The good news: The Irish News, a Belfast paper, won its appeal of the the libel case filed by the owner of Goodfellas pizzeria over a bad restaurant review. The original verdict had The Irish News paying out 25,000 pounds, roughly $36,000 U.S.
The bad news: The Irish News has to pay all its court costs, according to the Court of Appeal.
Apparently the food is not the only thing that stinks.
Mark Schleifstein of The Times-Picayune writes of his three-plus year stuggle to get Federal Emergency Management Agency records related to Katrina — records that should be available to the public.
He’s still waiting.
Schleifstein is seeking records about the types and amounts of help people in the affected areas needed after Katrina. His tale of bureaucracy woe would be funny if it weren’t so sad.
It is clear that federal government officials have been hoping he will go away. When he gets a response, he is asked if he still wants the records. Of course he does!
This isn’t surprising, given former Attorney General John Ashcroft’s memo that in essence encourages non-compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
But let’s hope this changes. After all, President Obama has already made compliance with FOIA a priority and issued a memo Jan. 21 that states
The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails. The Government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears.
See the full Obama memo here.
This story broke over the holidays, and somehow I missed it. I’m guessing many others did, too.
The lobbyist linked to Sen. John McCain filed a defamation suit against The New York Times late last month. You may recall that when the Times’s article ran in February 2008 people both inside and outside the media questioned whether McCain had an affair with lobbyist Vicki Iseman. Both McCain and Iseman said they did not have an affair nor an inappropriate relationship, but Iseman believes the article implied an affair. The Times maintains the article did not say the couple had an affair, but brought up concerns by staffers that the relationship between a senator and a lobbyist might be seen as inappropriate.
Iseman’s lawyers are seeking $27 million in damages.
The FCC is looking at indecency complaints about the Golden Globes, including a middle finger waved at actor Mickey Rourke and some off-color language, the LA Times reports (via rcfp).
It’s live TV. Things happen. It’s hard to believe that people would be so incensed about these random, unscripted moments on live TV that they’d be moved to file a complaint. Let’s see if the FCC has common sense about this.
Are you an absolutist? Do you believe no law should abridge free speech?
I am an absolutist, but an issue the Supreme Court is likely to tackle sure made me think about that.
The United States solicitor general asked the Supreme Court to look at whether a law that makes it illegal to sell videos depicting animal cruelty violates the First Amendment, according to Adam Liptak at the New York Times. The law in question does not make the animal cruelty illegal; other laws deal with the actual act. This law only criminalizes depiction of the act.
In a fascinating yet disturbing read, Liptak details how this law prohibits the sale of sexual fetish videos involving animal cruelty and dog fighting videos, among other things, and brings into question whether some speech simply has “no value.”
It’s a sick case. It’s hard to believe that anyone would want to see such images. But I guarantee this article and this case will make you think about where to draw the line on free speech.
Can you imagined being awoken at 6:40 a.m., handcuffed and strip searched twice in the same month because someone in the justice system wanted to talk to you about a libel case?
According to Washington Post writer Edward Cody, that is exactly what happened to a French editor of the Liberation daily in Paris. An investigating magistrate said she took the action because the journalist hadn’t responded when summoned.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to eliminate investigative magistrates because of abuses of power and a need for a greater presumption of innocence for the accused, Cody reports. While his idea apparently has a lot of support, my guess is the investigating magistrates will be buying a lot of Sarkozy voodoo dolls in the coming days.
Photo of Sarkozy voodoo doll by Associated Press
Great story today on how violating people’s free speech rights has a cost. The story is about an airline passenger forced to cover his T-shirt because of the Arabic writing. This reportedly led to the man receiving $240,000 in compensation.
It’s about time stories of the second-class treatment of Muslims in this country since 9-11 are starting to get wide attention. In the past week alone, this story and one of Muslims forced off a plane for “suspicious” discussions have gained nationwide attention.
My brother-in-law is an Iranian immigrant forced to leave his own country during the Revolution. If he goes back, he faces death. He would never complain about how the U.S. has treated him–quite the contrary, in fact. However, if one travels with him, one notices that this physician must adopt a placating, quiet manner in order not to be seen as a threat. His mere appearance and name already raise suspicion. He can’t talk boisterously like the rest of us can if we would like. That would raise eyebrows. And heaven forbid he have to take a phone call from a relative and speak in Farsi.
As journalists, we should help those who feel the need to be voiceless regain their voices. In doing so, we can remind people that the First Amendment is not just for Christians. It is for all.
The Buffalo News features a nice editorial on why President-elect Obama should make a federal shield law a priority. (A shield law is a law that protects journalists from having to reveal confidential sources. Currently, some states have shield laws, but there is no federal shield law. Check here to see if your state has one.)
The Society of Professional Journalists has also recently called upon Obama to support a federal shield law as he indicated he would do during the campaign.
With the economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it’s safe to say that gathering support for a federal shield law is not one of Obama’s top priorities. However, it should be. If we are going to get this country back on track, we need journalists to hold people in power accountable. To do that, they need to know they are not going to face prison for reporting an accurate story with an anonymous source whom they refuse to reveal. Journalists want “change we can believe in,” too.
Thank goodness 19 news organizations are fighting a ridiculous New Jersey appellate court decision that said that journalists could be sued for libel for accurately reporting legal complaints.
The groups — which include ABC, the New York Times, the ACLU and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press — have asked the New Jersey Supreme Court to overturn the decision.
journajunkie 