BlogHer - Bloggers, journalists demand freedom for jailed vlogger - Comments

Any Updates On This?

Public_Records — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:33:00 -0500

I heard Josh Wolf tried pleading the first Amendment. Also, didn't people think that the only reason the cops wanted to see the video was to identify the people in the video and not to use the video for punishment of the crime?

Cheers
Gary

Public Records Forum

Josh Wolf's arrest

Christopher King — Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:42:53 -0500

This is out of control.

I just spoke with Mr. Wolf's attorney and will be sending him a care package tomorrow. Can you send Odwalla bars to prison I wonder?

My blawg entry reflecting my conversation with Attorney Fuentes is here:

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2006/08/kingcast-and-jailed-video-b...

I empathize with Mr. Wolf because I got indicted the next business day after I sent notice of a critical blog entry to Jaffrey, NH Police and the NAACP for covering up a case of police abuse against a young black man.

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2005/06/why-naacp-is-sellout-organi...

My case is still dragging on, but at least I'm on the outside.

Peace.

So I've obviously had my head in the sand

Koan — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 01:17:28 -0500

Thanks, Kim, for posting this - I'm ashamed to admit that this is the first I've heard of this story. Which is testament to how little time I've spent online recently.

I *knew* I recognised Josh's name, but I just couldn't remember where from - and then I remembered. He was at BlogHer 2005, and although I don't recall that I actually spoke with him, he did opine on the post-event unpleasantness which I experienced (and which Grace Davis has set in counterpoint to more unpleasantness during BlogHer 2006).

What impressed me about Josh was that, once he realised that he'd misinterpreted the context of one of the barbs against me (i.e. that I hadn't said a word about abortion, even though one might presume I had, given how the person in question chose to embellish her barb with an abortion-specific quote from "Friends") he was quick to repair whatever hurt he'd caused by his interjection, without avoiding responsibility for his words, and while remaining apologetic for his part in compounding that hurt.

That combination - personal responsibility for the consequences of one's actions, fairness and consideration for the truth, and respect for the feelings of others - is rare enough these days, in my opinion. That someone who displayed that combination is now imprisoned, in the circumstances he has been, saddens me immensely. I've no idea what I can do to help, but I intend to try.

Blog: Multidimensional.Me

The show of support for Wolf has been remarkable

Kim Pearson — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 16:22:04 -0500

Thanks, Lisa for the helpful additional info and the call to arms. It's interesting to note that former NYT reporter Judith Miller has also come to Wolf's defense. She tried to interview him over the weekend, but was turned away. I particularly like this quote from Editor and Publisher's version of the AP story:

``We must stand together as journalists, scholars, educators and American citizens for freedom of the press, on behalf of our country,'' said Julianne Newton, a professor at the University of Oregon's journalism school."

Professor Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor, Law and Journalism/Media

First Amendment rights for all at stake here...

Lisa Stone — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 15:07:26 -0500

Kim, thank you for this fantastic post. According to Reporters Without Borders, right now 130 journalists and 57 "cyber-dissidents" are imprisoned.

It's frankly amazing that Josh Wolf is one of them. So amazing, in fact, that traditional journalism associations have put the (tired) question, "are bloggers journalists?" behind them and begun work to defend Wolf's rights as an independent journalist. The AP's Juliana Barbassa reported yesterday:

"The news media becomes an information-gathering arm of law enforcement when journalists are ordered to give up confidential sources or unpublished material, said Tony Overman, president of the National Press Photographers Association.

"When news sources believe that statements or actions observed or reported by journalists find their way into the hands of police or prosecutors, those sources will be less willing _ or flat-out afraid _ to cooperate with the media," Overman said at a news conference.

The photographers association and the Society of Professional Journalists announced they would help pay for the legal defense of freelance video journalist Joshua Wolf.

Let's hope organizations with deep pockets and important connections, such as The New York Times and Journalism.org, where I found this story, are next in line to support Mr. Wolf and, de facto, all of us. (Although he's not on RSF's list yet, they've issued this statement demanding his release).

To take effective action, it appears we have at least three steps to consider:

1. Equip anyone who wants to report news (on a blog, in a paper, whatever) with a strong defense. In our current legal system, that first line of defense is a federal shield law, as I have posted before. California has one but it isn't protecting Wolf in this case and federal agents are able to do an end-run around it in this case, as Reporters Without Borders reports:

Wolfâ€™s lawyer, Jose Luis Fuentes, told Reporters Without Borders that the judge refused to look at the video footage in question during yesterdayâ€™s hearing, saying this was the grand juryâ€™s job. The also judge said there was no federal shield law that exempted journalists from participating in a grand jury investigation.

2. Evangelize the First Amendment and its value across American society -- especially since many Americans publish blogs for people living abroad in countries such as China and Egypt, who cannot safely do so. We could all use a shield law -- not just working journalists. The risk of stopping with shield laws is that they create a sense of a special class of citizen -- a club of people who are trained to and encouraged to use all their First Amendment rights, while writing, observing and thinking by the rest of us can feel (or worse ACT) sidelined. Chris Boese puts it beautifully:

Instead, what we may be trying to say is that the right to BEAR WITNESS and REPORT are as much a part of the basic Bill of Rights of every person as are the rights to expression, assembly, and religious belief. Subject, of course, to the same libel laws and standards of truth (the primary defense against libel) as "professional" journalists.

Maybe the bigger questions should dwell on defining what are the most appropriate uses of subpoenas in a free society.

3. Learn what your legal rights are as bloggers right now. Here's a starter list of links: Check out Legal tips for bloggers: Audio advice from experts.

Now...I'm off to the wiki Kim linked to help Josh Wolf and his family. Hope to see you there...

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Bloggers, journalists demand freedom for jailed vlogger

Kim Pearson — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 13:33:07 -0500

Bloggers, journalists and free-speech advocates in the US hope to press the state of California to free videoblogger Josh Wolf. Wolf was imprisoned last week for failing to comply with a federal grand jury's subpoena requiring him to turn over unpublished footage of a protest he taped in July, 2005.

Wolf's case comes on the heels of a successful effort by bloggers around the world to press for the release of writer-filmaker Hao Wu, who was held by the Chinese government without charges for five months.

It is believed that Wu was jailed because Chinese government officials wanted access to his footage and notes for a documentary about China's underground Christian churches. In an article for New American Media, writer Eugenia Chen
noted that more than 1,000 websites carried Wu's story and picture within weeks of his Feb. 22 arrest, calling his July 11 release, "a testament to the power of the blogging community to generate information and gather support."

Wolf's defenders argue that he is covered by California's shield law, and that the government's action in this case is a violation of the First Amendment. As the San Francisco Chronicle put it:

"[T]he really ominous element of the government's argument is the notion that a journalist can be compelled to turn over raw material -- be it notes or video outtakes -- at the government's whim. If that standard can apply to Josh Wolf, it can be used against CNN, NBC, Fox News or any independent journalist who is conducting an investigation or trying to record a chaotic event. Journalists are not agents of the government.

"This case comes at a particularly precarious time for the First Amendment. The Bush administration has become increasingly aggressive about pursuing and prosecuting leaks -- including The Chronicle's publication of grand jury testimony about an investigation into performance-enhancing drugs at the highest level of sports. On Tuesday, a federal court cleared the way for prosecutors to inspect the telephone records of two New York Times reporters in an effort to identify their confidential sources."

Videoblogger Gena Haskins put it more succinctly:

"If you are an American, you know that this is wrong. If you are not an American I'm telling you this is not our way. You can't force someone to give up his property, especially under these conditions."

You can view Wolf's videoblog appeal. His supporters have also created a wiki with updated information about his case. His parents are maintaining Wolf's blog for now.