On 12/8/2011 3:12 PM, PrecisionmachinisT wrote:

----- Original Message -----

Newsgroups: rec.crafts.metalworking
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2011 12:42 PM
Subject: First Amendment as vulnerable as Second

Are journalists licensed by the state? The answer to that is NO. So
if there is no licensing, then there are no requirements to be a
journalist.


Just because one does not need any journalistic qualifications to call
himself a "journalist" does not provide immunity to libel suits.


One does not need any education in the field, no
affiliation with a news outlet, no proving of any standards.


Not to argue with the village idiot, but in order to enjoy the protections
normally reserved for those affiliated with news outlets on the list of
recognized media including newspapers, magazines, television and radio news,
and motion pictures, then it would only seem logical that one should be
required to demonstrate some sort of credentials identifying himself as
having an affiliation with one or more news outlets that are on the list of
recognized media, including newspapers, magazines, television and radio
news, and motion pictures.


In short an ordinary person does not need any journalistic
qualifications to be a journalist.


Tell it to the judge....




Then he will tell you. But the point is that while you don't need any
license to be a journalist there are and have always been ways to know
who is a journalist and who isn't. First off, is that how you make your
living? Second, do you work for or are you affiliated with any kind of
recognized media source? Or is your work regularly published in a
reputable place? If you can't fulfill those kinds of things then you are
on thin ice. If the only way one can tell you are a journalist is
because you say you are then I would consider you are not one.

Hawke