Why Bloggers Need A Shield Law–Ask Raja Petra
The popular Malaysian blogger has been ordered to reveal his sources for allegations he made in the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy scandal:
Shafee said the court also ordered Raja Petra, who writes for his No Holds Barred column, to remove the contentious postings and to refrain from publishing similar allegations. Raja Petra is already facing charges of sedition and criminal defamation over an article and a sworn statement he made alleging links between the country’s deputy prime minister and a murdered Mongolian woman. But Raja Petra said on Thursday he will not reveal his sources and denied knowing the identity of people who post comments on his blog. “Of course, I won’t. I never reveal my sources,” he said.
If you think this can’t happen in America, it most certainly can. Remember, there is no federal shield law for journalists, and even if there was, many have argued that bloggers shouldn’t be included.
Here’s one of Raja Petra’s articles alleging that Shafee Abdullah is behind the sodomy allegations, using them to gain the national Attorney General position:
Shafee’s hands are behind the whole thing. And this can only happen with Abdullah’s blessing. No, it is not Mahathir who is behind this. And it is not Abdullah, Najib and Anwar who are the three victims. The victims are Mahathir, Najib and Anwar. Abdullah is the hidden hand and Shafee is the henchman who was tasked with the job of implementing the evil deed. Politics is not what it always appears to be in Malaysia. That is how Malay politics is played out.
The idea of an ambitious politico using a sex scandal is hardly unique to any one country, but the issue isn’t really about what Raja Petra is saying in and of itself. If it is bullshit (and I have no idea one way or another), Petra is on the hook for serious libel and defamation claims, just as he would be here in America. But if he’s telling the truth, and has corroborated these allegations through investigation and extensive sourcing, how does that make him any different from a typical journalist? And why, then, should he not be protected from “outing” his sources and ruining their careers (and possibly lives) along with his? If he is wrong or lying, he loses his reputation and standing in the Malaysian community, but if he’s right, should he not be able to access sources off-the-record the same way any Beltway pundit would, without fear of reprisal?
This is not the first time Petra has brushed with the law over writing articles deemed “seditious,” but which largely seem to be controversial due to his criticisms of governmental shenanigans and wrongdoing. Petra is something of a folk hero in Malaysia, and his writing is deemed pivotal to the political shakeups that have led to Ibrahim’s path to power in the first place. We in America tend to take the First Amendment too much for granted, not realizing how easily something so fragile and yet so powerful as the right to speak freely without fear of censorship can be removed. Indeed, too often we willingly give away the right to speak, when we say things like “Corporations are private entities and are allowed to censor you,” or “We need to restrict some speech to keep people safe, or to protect national security.” And thus the slippery slope goes, but I digress.
Some states are recognizing that bloggers need the same protections as journalists and are acting accordingly. When you look at the type of real boots-on-the-ground journalism done by TPM, Raw Story, HuffPo, OpenLeft, and a million other blogs, the line between “blogger” and “journalist” is a thin one indeed, and on either side, both deserve the full protection of the law from being thumbscrewed into revealing their sources. Private should stay private, no matter what country you’re in.
August 15th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Thanks for bringing that to our attention. It’s new to me.
August 15th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
I can’t say I’d support a shield law for bloggers. Primarily based on the notion that “blogging” is extremely broad… Too broad… for a shield. Blogging in its broadest sense is publishing your words/thoughts/ideas on the Internet, no? I don’t think at that base level it is any different from what a regular guy chooses to say, verbally or in writing.
Any time I (as a joe blow citizen) can be compelled by law to testify to something, I think a blogger should as well, unless and until the definition of blogger is clarified and narrowed. Otherwise it would become “Well, I’ll just make a quick MySpace page to say this so I can be protected,” no?
August 16th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Nick,
That’s been the primary crux of disagreement over a shield law protecting bloggers–what separates a blogger from a journalist? I think it has to do with the amount of work the writer puts in to creating their pieces. Do they source interviews? Do they corroborate statements with other information? Do they investigate?
Josh Marshall’s Talking Points Memo is the perfect example of an “alternative” news source that combines elements of blogging with what is traditionally understood to be journalism and reporting. (I could be immodest and say that ConsumerAffairs.com does too.
) I would definitely say an operation like that deserves protection via a shield law.
Your average Livejournaler may not be qualified for such protection, but I’ve seen (and done) a lot of my best work on LJ. Should I be excluded from compulsory testimony because of the apparatus I use to transmit my work? How fine does the hair get split?
August 16th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Russ,
I know foreign policy is your meat and drink, so I thought you’d appreciate that.
August 16th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Dear Blogger,
Hello.
My name is Edward Skading, from Selangor, Malaysia. My parents once told me that to have a happy and long life, you must take great care about the food you consume. Always make sure it’s clean, because cleanliness is next to godliness and I stuck to these values. As a result, when it comes to food, I always make sure what I eat is reasonably clean and safe. I also believe that everyone has the right for healthy, clean and safe food.
Recently, I exposed a horrible discovery concerning one of F&N Dairies (M) Sdn Bhd products on my weblog. It all started when my family and I was shocked to discover an abnormal brownish-blackish substance in a “Tea Pot” brand, sweeten condensed milk. You can read the detail findings, correspondence letters, photos of the contaminated milk and the foul conditions of F&N Dairies’ plant, at my weblog http://consumersrighteousness.blogspot.com/.
Before exposing my horrible discovery, I have made a complaint to the company, but they are denying everything and not taking ownership of the product, even there is sufficient (justifiable) evidence that the milk is contaminated by mould and their plant have various foul conditions. I did not ask for any form of compensation, but I requested that the company be truthful, take ownership and accountable for their oversight, moreover rectify the problem and produce cleaner and safer food.
I also feel cheated when the company executive responded that they are not liable for damaged products in the marketplace. Looks like I had been scammed by the company after being a loyal customer for many years. If only I had been informed in advance that I was eating their products under unsecured risk and with no assurance, I would have immediately change brand. I would have chosen a company that is more reliable, accountable and concern about their customers.
As a consumer, I am sickened by the fact that we are not provided maximum protection from this sort of situations and whatever consumer rights we have now are defenceless. Even the consumer association NGO where I made a complaint (about 5 months ago) seems to be shying away because my grievances involve a corporate giant. With all of this going on, I feel my rights as a consumer had been deprived and now I am being forced to silence. Yes, the company is now suing me to shut up. They are using bullying legal tactics just because I am poor and powerless.
I believe, it is the responsibility of our whole society to protect the rights and benefits of consumers, and we should together stand up and uphold it. By doing so, together we will eventually improve the consumption environment and no big organisation dares to bully anyone supported by a unified consumer society and that’s why I am writing to you. I am seeking for your point of view and support towards a good cause campaign to protect and uphold our consumer rights.
If you are willing, I sincerely hope you can cover my story on your weblog and tell it to your world wide readers. I would greatly value and appreciate your kind support. I apologise if I had troubled you and I am sincerely sorry if this letter is in the wrong section of your weblog. Let’s show F&N that we Malaysians are concern too.
If you wish to contact me, please send an email to eddskading@hotmail.com.
Thank you.
Yours truly,
Edward Skading
September 1st, 2008 at 3:11 pm
[...] Anwar has pledged that Malaysia should belong to all races, though he himself has dipped into the anti-Semitic well when it’s convenient. Given that he himself is under the gun from Malaysia’s usage of DNA testing as a political tool due to his ongoing sodomy criminal case, should his coalition build a majority, one of the first things he should do is prove that Malaysia belongs to all viewpoints as well–and that means providing protection for critics of the government from the government. [...]
September 24th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
[...] I wrote last month, Petra is something of an urban folk hero to the Malaysia blogerati, and his gonzo journalism is directly responsible for catalyzing the [...]