sex girl school…

free sex teen pantys…

So without a legal definition of journalist, anyone can hide behind that name and do what would otherwise be illegal and damaging to society.

Journalists have done great good in the past in releasing certain protected information, and at great risk. But today, journalists seem to want to take the risk out of it, making it far to easy for the system to be abused.

Leaking Grand Jury testimonies is breaking the law. The Grand Jury system as it currently exists may be flawed but it is time tested and on very solid legal footing. The rights of those testifying are no less important than the right to report the story.

So the question becomes who gets to decide what’s more important the story or the law? Couldn’t a “shield law” be used to tip the balance too far toward the reporter’s side?

MAK

And Charlie Sierra, is there something wrong with your reading comprehension? Your assertion that “the reason government officals aren’t prosecuted is precisely because the media shields them. Hence the name of the law” is demonstrably untrue and exactly backwards.

Journalism is not about who you report for, it’s what you do. Whether you report on corruption as a blogger or an anchorman on one of the alphabet networks, you are engaging in journalism.

It’s the act, not the employer that makes one a journalist.

Is anyone with a blog a journalist? If so, that could pretty much cover every single person in the country within the next few years. So anyone could say anything about anyone else and claim legal protections as a “journalist.”

Thanks for exposing yourself as a moron.

As to your first point, the ends dont justify the means.

As to your second point, the reason government officals aren’t prosecuted is precisely because the media shields them. Hence the name of the law. I mean come on man, buy a freakin’ vowel.

The game changes. Equipment, medicine, players, rules ect. You can’t compare other generations players against todays players. It just doesnt work. The players of ol’ had to work real jobs. Barry Bonds deserves to get his record if he can get there. They are all juiced so its fair.

Seriously.

Well said!

And though I often wonder why people with such a virulent hatred of the media read a site dedicated to its improvement, I nontheless enjoy hearing all parts of the argument. I disagree with Charlie Sierra (Tango Uniform?) calling the editorial “mindless,” (after all, I did put my mind to it, he just disagrees) but insofar as editorials are meant to preach a point of view, I’ll give him “pontificating.” (I’d go with “advocating,” but an advocate is called a pontificator by those who don’t agree.)

2. The paragraph beginning “A judge is demanding” doesn’t explain what the judge is demanding …

Its nothing but a special privelge exemption for the media (who defines that?) to break the law.

I say throw the bastards in jail, so big bad bubba can entertain himself.

Also save your mindless pontificating about the fourth estate. Nobody trusts them, assuming we ever did. The media has disgraced itself, and should only look in the mirror for any problems it can drum up.

Fuck the media, and I’m not alone.