The California Appeals Court yesterday ruled that bloggers have the same rights as traditional journalists have the right to shield confidential sources. SF Chronicle Staff Writer Ellen Lee called it is a "decision that could set the tone for journalism in the Digital Age," and I agree.
The decision stems from a law suit by Apple Computer against a blogger who published information on a music product that had been discussed only under NDA restrictions. The blogger had not signed an NDA, but got the accurate information and published it, citing confidential sources--presumably inside the Cupertino-based company.
The California Appeals Court essentially ruled that bloggers are protected by the same First Amendment Rights as journalists. This is an essential component of a free press. If journalists cannot protect their sources, than the only source becomes the official company or government spokesperson.
I have long argued that some bloggers are journalists and deserve to be treated as such. I would also argue that some traditional newspaper writers are anything but journalists and abuse their privileges all over the place. The medium is not the key to defining the message-writer. The quality of reporting is.
It seems to me this decision is a good day for bloggers. It is a great day for free speech.
