I would suggest you join the MBA and we talk.
It just so happens I am in New Rochelle.
Sent from Bob Cox's iPhone
Sent from Bob Cox's iPhone
September 19, 2008 (LAS VEGAS)
The Media Bloggers Association has launched a comprehensive program to provide bloggers access to the same sort of legal and financial resources long available to traditional media organizations including BlogInsure, a first of its kind liability insurance program for bloggers which provides coverage for all forms of defamation, invasion of privacy and copyright infringement or similar allegations arising out of blogging activities. [read more]
The Media Bloggers Association is a nonpartisan non-profit organization dedicated to promoting, protecting and educating its members; supporting the development of "blogging" or "citizen journalism" as a distinct form of media; and helping to extend the power of the press, with all the rights and responsibilities that entails, to every citizen.
The Media Bloggers Association advances its mission as follows:
* Promoting its members by advancing the grassroots media movement generally, showcasing exemplary instances of media blogging and citizen journalism, making members available for media appearances, and otherwise creating promotional opportunities for the MBA and its members.
* Protecting members by defending the rights of bloggers and citizen journalists generally, providing first-line legal advice to members, and partnering with organizations dedicated to promoting values enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
* Educating its members through mutual support and robust internal discussion, by partnering with organizations dedicated to education in the area of technology, methods and standards and otherwise creating educational opportunities for the MBA and its members.
New York's all right if you have credentials
Jury: Lori Drew not guilty of criminal conspiracy, but faces prison time
No blogger immune from defamation claims -- even a blogger in elective office
Memphis PD drops big dimes seeking cop-criticizing blogger
MBA in the News
Media Bloggers Association Launches Education, Legal Advisory and Liability Insurance Program for Bloggers
Media Bloggers Association Creates Blogger Insurance Scheme
Not Who's A Journalist, But What Is Journalism
The South, Blogging & Wal-Mart Moms
You Blog, You’re Out
Joining the Media Bloggers Association
Welcome and thank you for taking the time to apply for membership in the Media Bloggers Association. This page begins with a brief overview of the application process and ends with a link you can click on to begin what will be the first of four steps to complete your application. In between is everything you need to know about becoming an MBA member.The entire process looks like this:1. Register for a "Temporary Registration Login"2. Take MBA Application Exam (basics of media law)3. Pay MBA Annual Dues4. Setup your MBA Profile & Place the MBA Logo on your site
I Think I Just Might Be Paying The $25 To Join MediaBloggers.Org . But First I Am Going To Bone Up On Media Law So That I Can Pass The Test In Your Application Test.
But First I am Once Again Try And Talk To Hearst Corporation Lawyer Ravi Sitwalla And See If He Really Wants Go To War Over Thin Skinned Greenwich Time Managing Editor Bruce Hunter.
I am Sure That Ravi And Hearst Newspaper Steven Swartz Will Be Able To Come Up With A Compromise That Will Make Greenwich Roundup And The Hearst Corporation Happy.
Greenwich Roundup Has Criticized Hearst Newspaper"s Weekly Paper, The Greenwich Citizen, In The Same Manner As, The Greenwich Time, But Greenwich Citizen Editor Don Harrison Is Not as Weak Minded And Thin Skinned As Bruce Hunter.
Unlike Hunter, Don Harrison Clearly Understands The Concepts Freedom Of Speech And Freedom Of The Press. Harrison Can Think Two Steps Ahead.
The Problem With Greenwich Time Managing Editor Bruce Hunter Is That He Is More Than Willing To Sit On The Hearst Media Throne And Pass Judgement On The Job Performance Of Everyone From The President, The Governor And Everyone Else He Happens To Encounter.
But When Judgement Is Passed On His Job Performance At The Greenwich Time He Has Publisher John "I Just Can't Pick A Winning Team."Dunster Calling Up Corporate Lawyers To Attack The Freedom Of Speech Rights Of A Little Ole Blogger.
As Bad As Last Years Greenwich Time Editors Were. Joe Pisani, David Warner And Jim Zebora Was They Did Not Try To Use Hearst Media Corporate Lawyers To Deny A Critics Free Speech Rights, Like Thin Skinned Bruce Hunter Has.
However Jim Zebora Did Try And Unsuccessfully Try To Use The Greenwich Time Editorial Pages To Attack Bloggers, But The Cowardly Zebora Quickly Hid Under His Desk When Bloggers Shot Back.
Joe Pisani, Even Called Greenwich Roundup At Home Asking That I Stop Mentioning How He Commissioned An Investigative Report On Martha Moxley And Did Not Publish It For A Decade, Because He Thought That Kennedy Relatives Would Sue The Paper For Printing Information That Would Point To Michael Skakel.
You Would Think That Hearst Newspapers Head Honcho Steven Swartz And Hearst Corporation Lawyer Ravi Sitwalla Would Relize That Greenwich Roundup's Criticisms Were Right On Target Since Greenwich Time Publisher John Dunster Has Went Through Four Editors In Less Than A Year.
No Other Daily Newspaper In Newspaper In The World Has Went Through Four Editors In Less Than A Year.
Hearst Newspaper Corporation Head David Swartz Should Realize That Improving The Greenwich Time Is The Only Wat To Silence The Newspaper's Critics.
Mr.Swartz Should Be Aware That Greenwich Roundup Is Getting Many Emails From Readers Who Say Some Of The Issues Raised Are A Matter Of Unsettled Law And That This Situation Might Be A Perfect Test Case.
Personally Greenwich Roundup Is Tempted To Bet His Meager Assets Against The Assets Of The Mega Bucks Hearst Corporation In A Court Of Law.
Greenwich Roundup Has A Confession For Hearst Newspaper's David Swartz...
Greenwich Roundup Is Really Tired Of His Boring Old Old Meager Assets, He Sure Would Like Some Brand New Shinny Assets From The Mega Bucks Hearst Newspaper Corporation's Newspaper Division Thanks To Greenwich Time Managing Editor Bruce Hunter.
1/26/09 Hearst Newspapers Attacks Citizen Journalist Who Is A Critic Of The Management Of The Greenwich Time - Use of Hearst Photographs and Articles
Please send comments to GreenwichRoundup@gmail.com
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
This language restricts government both more and less than it would if it were applied literally. It restricts government more in that it applies not only to Congress, but to all branches of the federal government, and to all branches of state and local government. It restricts government less in that it provides no protection to some types of speech and only limited protection to others.
The First Amendment limits the federal government from making any law or regulation that would ban or indirectly tend to suppress — that is, “chill” — speech or expression. Historically, the First Amendment has been interpreted broadly to protect individuals from government attempts to suppress political, ideological, or scientific ideas or information, and to defend against government incursions on freedom of expression in art, literature, movies, music and the press.
The provisions of the First Amendment have been interpreted to provide a bulwark against government intervention in the most basic elements of our democracy — the expression of thought, opinion, and belief. As necessary conditions to democratic governance, the rights embodied in the First Amendment occupy a “preferred position“ in the hierarchy of constitutional rights. As Justice Rutledge, speaking for the majority of the Supreme Court, said in 1945:
This case confronts us again with the duty . . . to say where the individual’s freedom ends and the State’s power begins. Choice on that border, now as always delicate, is perhaps more so where the usual presumption supporting legislation is balanced by the preferred place given in our scheme to the great, the indispensable democratic freedoms secured by the First Amendment . . .
That priority gives these liberties a sanctity and a sanction not permitting dubious intrusions, and it is the character of the right, not of the limitation, which determines what standard governs the choice. . . .