don't have it anymore.  I'm going to ask for it for Christmas)

But the point of all this is that we bloggers do need to take stock of who we are and what we're doing.  Blogging is a brand new source of communication, and if the standards aren't yet written in a rule book somewhere, we have to go by our own gut feelings about ethics and responsibility.  We owe something to our readers, as few as they might be.  We are opinionists and muckrakers but we aren't necessarily journalists.  The differences might be vague at the moment, but all it takes is one judge slapping a 2.5 million dollar fine on one of us to get our attention. 

So can we talk about this?  It looks like it's that time.


Added 12/9:  As expected, there's much more to the Crystal Cox story.  Kashmir Hill at Forbes dissects the huge award and sheds light on why the jury thought it was more than appropriate:  It's here.  After reading the Forbes piece, the distinction between blogger and journalist takes a back seat to what would be really nutty behavior, no matter who's doing it.  Whew!

Follow the Light. Hear the Voices. It's not all Fox and Hounds. It's not even C-Span.

For the past couple of years I've been watching with trepidation and, yes, sadness, as C-Span, that formerly great political  leveler, has been moving farther and farther to the right.  There was a time when they were scrupulous about their fairness.  I haven't forgotten the days when Brian Lamb seemed to feel strongly about their responsibility to present issues without bias.

These days things have changed enough that the moderators of Washington Journal find themselves using up precious minutes defending their choices against more and more urgent calls for some equity. They firmly deny the obvious fact that they give more quality time to Republicans and their issues than they do to Democrats. 

  They will say they read from many papers, and it's true, but if they choose, say, the New York Times, they'll only read the portions that weaken the Dem positions and strengthen the Republicans.  They choose the portions of articles they highlight based on how effectively they think it bashes government policies.  I didn't notice that same attention to detail during the dreaded Bush years.

Their papers du jour are the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Times, and the New York Post.  They  bring on guests from The Heritage Foundation, (just this AM Lisa Curtis from the Heritage Foundation was on  talking about WikiLeaks), The American Enterprise Institution, and the Cato Institution, and treat them as if their utterings are actually those of the American People.

Where are the folks from MoveOn.org or People for the American Way?  Where are the spokespeople for the labor organizations?  I see the U.S. Chamber of Commerce pushing their myth that unfettered business will fix everything, but I don't see representation of the obvious evidence showing that unfettered business benefited mightily from the ruination of our country.  (Today Laura Ingraham was on C-Span2's BookTV touting her latest screed against Obama.  Where's Robert Reich or Al Franken or Rachel Maddow?)

 Okay, I am biased and I make no bones about it.  I not only lean Liberal, I stand firmly on what I consider hallowed ground.  I haven't written about this before because I wanted to be sure I wasn't letting my biases get in the way.  Was I seeing something that wasn't actually there?  Are they fair and I'm just missing the times when the Democratic/Liberal/Progressive point-of-view is presented honestly and fairly, with the same amount of time given?

I wish I could say I'm wrong.  I used to have a real love affair with C-Span.  I watched it religiously and I marveled at the amount of unbiased information I could get from them.  Something happened to C-Span during the last few years of the Bush administration, but I was still blindly in love at the time and  refused to accept the growing signs of their abandonment.  It was there, I just wasn't admitting it.  Now I am.  They've left me--and you--and all of us who refuse to toe the Republican/Right Wing line.  They've gone over to the dark side and I'm completely baffled.  Just when we need them the most, they've sided with the enemy.  Why?

(August 2, 6:45 AM - C-Span 2 repeating the 7/16/10 airing of the 2010 Eagle Forum Collegians Summit at the Heritage Foundation.  Phyllis Schlafly and Michael Coffman spewing their Right Wing nonsense to a motley handful of students, but the C-Span cameras were there.  Why?)

Why??

It's one among many "whys".  Why are foolish clowns like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin the anointed titular heads of the Republican Party?
 
 Why are hate-filled organizations like the Tea Party and the NRA viewed as celebrators of democracy?

Why are our fearless leaders afraid of all of the above?  Why is the supposed free press afraid?

The answers are constantly being sought by those of us in the Liberal/Progressive blogosphere.  The good news is our numbers are rising.  The bad news is that there are so many of us, only a select few will rise to the top to be seen and heard by what passes these days for multitudes.

But now there is Twitter.

Yes, Twitter.

I know, I know.  I made the same jokes about Twitter and Tweeting as everyone else, but here's what's so great about Twitter:

Everything.

Plus you get to follow people who either know what they're talking about or can lead you (RT or ReTweet) to someone else who knows what they're talking about.  You can RT anything you find enlightening or amusing or nutty or sad, and it saves you from having to come up with your own 140-character quote-in-a-jar.

 There's even a secret code that opens the doors to other liberal/progressive Tweeters and lets them know you're one of them. (#p2)  There are other secret codes, of course, but I'm still bungling my way through so it's the only one I feel comfortable sharing right now.  There's TweetDeck and Bitly and hashtags and a whole host of other confusing and arcane necessities required of heavy-duty Tweeters and their acolytes. (That's me.)

But the whole point of my post here is to shed light on some pretty amazing bloggers.  These are people I might never have discovered had it not been for Twitter--and that's a fact.  I find pretty amazing bloggers in other places, too, (like Talking Points Memo Cafe Reader Posts , Alternet Soapbox, and Open Salon--where every would-be blogger--including me--is welcome).  In fact, there are legions of pretty amazing bloggers who are singing our song, spreading our message, and proving beyond doubt that liberals and progressives are out there in numbers that would be staggering to the MSM if only they would take the time to look around.

Here are a few of my favorite Twitter bloggers:

Tomfoolery with Otoolefan:  Check out his his piece about Thomas Sowell.  Priceless.
The Political Carnival with Paddy and Laffy
 A Free America: You Decide
EZKool
Lady Liberty Speaks
Wolfrum
Radio Graffiti
Drums n Whistles (Karoli)
The Jack Wade Show

From Talking Points Memo:

DickDay
FlowerChild
American Dad
The People Choose
Beneath the Spin - Wattree
Sleepin' Jeezus
Joe Wood
Brown Man Thinking Hard - Kris Broughton

And others:

Nutwood Junction
Bucko's World
Out Left

There are so many more (including my Favorites on the right side of my blog), but this gives an idea of the quality of the political blogs out there.  They're wonderful and deserve a spot at the top.  At the very least, they should know how much they're appreciated.  And the country should know they're here.  Please help spread the word.  And feel free to add names to my list.   Let their voices be heard.

Ramona