The MSM comes to the defense of bloggers! No, really:
SAN JOSE, Calif. - More than a half-dozen news organizations are supporting three online reporters who wrote about a top-secret product that Apple Computer Inc. says was protected by trade secret laws.
In December, Apple sued 25 unnamed individuals - possibly Apple employees - who allegedly leaked confidential product information to three Web publishers. The Cupertino-based company said the leaks violated nondisclosure agreements and California's Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
In Apple's attempts to identify the source of the leaks, the company asked the reporters' Internet providers to turn over e-mail records.
The reporters - Monish Bhatia, Jason O'Grady and another person who writes under the pseudonym Kasper Jade - tried to block the subpoenas. They said that identifying sources would create a "chilling effect" that could erode the media's ability to report in the public's interest.
Let me get this straight. We're journalists when we're taking on a big, bad corporation. But when we're taking on big-name politicians, we're pajama-wearing cranks.
Whatever.
"Let me get this straight. We're journalists when we're taking on a big, bad corporation. And we're journalists when we're taking on big, bad Republican politicians like Tom DeLay. But when we're taking on big-name Democrat politicians, we're pajama-wearing cranks."
Fixed it for you.
Qwinn
Not to mention when we are exposing the lies and bias of the MSM, then we are right wing hatchet men.
Don't forget the ankle biting...
This story is whacky, anyway. Violating trade secrets is not journalism. If I take insider information, which I have agreed not to divulge, then publish it, I'm just breaking a contract. This isn't the Pentagon Papers.
When you sign a non-disclosure agreement, you are bound by it, whether you're a journalist or not.
"This story is whacky, anyway. Violating trade secrets is not journalism. If I take insider information, which I have agreed not to divulge, then publish it, I'm just breaking a contract. This isn't the Pentagon Papers.
When you sign a non-disclosure agreement, you are bound by it, whether you're a journalist or not."
But when you sign for a security clearance, you're not bound by its secrecy provisions.
Strange logic, that.
If "Think Secret" was run by someone who was a gay Republican, would he still be considered a "journalist"?
I'm glad you brought this up, so I could clarify the point.
You are only a 'crank' if the pajamas are "footies".
If they have Teletubbies on them, you are also a "loon".
None of the sites are blogs. Go take a look. They are much more like trade journals.
The big boys are coming in because the judge ruled that trade secrets law trumps the state's journalistic privilege law. The judge didn't even have to rule if the sites counted under the journalism rule.
Get off your sanctimonious horses and do a little reading before you whine about media not taking you seriously.
